Cited by 14Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsEducational Games and Gamification

Improving Collaborative Problem-Solving Skills via Automated Feedback and Scaffolding: A Quasi-Experimental Study with CPSCoach 2.0

D’Mello, Sidney K., Duran, Nicholas, Michaels, Amanda, Stewart, Angela E. B.·2024·User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11257-023-09387-6

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
D’Mello, S. K., Duran, N., Michaels, A., & Stewart, A. E. B.
Affiliations
  • University of Colorado Boulder (US)
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
Corresponding author
D’Mello, Sidney K.
Venue
User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction
Published
2024-02-14
Volume
34
Issue
4
Pages
1087-1125
ISSN
  • 0924-1868 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-1391
OpenAlex
W4391805882
Cited by
14
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8
FWCI
2.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction (publishedVersion)
Funders
NSF (DRL 2019805, DUE 1745442/1660877)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
Keywords
collaborative problem solving, automated feedback, instructional scaffolding, computer-mediated collaboration, videoconferencing, game-based learning, speech analysis, shared knowledge construction, team functioning, dyads, personalized feedback, skill development

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review