Cited by 106Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningOnline Learning and AnalyticsArtificial Intelligence in Education

An Evaluation of an Adaptive Learning System Based on Multimodal Affect Recognition for Learners with Intellectual Disabilities

Open access
Standen, Penelope J., Brown, David J., Taheri, Mohammad, Galvez Trigo, Maria J., Boulton, Helen, Burton, Andrew, Hallewell, Madeline J., Lathe, James G. +8 more·2020·British Journal of Educational Technology

Abstract

Abstract Artificial intelligence tools for education (AIEd) have been used to automate the provision of learning support to mainstream learners. One of the most innovative approaches in this field is the use of data and machine learning for the detection of a student’s affective state, to move them out of negative states that inhibit learning, into positive states such as engagement. In spite of their obvious potential to provide the personalisation that would give extra support for learners with intellectual disabilities, little work on AIEd systems that utilise affect recognition currently addresses this group. Our system used multimodal sensor data and machine learning to first identify three affective states linked to learning (engagement, frustration, boredom) and second determine the presentation of learning content so that the learner is maintained in an optimal affective state and rate of learning is maximised. To evaluate this adaptive learning system, 67 participants aged between 6 and 18 years acting as their own control took part in a series of sessions using the system. Sessions alternated between using the system with both affect detection and learning achievement to drive the selection of learning content (intervention) and using learning achievement alone (control) to drive the selection of learning content. Lack of boredom was the state with the strongest link to achievement, with both frustration and engagement positively related to achievement. There was significantly more engagement and less boredom in intervention than control sessions, but no significant difference in achievement. These results suggest that engagement does increase when activities are tailored to the personal needs and emotional state of the learner and that the system was promoting affective states that in turn promote learning. However, longer exposure is necessary to determine the effect on learning.

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 · 10.1111/bjet.13010

Cites

39 of 39 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?

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. Kort, B., Reilly, R., & Picard, R. W. (2001). An affective model of the interplay between emotions and learn- ing. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT '01) (pp. 43-46). Madison, WI: IEEE Computer Society.
  2. Luckasson, R., Borthwick-Duffy, S., Buntinx, W. H. E., Coulter, D. L., Craig, E. M. (P.), Reeve, A., … The AAMR AD HOC Committee on Terminology and Classification. (2002). Mental retardation: Definition, classifica- tion, and systems of supports (10th ed.), Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.
  3. Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002). The concept of flow optimal experience and its role in devel- opment. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 89-105). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  4. Taheri, M., Brown, D., Standen, P., Sherkat, N., Cosma, G., & Langensiepen, C. (2018, September 4-6). State diagram for affective learning in an educational platform. Proc. 12th ICDVRAT with ITAG. Nottingham, UK.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Standen, P. J., Brown, D. J., Taheri, M., Galvez Trigo, M. J., Boulton, H., Burton, A., Hallewell, M. J., Lathe, J. G., Shopland, N., Blanco Gonzalez, M. A., Kwiatkowska, G. M., Milli, E., Cobello, S., Mazzucato, A., Traversi, M., & Hortal, E.
Affiliations
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • Nottingham Trent University (GB)
Corresponding author
Standen, Penelope J.
Venue
British Journal of Educational Technology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-07-29
Volume
51
Issue
5
Pages
1748-1765
ISSN
  • 0007-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8535
OpenAlex
W3045675805
Cited by
106
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1
FWCI
3.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Educational Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
  • Nottingham Trent University's Institutional Repository (Nottingham Trent Repository) (acceptedVersion)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • UEL Research Repository (University of East London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
European Commission Horizon 2020 (687772)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
Keywords
adaptive learning systems, intellectual disability, affective states, student engagement, frustration, boredom, academic performance, content personalization, multimodal sensors, artificial intelligence in education

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