A peer-role robot in break-time science classrooms did not increase overall science curiosity, though it increased for students who asked it questions¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The presence of the Robovie robot did not increase the science curiosity of the students overall, but the science curiosity of students who asked Robovie questions did increase. → Michael J Timms 2016

Evidence¶

Michael J Timms 2016¶

Michael J Timms. (2016). Letting Artificial Intelligence in Education Out of the Box: Educational Cobots and Smart Classrooms. Int J Artif Intell Educ 26:701–712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0095-y

q2 · i? · causal · r1

The paper reports, citing Shiomi et al. (2015), a study placing the Robovie social robot in 4th and 5th grade elementary science classrooms during break time, introduced as a new student (peer role), run semi-autonomously with Wizard-of-Oz handling of complex interactions. No effect size is printed.

"Overall the presence of the robot did not increase the science curiosity of the students but the science curiosity of the students who asked Robovie questions did increase."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• A communication robot as cooperative learning partner elicited student interactions similar to those with human partners — related
• Children encouraged to ask questions increase the number of relevant questions they ask over the course of training, but non-linearly — related
• Question-asking practice does not increase prompted question generation on a novel-animal task, nor the content categories of those questions — related
• Curiosity-modulated tutoring produces roughly 2.4× more conversational turns than baseline under fixed time budgets — related
• Flexible design with a human wizard anticipated kindergarteners' developing communication styles in robot-mediated interaction — related