Cited by 49Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningOnline Learning and AnalyticsOnline and Blended Learning

Effects of intelligent feedback on online learners' engagement and cognitive load: The case of research ethics education

Sun, Jerry Chih-Yuan, Yu, Shih-Jou, Chao, Chih-Hsuan·2019·Educational Psychology

Abstract

The current study developed an intelligent learning environment for online education of research ethics and investigated how encouragement and warning intelligent feedback influenced learners’ engagement (behavioural, emotional, and cognitive) and cognitive load (mental load and mental effort). Participants included 191 graduate students in Taiwan who were randomly assigned into four groups: a non-feedback group, a warning feedback group, an encouragement feedback group, and an encouragement plus warning feedback group. The intelligent feedback was established on the basis of learning analytics from a database of prior learners’ online learning of off- or on-task behaviours. The system detected students’ sequential behavioural patterns and provided instant intelligent feedback. The results showed that encouragement plus warning feedback caused higher emotional and cognitive engagement, whereas warning feedback led to higher mental load. The study suggests that when designing intelligent learning environments, encouragement, and warning intelligent feedback should be used jointly to enhance the appeal of the learning journey and to boost emotional engagement, thereby increasing students’ willingness to learn. It is important to avoid using only warning feedback to reduce interference in learning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01443410.2018.1527291

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • LA-based feedback underpinned by survey data can affect student cognitive load, community of inquiry, reflective thinking skills, motivation, transactional distance, and engagement.

    “Reviewed publications revealed that LA-based feedback underpinned by survey data can affect student cognitive load (Sun et al., 2019; Zheng et al., 2021), the community of inquiry, reflective thinking skills (Yilmaz, 2020), motivation, and transactional distance (Yilmaz & Yilmaz, 2020), and engagement (Sun et al., 2019; Yilmaz & Yilmaz, 2021, pp. 1 -12).”
  • LA services increase students' motivation for learning engagement.

    “increase their motivation for learning engagement (e.g. Lewis et al., 2021; Sun et al., 2019)”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sun, J. C.-Y., Yu, S.-J., & Chao, C.-H.
Affiliations
National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University (TW)
Corresponding author
Sun, Jerry Chih-Yuan
Venue
Educational Psychology
Published
2018-11-14
Volume
39
Issue
10
Pages
1293-1310
ISSN
  • 0144-3410 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-5820
OpenAlex
W2900654385
Cited by
49
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2
FWCI
1.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
Keywords
intelligent feedback, online learning, student engagement, cognitive load, research ethics training, emotional engagement, mental workload, cognitive effort, learning analytics, behavioral patterns, smart learning environments, graduate students

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