Cited by 140Online Learning and AnalyticsData Visualization and AnalyticsInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

Multimodal data to design visual learning analytics for understanding regulation of learning

Open access
Noroozi, Omid, Alikhani, Iman, Järvelä, Sanna, Kirschner, Paul A., Juuso, Ilkka, Seppänen, Tapio·2019·Computers in Human Behavior

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.019

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The proactive GenAI agent is particularly useful for guiding students through complex VLA, especially when integrating insights from multiple sources is required.

    “It is particularly useful for guiding students through complex VLA, especially when integrating insights from multiple sources is required (Martinez-Maldonado et al., 2020; Noroozi et al., 2019).”

    From The effects of generative AI agents and scaffolding on enhancing students’ comprehension of visual learning analytics (2025) · cites this paper as Noroozi et al., 2019

    The Implications and conclusions section says SLAM-KIT brings diverse data sources into a unified view, supporting the point about integrating multiple sources in visual learning analytics. But it says the tool is currently used by researchers and that targeting learners is future work; it does not describe a proactive GenAI agent guiding students. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The current study focuses on improved effectiveness and efficiency in comprehending insights from visual analytics and does not necessarily equate to enhanced memory retention, learner engagement, or emotional reaction to VLA.

    “However, the current study focuses on improved effectiveness and efficiency in comprehending insights from visual analytics and does not necessarily equate to enhanced memory retention, learner engagement, or emotional reaction to VLA (Noroozi et al., 2019; Vieira et al., 2018).”

    From The effects of generative AI agents and scaffolding on enhancing students’ comprehension of visual learning analytics (2025) · cites this paper as Noroozi et al., 2019

    Section 3 describes making multimodal learning data accessible visually and aims to help learners learn more effectively and efficiently. It does not address whether better comprehension of visual analytics translates into memory retention, learner engagement, or emotional reactions to VLA. Searches for those outcomes and for effectiveness and efficiency of interpreting visualisations found no passage making that distinction; the cited paper also cannot establish the citing authors’ own study focus. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [14]14. Greller, W., & Drachsler, H. (2012). Translating learning into numbers: Toward a generic framework for learning analytics. In G. Siemens (Ed.). Educational Technology and society, special issue on learning analytics (pp. 42-57). . http://doi.org/10.1145/ 2330601.2330634.
  2. [16]16. Hadwin, A. F., Järvelä, S., & Miller, M. (2017). Self-regulation, co-regulation and shared regulation in collaborative learning environments (pp. 83-106).
  3. [17]17. In D. Schunk, & J. Greene (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance(2nd ed.). NY: Routledge.
  4. [43]43. Wang, M., & Jacobson, M. J. (2011). Knowledge visualization for learning and knowledge management. Educational Technology & Society, 14(3), 1-3.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Noroozi, O., Alikhani, I., Järvelä, S., Kirschner, P. A., Juuso, I., & Seppänen, T.
Affiliations
  • Wageningen University & Research (NL)
  • University of Oulu (FI)
  • Open University of the Netherlands (NL)
Corresponding author
Noroozi, Omid
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-11
Volume
100
Pages
298-304
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2903932929
Cited by
140
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 7
FWCI
15.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Finnish Academy (275440)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Data Visualization and Analytics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Keywords
multimodal data, learning regulation, learning analytics, graphical user interface, data visualization, cooperative learning, learning environment, data analysis software

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