Design Principles for Gamified Pedagogical Conversational Agents
Authors: 
Bijan Khosrawi-Rad, Arne Borchers, Linda Grogorick, Susanne Robra-BissantzAuthors Info & Claims
Bijan Khosrawi-Rad, Arne Borchers, Linda Grogorick, Susanne Robra-BissantzAuthors Info & ClaimsPages 67 - 82
Abstract
Pedagogical conversational agents (PCAs) such as chatbots and voice assistants can support learners in their studies. However, interactions with PCAs are often perceived as less motivating. Gamifying PCAs has been proposed as one approach to counteract this issue and increase learners' engagement. However, there is currently little prescriptive knowledge on how to design gamified PCAs. To address this, we conducted interviews with learners and reviewed relevant literature to derive 18 meta-requirements, five design principles, and 20 design features for gamified PCAs. We then applied our design knowledge to create a conceptual prototype, which we validated through an experiment with 76 participants. The experiment results demonstrate that our design knowledge can positively influence motivation and enjoyment in learning with PCAs.
References
[1]
J Stacy Adams. 1965. Inequity in social exchange. In Advances in experimental social psychology. Elsevier, 267–299.
[2]
C.C. Aguirre, C.D. Kloos, C. Alario-Hoyos, and P.J. Munoz-Merino. 2018. Supporting a MOOC through a conversational agent. Design of a first prototype. In SIIE 2018 Proceedings.
[3]
Shoug Alfadhli and Asmaa Alsumait. 2015. Game-Based Learning Guidelines: Designing for Learning and Fun. In 2015 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI), IEEE, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 595–600.
[4]
Lorin W Anderson and David R Krathwohl. 2001. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman, New York.
[5]
Klaus Backhaus, Bernd Erichson, Wulff Plinke, and Rolf Weiber. 1994. Multivariate Analysemethoden Eine anwendungsorientierte Einführung. Springer Verlag. Retrieved April 7, 2021 from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-12552-6
[6]
Albert Bandura. 1977. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological review 84, 2 (1977), 191–215.
[7]
Albert Bandura and Richard H Walters. 1977. Social learning theory. Englewood cliffs Prentice Hall.
[8]
Gabriel Barata, Sandra Gama, Joaquim Jorge, and Daniel Gonçalves. 2017. Studying student differentiation in gamified education: A long-term study. Computers in Human Behavior 71 (June 2017), 550–585.
[9]
Richard Baskerville, Abayomi Baiyere, Shirley Gregor, Alan Hevner, and Matti Rossi. 2018. Design Science Research Contributions: Finding a Balance between Artifact and Theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 19, 5 (May 2018).
[10]
Andreas Behr, Marco Giese, Herve D. Teguim Kamdjou, and Katja Theune. 2021. Motives for dropping out from higher education—An analysis of bachelor's degree students in Germany. European Journal of Education 56, 2 (2021), 325–343.
[11]
Dennis Benner, Sofia Schöbel, and Christoph Süess. 2022. Towards Gamified Conversational Agents for Self-Regulated Learning in Digital Education. In ICIS 2022 Proceedings, Copenhagen, Denmark.
[12]
Dennis Benner, Sofia Schöbel, Christoph Süess, Vera Baechle, and Andreas Janson. 2022. Level-Up your Learning – Introducing a Framework for Gamified Educational Conversational Agents. In Wirtschaftsinformatik 2022 Proceedings.
[13]
Benjamin Samuel Bloom. 1956. Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, 1st ed. Longman Group, Harlow, Essex, England.
[14]
Monique Boekaerts. 1999. Self-regulated learning: where we are today. International Journal of Educational Research 31, 6 (January 1999), 445–457.
[15]
Jan vom Brocke, Robert Winter, Alan Hevner, and Alexander Maedche. 2020. Special Issue Editorial –Accumulation and Evolution of Design Knowledge in Design Science Research: A Journey Through Time and Space. JAIS 21, 3 (May 2020), 520–544.
[16]
Nicholas J. Cepeda, Edward Vul, Doug Rohrer, John T. Wixted, and Harold Pashler. 2008. Spacing effects in learning: a temporal ridgeline of optimal retention. Psychol Sci 19, 11 (November 2008), 1095–1102.
[17]
Yu Chen, Tianjie Zhu, Simran Bhalla, Nitin Aggarwal, and Larry Gee. 2022. A Conversational Goal Setting Buddy for Student Learning. In AMCIS 2022 Proceedings.
[18]
Zhi-Hong Chen and Tak-Wai Chan. 2008. Learning by Substitutive Competition: Nurturing My-Pet for Game Competition Based on Open Learner Model. In Second IEEE International Conference on Digital Game and Intelligent Toy Enhanced Learning, Banff, AB, Canada.
[19]
Michelene T. H. Chi and Ruth Wylie. 2014. The ICAP Framework: Linking Cognitive Engagement to Active Learning Outcomes. Educational Psychologist 49, 4 (October 2014), 219–243.
[20]
Wynne W. Chin. 1998. The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In Modern methods for business research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, NJ, US, 295–336.
[21]
Richard E. Clark and Sunhee Choi. 2005. Five Design Principles for Experiments on the Effects of Animated Pedagogical Agents. Journal of Educational Computing Research 32, 3 (April 2005), 209–225.
[22]
Jacob Cohen. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed ed.). L. Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J.
[23]
Thomas M. Connolly, Elizabeth A. Boyle, Ewan MacArthur, Thomas Hainey, and James M. Boyle. 2012. A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Computers & Education 59, 2 (September 2012), 661–686.
[24]
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Sami Abuhamdeh, and Jeanne Nakamura. 2014. Flow. In Flow and the Foundations of Positive Psychology. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 227–238.
[25]
Sebastian Deterding, Dan Dixon, Rilla Khaled, and Lennart Nacke. 2011. From game design elements to gamefulness: defining “gamification.” In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference on Envisioning Future Media Environments.
[26]
Michele Dickey. 2005. Engaging by design: How engagement strategies in popular computer and video games can inform instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development 53 (June 2005), 67–83.
[27]
Stephan Diederich, Alfred Brendel, Stefan Morana, and Lutz Kolbe. 2022. On the Design of and Interaction with Conversational Agents: An Organizing and Assessing Review of Human-Computer Interaction Research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems (January 2022).
[28]
Pierre Dillenbourg, Sanna Järvelä, and Frank Fischer. 2009. The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning: From design to orchestration. Springer.
[29]
George T. Doran. 1981. There'sa SMART way to write management's goals and objectives. Management review 70, 11 (1981), 35–36.
[30]
John Dunlosky, Katherine A. Rawson, Elizabeth J. Marsh, Mitchell J. Nathan, and Daniel T. Willingham. 2013. Improving Students’ Learning With Effective Learning Techniques: Promising Directions From Cognitive and Educational Psychology. Psychol Sci Public Interest 14, 1 (January 2013), 4–58.
[31]
Linda Eckardt and Rebecca Finster. 2019. Kollaboration oder Wettbewerb: ein Vergleich der Motivation beim Game-based Learning. HMD 56, 1 (February 2019), 83–93.
[32]
D. Economou, I. Doumanis, V. Bouki, F. Pedersen, P. Kathrani, M. Mentzelopoulos, and N. Georgalas. 2015. A dynamic role-playing platform for simulations in legal and political education. 232–236.
[33]
Leon Festinger. 1954. A theory of social comparison processes. Human relations 7, 2 (1954), 117–140.
[34]
Asbjørn Følstad, Cecilie Bertinussen Nordheim, and Cato Alexander Bjørkli. 2018. What makes users trust a chatbot for customer service? An exploratory interview study. In International conference on internet science, 194–208.
[35]
C.M. Forsyth, A. Graesser, and K. Millis. 2020. Predicting Learning in a Multi-component Serious Game. Technology, Knowledge and Learning 25, 2 (2020), 251–277.
[36]
Pia Gebbing, Bijan Khosrawi-Rad, Timo Strohmann, Charlotte Windolf, and Christoph Lattemann. 2023. A Virtual Companion for Lifelong Learning - Design Principles for Motivation, Social Learning, and Exam Preparation. In Proceedings of the 36th Bled eConference, Bled, Slovenia.
[37]
Shirley Gregor, Leona Chandra Kruse, and Stefan Seidel. 2020. The Anatomy of a Design Principle. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 21, (2020), 1622–1652.
[38]
Shirley Gregor and Alan R. Hevner. 2013. Positioning and Presenting Design Science Research for Maximum Impact. MISQ 37, 2 (February 2013), 337–355.
[39]
Shirley Gregor and David Jones. 2007. The Anatomy of a Design Theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8, 5 (May 2007), 312–335.
[40]
F. Grivokostopoulou, K. Kovas, and I. Perikos. 2020. The effectiveness of embodied pedagogical agents and their impact on students learning in virtual worlds. Applied Sciences 10, 5 (2020).
[41]
Joseph F. Hair, William C. Black, Barry J. Babin, and Rolph E. Anderson. 2014. Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson.
[42]
Juho Hamari, Jonna Koivisto, and Harri Sarsa. 2014. Does Gamification Work? — A Literature Review of Empirical Studies on Gamification. In Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
[43]
Khe Foon Hew, Weijiao Huang, Jiahui Du, and Chengyuan Jia. 2023. Using chatbots to support student goal setting and social presence in fully online activities: learner engagement and perceptions. J Comput High Educ 35, 1 (2023), 40–68.
[44]
Sebastian Hobert. 2019. Say Hello to ‘Coding Tutor’! Design and Evaluation of a Chatbot-based Learning System Supporting Students to Learn to Program. In ICIS 2019 Proceedings.
[45]
Sebastian Hobert and Raphael Meyer von Wolff. 2019. Say Hello to Your New Automated Tutor – A Structured Literature Review on Pedagogical Conversational Agents. In Wirtschaftsinformatik 2019 Proceedings.
[46]
Johan Högberg, Juho Hamari, and Erik Wästlund. 2019. Gameful Experience Questionnaire (GAMEFULQUEST): an instrument for measuring the perceived gamefulness of system use. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 29, 3 (2019), 619–660.
[47]
W. A. IJsselsteijn, Y. A. W. de Kort, and K. Poels. 2013. The Game Experience Questionnaire. (2013). Retrieved December 28, 2020 from https://research.tue.nl/en/publications/the-game-experience-questionnaire
[48]
Antje Janssen, Lukas Grützner, and Michael H. Breitner. 2021. Why do Chatbots fail? A Critical Success Factors Analysis. In ICIS 2021 Proceedings.
[49]
Henry F. Kaiser and John Rice. 1974. Little Jiffy, Mark Iv. Educational and Psychological Measurement 34, 1 (April 1974), 111–117.
[50]
Karl M. Kapp. 2012. The gamification of learning and instruction: game-based methods and strategies for training and education. John Wiley & Sons, San Francisco, CA.
[51]
Enkelejda Kasneci, Kathrin Seßler, Stefan Küchemann, Maria Bannert, Daryna Dementieva, Frank Fischer, Urs Gasser, Georg Groh, Stephan Günnemann, and Eyke Hüllermeier. 2023. ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences 103 (2023).
[52]
John M. Keller. 1987. Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of Instructional Development 10, 3 (September 1987), 2.
[53]
Bijan Khosrawi-Rad, Linda Grogorick, and Susanne Robra-Bissantz. 2023. Game-inspired Pedagogical Conversational Agents: A Systematic Literature Review. AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction 15, 2 (June 2023), 146–192.
[54]
Bijan Khosrawi-Rad, Heidi Rinn, Ricarda Schlimbach, Pia Gebbing, Xingyue Yang, Christoph Lattemann, Daniel Markgraf, and Susanne Robra-Bissantz. 2022. Conversational Agents in Education – A Systematic Literature Review. In ECIS 2022 Proceedings, Timișoara, Romania.
[55]
Bijan Khosrawi-Rad, Ricarda Schlimbach, Timo Strohmann, and Susanne Robra-Bissantz. 2022. Design Knowledge for Virtual Learning Companions. In Proceedings of the 2022 AIS SIGED International Conference on Information Systems Education and Research, Copenhagen, Denmark.
[56]
Yanghee Kim and Amy L Baylor. 2016. Research-Based Design of Pedagogical Agent Roles: a Review, Progress, and Recommendations. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 26 (2016), 160–169.
[57]
Kathrin Knautz. 2015. Gamification in der Hochschuldidaktik – Konzeption, Implementierung und Evaluation einer spielbasierten Lernumgebung. Retrieved January 24, 2021 from https://docserv.uni-duesseldorf.de/servlets/DocumentServlet?id=36429
[58]
J. Knispel, L. Wittneben, V. Slavchova, and V. Arling. 2021. Skala zur Messung der beruflichen Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung (BSW-5-Rev). Zusammenstellung sozialwissenschaftlicher Items und Skalen (ZIS) (2021).
[59]
Jeanine Krath, Linda Schürmann, and Harald F. O. von Korflesch. 2021. Revealing the theoretical basis of gamification: A systematic review and analysis of theory in research on gamification, serious games and game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior 125, (December 2021), 106963.
[60]
Bill Kuechler and Vijay Vaishnavi. 2008. On theory development in design science research: anatomy of a research project. European Journal of Information Systems 17, 5 (2008), 489–504.
[61]
Richard N. Landers and Amy K. Landers. 2014. An Empirical Test of the Theory of Gamified Learning: The Effect of Leaderboards on Time-on-Task and Academic Performance. Simulation & Gaming 45, 6 (December 2014), 769–785.
[62]
Gary P Latham, Deshani B Ganegoda, and Edwin A Locke. 2011. Goal-setting: A state theory, but related to traits. (2011).
[63]
D. Lindholm, E.P. Brooks, and T. Nauerby. 2013. I see, please tell me more - Exploring virtual agents as interactive storytellers. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) 8018 LNCS, PART 3 (2013), 89–98.
[64]
Edwin A Locke and Gary P Latham. 1990. A theory of goal setting & task performance. Prentice-Hall, Inc, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
[65]
Ana Manzano-León, Pablo Camacho-Lazarraga, Miguel A Guerrero, Laura Guerrero-Puerta, José M Aguilar-Parra, Rubén Trigueros, and Antonio Alias. 2021. Between level up and game over: A systematic literature review of gamification in education. Sustainability 13, 4 (2021), 2247.
[66]
Richard E. Mayer, Kristina Sobko, and Patricia D. Mautone. 2003. Social Cues in Multimedia Learning: Role of Speaker's Voice. Journal of Educational Psychology 95, 2 (2003), 419–25.
[67]
Philipp Mayring. 2015. Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken (12th ed.). Beltz Verlag.
[68]
Elisa D. Mekler, Florian Brühlmann, Klaus Opwis, and Alexandre N. Tuch. 2013. Do points, levels and leaderboards harm intrinsic motivation?: an empirical analysis of common gamification elements. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Gameful Design, Research, and Application.
[69]
M. J. Mendelson and F. Aboud. 2012. McGill Friendship Questionnaire-Respondent's affection (MFQ-RA). Measurement Instrument Database for the Social Science (2012).
[70]
Hendrik Meth, Benjamin Mueller, and Alexander Maedche. 2015. Designing a Requirement Mining System. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 16, 9 (September 2015).
[71]
Frederik Möller, Tobias Moritz Guggenberger, and Boris Otto. 2020. Towards a method for design principle development in information systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology, Kristiansand, Norway.
[72]
Frederik Möller, Thorsten Schoormann, Gero Strobel, and Magnus Hansen. 2022. Unveiling the Cloak: Kernel Theory Use in Design Science Research. In ICIS 2022 Proceedings.
[73]
Dominique Morisano, Jacob B. Hirsh, Jordan B. Peterson, Robert O. Pihl, and Bruce M. Shore. 2010. Setting, elaborating, and reflecting on personal goals improves academic performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 95, 2 (2010), 255–264.
[74]
Christian Moser. 2012. User experience design. Springer.
[75]
Clifford Nass, Jonathan Steuer, and Ellen R. Tauber. 1994. Computers are social actors. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM, 72–78.
[76]
Munir Naveed, Muath Alrammal, Mukti Sharma, and Kausar Fatima. 2017. AIPRO: An AI Framework as a Student Learning Support Tool. adv sci lett 23, 8 (August 2017), 7666–7669.
[77]
Scott Nicholson. 2015. A RECIPE for Meaningful Gamification. In Gamification in Education and Business, Torsten Reiners and Lincoln C. Wood (eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 1–20.
[78]
Marcia Nißen, Driton Selimi, Antje Janssen, Davinia Cardona, Michael Breitner, Tobias Kowatsch, and Florian Wangenheim. 2021. See you soon again, chatbot? A design taxonomy to characterize user-chatbot relationships with different time horizons. Computers in Human Behavior 127 (October 2021), 1–15.
[79]
J Nunnally and I Bernstein. 1994. Psychometric Theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
[80]
X.L. Pham, T. Pham, Q.M. Nguyen, T.H. Nguyen, and T.T.H. Cao. 2018. Chatbot as an intelligent personal assistant for mobile language learning. In ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 16–21.
[81]
Lingyun Qiu and Izak Benbasat. 2009. Evaluating anthropomorphic product recommendation agents: A social relationship perspective to designing information systems. Journal of Management Information Systems 25, 4 (2009), 145–182.
[82]
Ganit Richter, Daphne R. Raban, and Sheizaf Rafaeli. 2015. Studying Gamification: The Effect of Rewards and Incentives on Motivation. In Gamification in Education and Business, Torsten Reiners and Lincoln C. Wood (eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 21–46.
[83]
Lara Riefle and Carina Benz. 2021. User-Specific Determinants of Conversational Agent Usage: A Review and Potential for Future Research. In Wirtschaftsinformatik 2021 Proceedings.
[84]
Heidi Rinn, Bijan Khosrawi-Rad, Ricarda Schlimbach, Martina Masurek, Susanne Robra-Bissantz, and Daniel Markgraf. 2022. Needs of Students in Further Education-A Mixed Methods Study. In GeNeMe 2022 Proceedings, Dresden, Germany.
[85]
Errol Scott Rivera and Claire Louise Palmer Garden. 2021. Gamification for student engagement: a framework. Journal of Further and Higher Education 45, 7 (August 2021), 999–1012.
[86]
Karen Robson, Kirk Plangger, Jan H. Kietzmann, Ian McCarthy, and Leyland Pitt. 2015. Is it all a game? Understanding the principles of gamification. Business Horizons 58, 4 (July 2015), 411–420.
[87]
Sherry Ruan, Liwei Jiang, Justin Xu, Bryce Joe-Kun Tham, Zhengneng Qiu, Yeshuang Zhu, Elizabeth L. Murnane, Emma Brunskill, and James A. Landay. 2019. QuizBot: A Dialogue-based Adaptive Learning System for Factual Knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY, USA, 1–13.
[88]
Richard M. Ryan. 1982. Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 43, 3 (1982), 450–461.
[89]
Richard M Ryan and Edward L Deci. 2000. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary educational psychology 25, 1 (2000), 54–67.
[90]
Michael Sailer, Jan Hense, Heinz Mandl, and Markus Klevers. 2013. Psychological perspectives on motivation through gamification. Ixd&a 19, 1 (2013), 28–37.
[91]
Michael Sailer, Jan Ulrich Hense, Sarah Katharina Mayr, and Heinz Mandl. 2017. How gamification motivates: An experimental study of the effects of specific game design elements on psychological need satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior 69, (April 2017), 371–380.
[92]
Diana R Sanchez, Markus Langer, and Rupinder Kaur. 2020. Gamification in the classroom: Examining the impact of gamified quizzes on student learning. Computers & Education 144 (2020), 103666.
[93]
Stefanie Saremba. 2017. Motivation in der Verwaltung. Sozialwissenschaftliche Grundlagen des beruflichen Handelns: Handeln in Organisationen und öffentlichen Verwaltungen (2017), 189–232.
[94]
Sven Scheu and Ivo Benke. 2022. Digital Assistants for Self-Regulated Learning: Towards a State-Of-The-Art Overview. In ECIS 2022 Proceedings.
[95]
Ricarda Schlimbach, Charlotte Windolf, and Susanne Robra-Bissantz. 2023. A Service Perspective on Designing Learning Companions as Bonding and Mindful Time Managers in Further Education. ECIS 2023 Proceedings (2023).
[96]
T. Schlippe and J. Sawatzki. 2022. AI-Based Multilingual Interactive Exam Preparation. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems 349 LNNS, (2022), 396–408.
[97]
Sofia Marlena Schöbel, Andreas Janson, and Matthias Söllner. 2020. Capturing the complexity of gamification elements: a holistic approach for analysing existing and deriving novel gamification designs. European Journal of Information Systems 29, 6 (2020), 641–668.
[98]
Anna-Maria Seeger and Armin Heinzl. 2021. Chatbots often Fail! Can Anthropomorphic Design Mitigate Trust Loss in Conversational Agents for Customer Service? In Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems.
[99]
Kuei-Ping Shih, Hung-Chang Chen, Chih-Yung Chang, and Tai-Chien Kao. 2010. The Development and Implementation of Scaffolding-Based Self-Regulated Learning System for e/m-Learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 13, 1 (2010), 80–93.
[100]
Dominik Siemon. 2022. Elaborating Team Roles for Artificial Intelligence-based Teammates in Human-AI Collaboration. Group Decis Negot 31, 5 (October 2022), 871–912.
[101]
Robert E. Slavin. 1980. Cooperative Learning. Review of Educational Research 50, 2 (June 1980), 315–342.
[102]
Pavel Smutny and Petra Schreiberova. 2020. Chatbots for learning: A review of educational chatbots for the Facebook Messenger. Computers & Education 151 (2020), 103862.
[103]
Timo Strohmann, Dominik Siemon, Bijan Khosrawi-Rad, and Susanne Robra-Bissantz. 2022. Toward a design theory for virtual companionship. Human–Computer Interaction 38, 3–4 (July 2022), 1–41.
[104]
Timo Strohmann, Dominik Siemon, and Susanne Robra-Bissantz. 2019. Designing virtual in-vehicle assistants: Design guidelines for creating a convincing user experience. AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction 11, 2 (2019), 54–78.
[105]
Jörg Strübing. 2018. Qualitative Sozialforschung: Eine komprimierte Einführung. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.
[106]
Chuen-Tsai Sun, Holin Lin, and Chheng Hong Ho. 2006. Sharing tips with strangers: Exploiting gift culture in computer gaming. CyberPsychology & Behavior 9, 5 (2006), 560–570.
[107]
Armando M. Toda, Pedro H. D. Valle, and Seiji Isotani. 2018. The Dark Side of Gamification: An Overview of Negative Effects of Gamification in Education. In Higher Education for All. From Challenges to Novel Technology-Enhanced Solutions, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 143–156.
[108]
A.Y. Utomo and H.B. Santoso. 2015. Development of gamification-enriched pedagogical agent for e-learning system based on community of inquiry. 1–9.
[109]
Mart Van Dinther, Filip Dochy, and Mien Segers. 2011. Factors affecting students’ self-efficacy in higher education. Educational research review 6, 2 (2011), 95–108.
[110]
John Venable, Jan Pries-Heje, and Richard Baskerville. 2016. FEDS: a Framework for Evaluation in Design Science Research. European Journal of Information Systems 25, 1 (January 2016), 77–89.
[111]
Lev Semenovich Vygotsky and Michael Cole. 1978. Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press, Cambridge, MA.
[112]
Thiemo Wambsganss, Matthias Soellner, and Jan Marco Leimeister. 2020. Design and Evaluation of an Adaptive Dialog-Based Tutoring System for Argumentation Skills. ICIS 2020 Proceedings (December 2020).
[113]
Thiemo Wambsganss, Florian Weber, and Matthias Söllner. 2021. Designing an Adaptive Empathy Learning Tool. In Wirtschaftsinformatik 2021 Proceedings.
[114]
Natalie Wellnhammer, Mateusz Dolata, Susanne Steigler, and Gerhard Schwabe. 2020. Studying with the Help of Digital Tutors: Design Aspects of Conversational Agents that Influence the Learning Process. In Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
[115]
Lena Wessel. 2015. Ausgewählte Ansätze zur Sprachförderung im Fach. Fach-und sprachintegrierte Förderung durch Darstellungsvernetzung und Scaffolding: Ein Entwicklungsforschungsprojekt zum Anteilbegriff (2015), 29–86.
[116]
Rainer Winkler, Sebastian Hobert, Antti Salovaara, Matthias Söllner, and Jan Marco Leimeister. 2020. Sara, the Lecturer: Improving Learning in Online Education with a Scaffolding-Based Conversational Agent. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
[117]
Sebastian Wollny, Jan Schneider, Daniele Di Mitri, Joshua Weidlich, Marc Rittberger, and Hendrik Drachsler. 2021. Are We There Yet? - A Systematic Literature Review on Chatbots in Education. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 4 (July 2021), 654924.
[118]
Jacqueline Wong, Martine Baars, Min He, Björn B. de Koning, and Fred Paas. 2021. Facilitating goal setting and planning to enhance online self-regulation of learning. Computers in Human Behavior 124 (November 2021), 106913.
[119]
David Wood, Jerome S Bruner, and Gail Ross. 1976. The role of tutoring in problem solving. Child Psychology & Psychiatry & Allied Disciplines (1976).
[120]
Jiaqi Yin, Tiong-Thye Goh, Bing Yang, and Yang Xiaobin. 2021. Conversation Technology With Micro-Learning: The Impact of Chatbot-Based Learning on Students’ Learning Motivation and Performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research 59, 1 (March 2021), 154–177.
[121]
Ramazan Yılmaz and Hafize Keser. 2017. The Impact of Interactive Environment and Metacognitive Support on Academic Achievement and Transactional Distance in Online Learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research 55, 1 (March 2017), 95–122.
[122]
Zamzami Zainuddin, Muhammad Shujahat, Hussein Haruna, and Samuel Kai Wah Chu. 2020. The role of gamified e-quizzes on student learning and engagement: An interactive gamification solution for a formative assessment system. Computers & Education 145 (February 2020), 103729.
[123]
Barry J Zimmerman. 1989. Models of self-regulated learning and academic achievement. In Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research, and practice. Springer, 1–25.
[124]
Barry J. Zimmerman. 2013. From Cognitive Modeling to Self-Regulation: A Social Cognitive Career Path. Educational Psychologist 48, 3 (July 2013), 135–147.
Index Terms
- Design Principles for Gamified Pedagogical Conversational Agents
Recommendations
Towards Pedagogical Conversational Agents as Creativity Drivers in Virtual Worlds
Mindtrek '23: Proceedings of the 26th International Academic Mindtrek ConferencePedagogical Conversational Agents (PCAs) such as chatbots and voice assistants can be used to help learners study through intelligent dialog. For example, educators can use PCAs to facilitate creative brainstorming processes. PCAs as brainstorming ...
Clashroom: A Game to Enhance the Classroom Experience (Abstract Only)
SIGCSE '16: Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science EducationClashroom is a web-based fantasy game that was created to enhance the motivation and learning of a traditional classroom. It was created to address several drawbacks of other educational games by being broadly applicable to any course, requiring no ...
Integrating gamification and instructional design to enhance usability of online learning
AbstractThe current study investigates the interaction of Gamification, and Instructional Design to enhance the Usability of e-Learning in higher education programs. The study also examines the mediating role of Instructional design. Data were collected ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
October 2023
381 pages
ISBN:9798400708749
DOI:10.1145/3616961
Copyright © 2023 Owner/Author.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 02 November 2023
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Funding Sources
- German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF)
Conference
Mindtrek '23
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 110 of 207 submissions, 53%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 489Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)369
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)73
Reflects downloads up to 09 Feb 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML FormatLogin options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in