Process mining showed LPK students began with preparatory tasks and achieved a higher proportion of correct decisions, while HPK students skipped preparation and increasingly took advanced tasks¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Process mining maps showed LPK students more often started with preparatory tasks (Start → YesToExtra, f = 75%) versus HPK students avoiding them (fStart → NoToExtra = 72%), and LPK students achieved a higher proportion of CorrectDecision outcomes (70.8% vs. 56%). → Man Su 2025
Evidence¶
Man Su 2025¶
Man Su, Belle Dang, Andy Nguyen & Tomohiro Nagashima. (2025). Choice-making in an adaptive learning system with motivational pedagogical agents. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00366-7
q2 · i? · causal · r2
Process mining (Disco tool, 100% of activities) of logged interaction pathways for the HPK and LPK groups, complementing the LSA. The LPK group's higher proportion of correct decisions, its early engagement with preparatory tasks, and reduced later willingness to take advanced tasks are reported as descriptive pathway frequencies.
"Interestingly, the LPK group demonstrated a higher proportion of CorrectDecision outcomes compared to the HPK group (f Low = 70.8%; f High = 56%)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Agent-condition learning gains trended higher (marginal), with Agent LPK students gaining significantly more than Non-Agent HPK students — related
- Lag sequential analysis revealed distinct choice-making trajectories: HPK students showed confidence-driven extra-task engagement and unre reflective repeated-failure sequences, while LPK students relied on preparatory worked examples — related
- Process mining shows low performers access solutions more and transition to hints after incorrect submissions more than high performers — a broader claim this one bears on
- In the High-Agency condition, HPK students selected significantly more challenging preparatory tasks than LPK students ('step size' U = 21, p = .038) — related
- Learners from different performance groups differ in priorities of learning tactic usage across learning sessions — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
process-mining-correct-decision-lpk |
title |
Process mining showed LPK students began with preparatory tasks and achieved a higher proportion of correct decisions, while HPK students skipped preparation and increasingly took advanced tasks |
description |
Process mining showed LPK students began with preparatory tasks and achieved a higher proportion of correct decisions, while HPK students skipped preparation and increasingly took advanced tasks |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2025 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-27 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — man-su-2025 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.