Cited by 386Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningEmotion and Mood RecognitionSocial Robot Interaction and HRI

Toward an Affect-Sensitive AutoTutor

D'Mello, Sidney, Picard, Rosalind W., Graesser, Arthur·2007·IEEE Intelligent Systems

Abstract

Here, we consider the possibility of enabling AutoTutor, an intelligent tutoring system, to process learners' affective and cognitive states. AutoTutor is a fully automated computer tutor that simulates human tutors and converses with students in natural language.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/mis.2007.79

Cites

13 of 13 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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
D'Mello, S., Picard, R. W., & Graesser, A.
Affiliations
MIT Media Lab (US)
Venue
IEEE Intelligent Systems
Published
2007-07
Volume
22
Issue
4
Pages
53-61
ISSN
1541-1672 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1982709543
Cited by
386
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 19
FWCI
28.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Intelligent Systems (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Division of Mathematical Sciences
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
Keywords
AutoTutor, intelligent tutoring systems, affective computing, natural language dialogue, conversational tutoring, human-computer interaction

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