CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 10Teaching and Learning ProgrammingChild Development and Digital TechnologySpreadsheets and End-User Computing

When Children Program Intelligent Environments: Lessons Learned from a Serious AR Game

Open access
Stefanidi, Evropi, Korozi, Maria, Leonidis, Asterios, Arampatzis, Dimitrios, Antona, Margherita, Papagiannakis, George·2021·Interaction Design and Children
DOI 10.1145/3459990.3462463
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

While the body of research focusing on Intelligent Environments (IEs) programming by adults is steadily growing, informed insights about children as programmers of such environments are limited. Previous work already established that young children can learn programming basics. Yet, there is still a need to investigate whether this capability can be transferred in the context of IEs, since encouraging children to participate in the management of their intelligent surroundings can enhance responsibility, independence, and the spirit of cooperation. We performed a user study (N=15) with children aged 7-12, using a block-based, gamified AR spatial coding prototype allowing to manipulate smart artifacts in an Intelligent Living room. Our results validated that children understand and can indeed program IEs. Based on our findings, we contribute preliminary implications regarding the use of specific technologies and paradigms (e.g. AR, trigger-action programming) to inspire future systems that enable children to create enriching experiences in IEs.

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 · 10.1145/3459990.3462463

Cites

1 of 1 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?

  • Students who used Stefanidi et al.'s gamified augmented reality application found the overall learning experience interesting and fun and better understood the idea of intelligent environments.

    “Their results revealed that the overall learning experience was interesting and fun according to the students who better understood the idea of intelligent environments.”

    From Integrating Augmented Reality, Gamification, and Serious Games in Computer Science Education (2023) · cites this paper as [33]

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: 67

  1. Stojkoska, B.L.R., Trivodaliev, K.V.: A review of Internet of Things for smart home: Challenges and solutions. Journal of Cleaner Production. 140, 1454-1464 (2017).
  2. Augusto, J.C.: Ambient intelligence: the confluence of ubiquitous/pervasive computing and artificial intelligence. In: Intelligent computing everywhere. pp. 213-234. Springer (2007).
  3. Xia, F., Yang, L.T., Wang, L., Vinel, A.: Internet of things. International journal of communication systems. 25, 1101 (2012).
  4. Walch, M., Rietzler, M., Greim, J., Schaub, F., Wiedersheim, B., Weber, M.: home- BLOX: making home automation usable. In: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing adjunct publication. pp. 295-298 (2013).
  5. Sovacool, B.K., Del Rio, D.D.F.: Smart home technologies in Europe: A critical review of concepts, benefits, risks and policies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 120, 109663 (2020).
  6. Brich, J., Walch, M., Rietzler, M., Weber, M., Schaub, F.: Exploring end user programming needs in home automation. ACM Transactions on Computer- Human Interaction (TOCHI). 24, 1-35 (2017).
  7. Heckhausen, J., Schulz, R.: A life-span theory of control. Psychological review. 102, 284 (1995).
  8. Stoeckelmayr, K., Tesar, M., Hofmann, A.: Kindergarten children programming robots: a first attempt. In: Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Robotics in Education (RIE) (2011).
  9. Radich, J.: Technology and interactive media as tools in early childhood pro- grams serving children from birth through age 8. Every Child. 19, 18 (2013).
  10. Law, M., Anaby, D., Teplicky, R., Khetani, M.A., Coster, W., Bedell, G.: Partici- pation in the home environment among children and youth with and without disabilities. British Journal of Occupational Therapy. 76, 58-66 (2013).
  11. diSessa, A.A.: Changing minds: Computers, language and literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (2000).
  12. Papert, S.: Mindstorms. Brighton. In: Big Issues in Mobile Learning: Report of a Workshop by the Kaleidoscope Network of Excellence Mobile Learning Initiative. Retrieved May. p. 2006 (1980).
  13. Bredekamp, S., Copple, C.: Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Child- hood Programs.(Revised Edition). ERIC (1997).
  14. McInerney, D.M.: Educational psychology: Constructing learning. Pearson Higher Education AU (2013).
  15. Bers, M.U.: Coding as a playground: Programming and computational thinking in the early childhood classroom. Routledge (2020).
  16. Badger, J.R., Mellanby, J.H.V.: Producing and understanding conditionals: When does it happen and why does it matter? Journal of Child Language Acquisition and Development. 6, (2018).
  17. Kafai, Y.B., Burke, Q.: Connected code: Why children need to learn programming. Mit Press (2014).
  18. McDevitt, T.M., Ormrod, J.E.: Child development and education. Pearson Educa- tion (2010).
  19. Piaget, J., Cook, P.: The Origin of Intelligence in the Child.(Translated by Mar- garet Cook.). Routledge & Kegan Paul (1953).
  20. Eisenberg, M., Elumeze, N., MacFerrin, M., Buechley, L.: Children's program- ming, reconsidered: settings, stuff, and surfaces. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children. pp. 1-8 (2009).
  21. Myers, B.A.: Visual programming, programming by example, and program visualization: a taxonomy. ACM sigchi bulletin. 17, 59-66 (1986).
  22. Myers, B.A.: Taxonomies of visual programming and program visualization. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing. 1, 97-123 (1990).
  23. Williams, M.G., Ledder, W.A., Buehler, J.N., Canning, J.T.: An empirical study of visual labs. In: Proceedings 1993 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages. pp. 371-373. IEEE (1993).
  24. Bau, D., Gray, J., Kelleher, C., Sheldon, J., Turbak, F.: Learnable programming: blocks and beyond. Communications of the ACM. 60, 72-80 (2017).
  25. Weintrop, D., Wilensky, U.: To block or not to block, that is the question: stu- dents' perceptions of blocks-based programming. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on interaction design and children. pp. 199-208 (2015).
  26. Maloney, J., Burd, L., Kafai, Y., Rusk, N., Silverman, B., Resnick, M.: Scratch: a sneak preview [education]. In: Proceedings. Second International Conference on Creating, Connecting and Collaborating through Computing, 2004. pp. 104-109. IEEE (2004).
  27. Slany, W.: Catroid: a mobile visual programming system for children. In: Proceed- ings of the 11th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children. pp. 300-303 (2012).
  28. Horn, M.S., Jacob, R.J.: Designing tangible programming languages for class- room use. In: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction. pp. 159-162 (2007).
  29. Melcer, E.F., Isbister, K.: Bots & (Main) frames: exploring the impact of tangible blocks and collaborative play in an educational programming game. In: Pro- ceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 1-14 (2018).
  30. Wang, D., Zhang, C., Wang, H.: T-Maze: a tangible programming tool for children. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on interaction design and children. pp. 127-135 (2011).
  31. Hu, F., Zekelman, A., Horn, M., Judd, F.: Strawbies: explorations in tangible pro- gramming. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children. pp. 410-413 (2015).
  32. Blackwell, A.F., Hague, R.: AutoHAN: An architecture for programming the home. In: Proceedings IEEE Symposia on Human-Centric Computing Languages and Environments (Cat. No. 01TH8587). pp. 150-157. IEEE (2001).
  33. Sullivan, A., Elkin, M., Bers, M.U.: KIBO robot demo: engaging young children in programming and engineering. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on interaction design and children. pp. 418-421 (2015).
  34. Newcombe, N.S.: Picture this: Increasing math and science learning by improv- ing spatial thinking. American Educator. 34, 29 (2010).
  35. Wai, J., Lubinski, D., Benbow, C.P.: Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of educational Psychology. 101, 817 (2009).
  36. Fuste, A., Schmandt, C.: HyperCubes: A Playful Introduction to Computational Thinking in Augmented Reality. In: Extended Abstracts of the Annual Sympo- sium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play Companion Extended Abstracts. pp. 379-387 (2019).
  37. Radu, I., MacIntyre, B.: Augmented-reality scratch: a children's authoring envi- ronment for augmented-reality experiences. In: Proceedings of the 8th Interna- tional Conference on Interaction Design and Children. pp. 210-213 (2009).
  38. Zünd, F., Ryffel, M., Magnenat, S., Marra, A., Nitti, M., Kapadia, M., Noris, G., Mitchell, K., Gross, M., Sumner, R.W.: Augmented creativity: Bridging the real and virtual worlds to enhance creative play. In: SIGGRAPH Asia 2015 Mobile Graphics and Interactive Applications. pp. 1-7 (2015).
  39. Jin, Q., Wang, D., Deng, X., Zheng, N., Chiu, S.: AR-Maze: a tangible program- ming tool for children based on AR technology. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Interaction Design and Children. pp. 611-616 (2018).
  40. Druin, A., Perlin, K.: Immersive environments: A physical approach to the computer interface. In: Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems. pp. 325-328 (1994).
  41. Alborzi, H., Druin, A., Montemayor, J., Platner, M., Porteous, J., Sherman, L., Boltman, A., Taxén, G., Best, J., Hammer, J.: Designing StoryRooms: interactive storytelling spaces for children. In: Proceedings of the 3rd conference on De- signing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques. pp. 95-104. ACM (2000).
  42. Tan, L., Wang, N.: Future internet: The internet of things. In: 2010 3rd interna- tional conference on advanced computer theory and engineering (ICACTE). pp. V5-376-V5-380. IEEE (2010).
  43. Aarts, E., Wichert, R.: Ambient intelligence. In: Technology guide. pp. 244-249. Springer (2009).
  44. Wellner, P., Mackay, W., Gold, R.: Back to the real world. Communications of the ACM. 36, 24-26 (1993).
  45. Fitzmaurice, G.W., Ishii, H., Buxton, W.A.: Bricks: laying the foundations for graspable user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. pp. 442-449 (1995).
  46. Dahl, Y., Svendsen, R.-M.: End-user composition interfaces for smart environ- ments: A preliminary study of usability factors. In: International Conference of Design, User Experience, and Usability. pp. 118-127. Springer (2011).
  47. Davidoff, S., Lee, M.K., Yiu, C., Zimmerman, J., Dey, A.K.: Principles of smart home control. In: International conference on ubiquitous computing. pp. 19-34. Springer (2006).
  48. Dey, A.K., Sohn, T., Streng, S., Kodama, J.: iCAP: Interactive prototyping of context-aware applications. In: International Conference on Pervasive Comput- ing. pp. 254-271. Springer (2006).
  49. Ur, B., Pak Yong Ho, M., Brawner, S., Lee, J., Mennicken, S., Picard, N., Schulze, D., Littman, M.L.: Trigger-Action Programming in the Wild: An Analysis of 200,000 IFTTT Recipes. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 3227-3231. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858556. · DOI
  50. Stefanidi, E., Foukarakis, M., Arampatzis, D., Korozi, M., Leonidis, A., Antona, M.: ParlAmI: A Multimodal Approach for Programming Intelligent Environments. Technologies. 7, 11 (2019).
  51. Ghiani, G., Manca, M., Paternò, F., Santoro, C.: Personalization of context- dependent applications through trigger-action rules. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI). 24, 1-33 (2017).
  52. Leonardi, N., Manca, M., Paternò, F., Santoro, C.: Trigger-action programming for personalising humanoid robot behaviour. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 1-13 (2019).
  53. Seraj, M., Autexier, S., Janssen, J.: BEESM, a block-based educational program- ming tool for end users. In: Proceedings of the 10th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. pp. 886-891 (2018).
  54. Montemayor, J., Druin, A., Farber, A., Simms, S., Churaman, W., D'Amour, A.: Physical programming: designing tools for children to create physical interactive environments. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 299-306. ACM (2002).
  55. Seraj, M., Große, C.S., Autexier, S., Drechsler, R.: Smart Homes Programming: Development and Evaluation of an Educational Programming Application for Young Learners. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Interaction Design and Children. pp. 146-152 (2019).
  56. Stefanidi, E., Arampatzis, D., Leonidis, A., Korozi, M., Antona, M., Papagian- nakis, G.: MagiPlay: An Augmented Reality Serious Game Allowing Children to Program Intelligent Environments. In: Transactions on Computational Science XXXVII. pp. 144-169. Springer (2020).
  57. Radu, I.: Why should my students use AR? A comparative review of the educa- tional impacts of augmented-reality. In: 2012 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR). pp. 313-314. IEEE (2012).
  58. Neumann, U., Majoros, A.: Cognitive, performance, and systems issues for augmented reality applications in manufacturing and maintenance. In: Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium, 1998. Proceedings., IEEE 1998. pp. 4-11. IEEE (1998).
  59. Brown, B., MacColl, I., Chalmers, M., Galani, A., Randell, C., Steed, A.: Lessons from the Lighthouse: Collaboration in a Shared Mixed Reality System. In: Pro- ceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 577-584. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2003). https://doi.org/10.1145/642611. 642711. · DOI
  60. Benzi, F., Cabitza, F., Fogli, D., Lanzilotti, R., Piccinno, A.: Gamification tech- niques for rule management in ambient intelligence. In: European Conference on Ambient Intelligence. pp. 353-356. Springer (2015).
  61. Resnick, M.: All I really need to know (about creative thinking) I learned (by studying how children learn) in kindergarten. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity & Cognition. pp. 1-6 (2007).
  62. Repenning, A., Ioannidou, A.: Agent-based end-user development. Communica- tions of the ACM. 47, 43-46 (2004).
  63. Ur, B., McManus, E., Pak Yong Ho, M., Littman, M.L.: Practical Trigger-action Programming in the Smart Home. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 803-812. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557420. · DOI
  64. Hanna, L., Neapolitan, D., Risden, K.: Evaluating computer game concepts with children. In: Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Interaction design and children: building a community. pp. 49-56 (2004).
  65. Bloom, B.S.: Taxonomy of educational objectives. Vol. 1: Cognitive domain. New York: McKay. 20, 24 (1956).
  66. Kasahara, S., Niiyama, R., Heun, V., Ishii, H.: exTouch: spatially-aware embodied manipulation of actuated objects mediated by augmented reality. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction. pp. 223-228. ACM (2013).
  67. Zaeh, M.F., Vogl, W.: Interactive laser-projection for programming industrial robots. In: Mixed and Augmented Reality, 2006. ISMAR 2006. IEEE/ACM Inter- national Symposium on. pp. 125-128. IEEE (2006).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stefanidi, E., Korozi, M., Leonidis, A., Arampatzis, D., Antona, M., & Papagiannakis, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Bremen (DE)
  • FORTH Institute of Computer Science (GR)
  • Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas (GR)
  • University of Crete (GR)
ORCID
Stefanidi, Evropi
Venue
Interaction Design and Children
Publisher
ACM
Published
2021-06-24
Pages
375-386
DOI
10.1145/3459990.3462463
OpenAlex
W3161807772
Cited by
10
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1
FWCI
1.98
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Background (vor)
Locations
  • ACM International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Spreadsheets and End-User Computing
Keywords
smart environments, serious games, augmented reality, block-based programming, spatial coding, trigger-action programming, children's programming 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