Reading with Robots: A Personalized Robot-Based Learning Companion for Solving Cognitively Demanding Tasks
Soon, sociable companion robots will become indispensable for providing related support in our daily living and tasks. This paper provides process, design perspectives, and deployment of a reading companion robot (IQRA’) that monitors the cognitive load level of a reader during demanding reading tasks and to provide support for readers to complete tasks. Current technological solutions only cover external design aspects of the application and have no adaptive mechanisms to deal with dynamics with the reader’s perspectives and environment. Inspired by several theories from cognitive psychology domains, a computational model of the cognitive load was developed as a basis for reasoning and analytical purposes. This analytical ability provides the robot with a computational mechanism to reason in human-like manners and analyses of the functioning of observed conditions. This is essential in providing better-informed actions and intelligent analysis. Besides, the physical and software design of the robot and essential concepts in human-robot interaction are covered. Also, five evaluation constructs were chosen to evaluate the capability of our robot-based platform. These constructs are; 1) likeability, 2) perceived intelligence, 3) sociability, 4) social presence, and 5) cognitive load. The overall results from the pilot study support the practical usage of our proposed robotic solution.
J. Sweller, P. Ayres, and S. Kalyuga, cognitive load theory. New York: Springer, 2011.
F. Paas, A. Renkl, and J. Sweller, Cognitive Load Theory: A Special Issue of educational Psychologist. Taylor & Francis, 2016.
R. Antonijević, “Cognitive Activities in Solving Mathematical Tasks: The role of a Cognitive Obstacle.,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 12, no. 9, 2016.
H.-H. Choi, J. J. G. van Merriënboer, and F. Paas, “Effects of the physical environment on cognitive load and learning: towards a new model of cognitive load,” Educ. Psychol. Rev., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 225–244, 2014.
N. H. Jalani and L. C. Sern, “The Example-Problem-Based Learning Model: Applying Cognitive Load Theory,” Procedia-Social Behav. Sci., vol. 195, pp. 872–880, 2015.
H. Mohammed, A. A. Aziz, and R. Ahmad, “Exploring the need of an assistive robot to support reading process: A pilot study,” in 2015 International Symposium on Agents, Multi-Agent Systems and Robotics (ISAMSR), 2015, pp. 35–40.
H. M. A. Ghanimi, A. A. Aziz, and F. Ahmad, “An Ambient Agent Model for a Reading Companion Robot,” in Information Systems: Proceedings of the Computational Intelligence in Information Systems Conference (CIIS 2016), 2017, pp. 94–106.
H. M. A. Ghanimi, A. Ab Aziz, and F. Ahmad, “Designing an Intelligent Support Model of a Reading Companion Robot,” in Intelligent Environments 2017: Workshop Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Intelligent Environments, 2017, vol. 22, p. 131.
A. Kendon, Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters. Cambridge University Press, 1990.
J. Treur, Network-Oriented Modeling: Addressing Complexity of Cognitive, Affective and Social Interactions. Springer International Publishing, 2016.
J. Treur, “Dynamic modeling based on a temporal–causal network modeling approach,” Biol. Inspired Cogn. Archit., vol. 16, pp. 131–168, 2016.
H. M. A. Ghanimi, A. A. Aziz, and F. Ahmad, “An Agent-Based Model for Refined Cognitive Load and Reading Performance in Reading Companion Robot,” J. Telecommun. Electron. Comput. Eng., vol. 9, no. 3–5, pp. 55–59, 2017.
J. Brooke, “SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale,” Usability Eval. Ind., vol. 189, no. 194, pp. 4–7, 1996.
C. Bartneck, D. Kulić, E. Croft, and S. Zoghbi, “Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots,” Int. J. Soc. Robot., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 71–81, 2009.
A. Schmeck, M. Opfermann, T. van Gog, F. Paas, and D. Leutner, “Measuring cognitive load with subjective rating scales during problem solving: differences between immediate and delayed ratings,” Instr. Sci., vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 93–114, 2015.
- There are currently no refbacks.
Published by INSIGHT - Indonesian Society for Knowledge and Human Development