Cited by 59Social Robot Interaction and HRIEducational Robotics and EngineeringIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

Working with a Social Robot in School: A Long-Term Real-World Unsupervised Deployment

Open access
Davison, Daniel P., Wijnen, Frances M., Charisi, Vicky, van der Meij, Jan, Evers, Vanessa, Reidsma, Dennis·2020·Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

Abstract

Interactive learning technologies, such as robots, increasingly find their way into schools. However, more research is needed to see how children might work with such systems in the future. This paper presents the unsupervised, four month deployment of a Robot-Extended Computer Assisted Learning (RECAL) system with 61 children working in their own classroom. Using automatically collected quantitative data we discuss how their usage patterns and self-regulated learning process developed throughout the study.

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 · 10.1145/3319502.3374803

Cites

47 of 48 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?

  • Companion robots can effectively support both school-based learning (e.g., math, literacy, science) and home-based learning activities (e.g., reading, number board games, math-oriented conversations with parents).

    “Prior work demonstrated that companion robots can effectively support both school-based learning ( e.g., math [48], literacy [22, 41], and science [12]) and home-based learning activities ( e.g., reading [53, 54], number board games [32], and math-oriented conversations with parents [34]).”

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: 1

  1. Jelte van Waterschoot, Merijn Bruijnes, Jan Flokstra, Dennis Reidsma, Daniel Davison, Mariët Theune, and Dirk Heylen. 2018. Flipper 2.0: A pragmatic dialogue engine for embodied conversational agents. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents. ACM Press, Sydney, Australia, 43-50.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Davison, D. P., Wijnen, F. M., Charisi, V., van der Meij, J., Evers, V., & Reidsma, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Twente (NL)
  • Het Erasmus, Almelo, Overijssel, Netherlands
  • Nanyang Technological University (SG)
Venue
Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction
Publisher
ACM
Published
2020-03-09
Pages
63-72
OpenAlex
W3010349693
Cited by
59
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 3
FWCI
11.99
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
European Union 7th Framework Program (611971)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Educational Robotics and Engineering
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Keywords
social robots, classroom deployment, student self-regulation, usage patterns, educational robotics

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