ITS authoring tool research is concentrated in academic settings, and 45.45% of included papers conducted empirical studies while illustrative scenarios were the most common method¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Only 2 of the 33 included studies were conducted in industrial settings, with the remainder academic. → Diego Dermeval 2018 q3 i? Illustrative scenarios were the most common research method among included studies, and the review flags the high number of papers without empirical evaluation as a community concern. → Diego Dermeval 2018 (2)

Evidence¶

Diego Dermeval 2018¶

Diego Dermeval, Ranilson Paiva, Ig Ibert Bittencourt, Julita Vassileva, Daniel Borges. (2018). Authoring Tools for Designing Intelligent Tutoring Systems: a Systematic Review of the Literature. Int J Artif Intell Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-017-0157-9

q3 · i? · review · r3

Overview of the 33 included studies categorising application context as industry or academic. The review reports that "Most the papers (31 studies) are considered academic" and notes only 6% of papers are applied in an industrial context.

"Most the papers (31 studies) are considered academic, while 2 studies (S03 and S32) were conducted in an industrial setting."

Diego Dermeval 2018 (2)¶

Diego Dermeval, Ranilson Paiva, Ig Ibert Bittencourt, Julita Vassileva, Daniel Borges. (2018). Authoring Tools for Designing Intelligent Tutoring Systems: a Systematic Review of the Literature. Int J Artif Intell Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-017-0157-9

q3 · i? · review · r3

Overview classifying research methods by Easterbrook et al. categories plus two extra categories. The review reports illustrative scenarios as the majority (39.39%; 13 studies) and controlled experiments at 27.27% (9 studies), and states the number of papers without empirical evaluation "is still high and deserves attention by the community".

"Fifteen papers (45.45%) are concerned in conducting empirical studies (i.e., controlled experiment, case study, and survey) on the applications of authoring tools ITS design."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Research on generative AI in secondary STEM education is concentrated in the Global North, with 73% of affiliations and the United States accounting for 30% of publications — related
• Empirical research on the Pepper robot in formal education is recent, concentrated in primary education, and dominated by qualitative designs with small samples — related
• Participant samples in AI trust research skew WEIRD: mostly Western, adult, university-educated participants, limiting external validity — related
• A systematic literature review published from 2009 to June 2016 identified 33 primary studies on ITS authoring tools for non-programmer authors out of 4622 retrieved papers — related