具情緒表情變化之聊天機器人對國小學生英語閱讀興趣影響

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：48

、訪客IP：18.218.128.229

姓名

董彥甫(Yan-Fu Tung) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

資訊工程學系

論文名稱

具情緒表情變化之聊天機器人對國小學生英語閱讀興趣影響
(The Effect of Chatbot with Emotional Facial Expression on Elementary School Students’ Interest in English Reading)

相關論文

★ 以視覺為主的遊戲空間輔助全身性學習	★ 以數位教室環境增進同步遠距教學之臨場感
★ 以行動載具支援並分析合作式的探索活動	★ 以混合實境支援工作臺協同探究學習
★ 使用資料探勘輔助學習者探索大型資料庫—學習者經驗之研究	★ 以貢獻與聯結為基礎之社會知識創造模型—一個資源與概念合作聯結工具
★ 互動式計算桌面環境對於合作學習的優缺點	★ 以共享螢幕及群組軟體支援一對一環境下面對面的合作網路探索
★ 合作學習使用網際網路: 學習腳本在面對面網路合作探索的影響	★ 兒童使用超媒體的Web2.0創作故事平台之探究--衍生與重組
★ 以創用為基礎之合作說故事平台 - 衍生、重組、擁有感	★ 透過網路實施模擬實務社群並利用即興創作激發創意
★ 使用群組軟體與共同螢幕進行一對一合作網路探索活動	★ 以Cyber-Physical環境支援程式設計學習之探究
★ 跨領域合作設計活動之互動分析：群組軟體的支援與設計	★ 不同成就學生於模擬遊戲環境中程式學習效果之探究

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

英語是主要的國際語言，在我國現今的教育中更是重點培養的能力。而英語的教學方式是熱門的研究問題；相關研究指出，對話式閱讀或稱分享式閱讀能夠提升學童對於英語閱讀的興趣及深度，本研究在對話式聊書機器人的基礎上進一步探究，當聊書機器人具情緒表情回應時，孩童聊書過程對話方式、對聊書機器人的感受、聊書過程中投入的程度，以及對其閱讀情境興趣是否有影響。
本研究實驗對象為臺灣桃園市某國小四年級共計55位的學生；學生分為情緒表情組及純文字組，純文字組使用純文字介面之聊書機器人，情緒表情組使用具情緒表情變化之聊書機器人。聊書活動共進行2次，每次活動皆由學生自由挑選英文書籍並在閱讀後與聊書機器人分享。學生分享方式無任何限制。本研究主要收集與分析學生的心流、與機器人關係連結以及聊書過程中的對話資料進行分析探討，最後針對每位學生進行單獨訪談。
研究發現，情緒組學生心得分享的字數較文字組學生多。但樂於與機器人分享書籍並沒有幫助到閱讀情境興趣提升。而純文字組學生較投入在閱讀本身，閱讀情境興趣有顯著提升。此外，先備知識差異在使用不同聊書機器人時的體驗不同。低成就學生使用純文字組機器人聊書效果較好，閱讀情境興趣上升且維持。情緒表情組學生在訪談中普遍認為與機器人聊書是好玩的活動，也願意為機器人準備書籍，但會挑選較簡單好聊的書，比較不會想要挑戰高難度的書。因此可能對閱讀興趣沒有明顯的幫助。高成就學生閱讀興趣較穩定不受機器人影響。

摘要(英)

English is the main international language, and it is the most important ability to cultivate in our country′s current education. The teaching method of English is a hot research issue; related research points out that conversational reading or shared reading can enhance students’ interest and depth in English reading. When the book robot responded with emotional facial expressions, whether the children’s conversational style, their feelings towards the robot, the degree of engagement in the book talk process, and the interest in the reading situation had any influence. The subjects of this study were 55 fourth-grade students from an elementary school in Taoyuan City, Taiwan. The students were divided into an emotional expression group and a text-only group. The text-only group used a text-only chatbot, and the emotional-expression group used emotional expression Chatbot. There were 2 book talk activities, and in each activity, students freely selected English books and shared them with the chatbot after reading. There are no restrictions on how students can share. This research mainly collects and analyzes the students′ flow, the relationship with the robot, and the dialogue data during the chatting process, and finally conducts individual interviews for each student. The study found that students in the emotion group shared more words than those in the text group. But the willingness to share books with the robot did not help with the situational interest (SI) in reading. Students in the text-only group were more engaged in reading itself, and their interest in reading situations was significantly improved. In addition, prior knowledge will lead to different experiences with different chatbots. Low-achieving students use the text-only group chatbot to chat better, and their interest in reading situations increases and keep. In the interviews, students in the emotional expression group generally believed that chatting with the chatbot was a fun activity, and they were willing to prepare books for the chatbot, but they would choose simpler books to talk about, and would not want to challenge difficult books. So there may be no obvious help for reading interest. The reading interest of high-achieving students is relatively stable and unaffected by chatbots.

關鍵字(中)

★ 英語閱讀
★ 聊書
★ 聊天機器人
★ 感知
★ 心流
★ GODSPEED
★ 情境興趣
★ 對話式閱讀
★ 表情機器人

關鍵字(英)

★ English reading
★ book talk
★ chatbot
★ perception
★ flow
★ godspeed scales
★ situational interest
★ dialogic reading
★ facial expression robots

論文目次

目錄
摘要 I
Abstract II
致謝 IV
目錄 V
圖目錄 IX
表目錄 X
第一章續論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的與問題 3
1.3 名詞解釋 4
1.3.1 心流 4
1.3.2 Godspeed 4
1.3.3 情境興趣 4
1.3.4 聊書 4
1.4 研究範圍與限制 5
1.5 論文架構 5
第二章文獻探討 6
2.1 聊書機器人 6
2.2 表情機器人 8
2.3 心流 10
2.4 Godspeed 12
2.5 情境興趣 14
第三章系統設計 16
3.1 系統特色 16
3.2 系統概念 18
3.3 對話策略 19
3.4 系統架構 25
3.4.1後端資料庫 25
第四章研究方法 27
4.1 研究對象 27
4.2 研究流程 28
4.3 實驗設計 28
4.4 「英語閱讀」活動設計 30
4.4.1 英語書籍 30
4.4.2 閱讀活動 30
4.4.3 「魚姐姐」聊書活動 31
4.5 研究工具 32
4.5.1 學生對話紀錄剖析 32
4.5.2 心流量表 32
4.5.3 Godspeed 量表 33
4.5.4 情境興趣量表 34
4.6 資料收集與分析 36
4.6.1 聊書活動對話分析 36
4.6.2 聊書活動後訪談分析 38
4.6.3 Godspeed量表分析 39
4.6.4 心流量表分析 39
4.6.5 情境興趣量表分析 39
第五章研究結果與討論 40
5.1 學生與聊書機器人的對話狀況 40
5.2 對話過程P值變化比較 53
5.3 學生對「魚姐姐」的感受 56
5.4 學生在聊書活動投入狀況分析 63
5.5 學生英語閱讀之「情境興趣」分析 71
5.6 先備知識對於學生聊書活動投入的影響分析 77
5.7 先備知識對於學生聊書活動感受的影響分析 81
5.8 先備知識對於學生英語閱讀之「情境興趣」影響分析 85
第六章結論與討論 89
6.1 聊書機器人使用「純文字」及「情緒表情」兩種介面中學生聊書的對話狀況如何? 89
6.2 聊書機器人使用「純文字」及「情緒表情」兩種介面中學生聊書的投入狀況如何? 90
6.3 聊書機器人使用「純文字」及「情緒表情」兩種介面中學生聊書的感受如何? 91
6.4 聊書機器人使用「純文字」及「情緒表情」兩種介面對學生閱讀情境興趣的影響如何? 92
6.5 聊書機器人使用「純文字」及「情緒表情」兩種介面中不同先備知識聊書的投入狀況如何? 93
6.6 聊書機器人使用「純文字」及「情緒表情」兩種介面中不同先備知識學生聊書的感受如何? 93
6.7 聊書機器人使用「純文字」及「情緒表情」兩種介面對不同先備知識學生閱讀情境興趣的影響如何? 94
6.8 聊書機器人使用「純文字」及「情緒表情」兩種介面中面對不同對話類型的學生時機器人的情緒會如何轉變? 94
6.9 總結與未來研究 97
參考文獻 98
中文文獻 98
英文文獻 99
附錄A 書目列表 105
附錄B 心流量表問卷 107
附錄C Godspeed量表 108
你覺得這次「魚姐姐」跟你的對話... 108
我覺得「魚姐姐」... 108
我覺得「魚姐姐」... 109
附錄D 情境興趣量表 110
附錄E 訪談記錄 111

參考文獻

中文文獻
廖墨剛(2021)。聊天機器人對國小學生英語閱讀興趣的影響。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所碩士論文，桃園市。
邱茗琪(2020)。社交機器人表情回饋對於不同年齡兒童學習之影響。國立嘉義大學數位學習設計與管理學研究所碩士論文，嘉義市。
馮永婷(2021)。聊天機器人使用故事接龍及故事引導對話策略對學生英語閱讀經驗的影響。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所碩士論文，桃園市。

英文文獻
Abdelaal, N. M., & Sase, A. S. (2014). Relationship between prior knowledge and reading comprehension. Advances in Language & Literary Studies, 5(6), 125–131. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.5n.6p.125
Bartneck, C., Kanda, T., Mubin, O., & Al Mahmud, A. (2007, November). The perception of animacy and intelligence based on a robot′s embodiment. In 2007 7th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots (pp. 300-305). IEEE.
Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International journal of social robotics, 1(1), 71-81.
Chambers, A. (1985). Booktalk: Occasional writing on literature and children. Harpercollins Childrens Books.
Chambers, A. (1993). Tell me: Children, reading & talk. Primary English Teaching Association, Laura Street, Newtown, New South Wales 2042, Australia (PET045; $14 Australian members; $17 nonmembers plus $2.50 postage/handling)..
Chandra, S., Paradeda, R., Yin, H., Dillenbourg, P., Prada, R., & Paiva, A. (2018, February). Do Children Perceive Whether a Robotic Peer is Learning or Not?. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 41-49).
Craig, S., Graesser, A., Sullins, J., & Gholson, B. (2004). Affect and learning: an exploratory look into the role of affect in learning with AutoTutor. Journal of educational media, 29(3), 241-250.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Beyond boredom and anxiety. Jossey-Bass. (Original work published 1975)
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikzentmihaly, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience (Vol. 1990). New York: Harper & Row.
Eyssel, F., Hegel, F., Horstmann, G., & Wagner, C. (2010, September). Anthropomorphic inferences from emotional nonverbal cues: A case study. In 19th international symposium in robot and human interactive communication (pp. 646-651). IEEE.
Fryer, L. K., Nakao, K., Thompson, A. (online). Chatbot learning partners: Connecting learning experiences, interest and competence. Computers in Human Behavior. doi 10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.023
Fryer, L. K., Ainley, M., Thompson, A., Gibson, A., & Sherlock, Z. (2017). Stimulating and sustaining interest in a language course: An experimental comparison of Chatbot and Human task partners. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 461-468. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.045
Ganotice Jr, F. A., Downing, K., Mak, T., Chan, B., & Lee, W. Y. (2017). Enhancing parent-child relationship through dialogic reading. Educational Studies, 43(1), 51-66.
Gehard, J. G. (1996). Teaching English as a foreign or second language. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Haider, M., & Yasmin, A. (2015). Significance of scaffolding and peer tutoring in the light of Vygotsky’s theory of zone of proximal development. International Journal of Languages, Literature and Linguistics, 1(3), 2015.
Han, J.; Kang, S.; Song, S. The design of monitor-based faces for robot-assisted language learning. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE RO-MAN, Gyeongju, Korea, 26–29 August 2013; pp. 356–357.
Heerink, M., Kröse, B., Evers, V., & Wielinga, B. (2010). Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: the almere model. International journal of social robotics, 2(4), 361-375.
Hidi, S. (1990). Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational research, 60(4), 549-571.
Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical issue for the 21st century. Review of educational research, 70(2), 151-179.
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational psychologist, 41(2), 111-127.
Kanda, T., Shiomi, M., Miyashita, Z., Ishiguro, H., & Hagita, N. (2009, March). An affective guide robot in a shopping mall. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction (pp. 173-180).
Kanda, T., Shimada, M., & Koizumi, S. (2012, March). Children learning with a social robot. In 2012 7th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (pp. 351-358). IEEE.
Kirchhoff, C. (2013). L2 extensive reading and flow: Clarifying the relationship. Reading in a foreign language, 25(2), 192-212.
Korat, O., Shamir, A., & Heibal, S. (2013). Expanding the boundaries of shared book reading: E-books and printed books in parent–child reading as support for children’s language. First language, 33(5), 504-523.
Kulic, D., & Croft, E. (2007). Physiological and subjective responses to articulated robot motion. Robotica, 25(1), 13.
Lee, K. M., Park, N., & Song, H. (2005). Can a robot be perceived as a developing creature? Effects of a robot′s long‐term cognitive developments on its social presence and people′s social responses toward it. Human communication research, 31(4), 538-563.
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Durik, A. M., Conley, A. M., Barron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., Karabenick, S. A., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). Measuring situational interest in academic domains. Educational and psychological measurement, 70(4), 647-671.
Linnenbrink‐Garcia, L., Patall, E. A., & Messersmith, E. E. (2013). Antecedents and consequences of situational interest. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(4), 591-614.
Mitchell, M. (1993). Situational interest: Its multifaceted structure in the secondary school mathematics classroom. Journal of educational psychology, 85(3), 424.
Monahan, J. L. (1998). I don′t know it but I like you: The influence of nonconscious affect on person perception. Human Communication Research, 24(4), 480-500.
MacDorman, K. F. (2006, July). Subjective ratings of robot video clips for human likeness, familiarity, and eeriness: An exploration of the uncanny valley. In ICCS/CogSci-2006 long symposium: Toward social mechanisms of android science (pp. 26-29).
Michaelis, J. E., & Nathan, M. J. (2015). The four-phase interest development in engineering survey. In American Society of Engineering Education Conference, Seattle, WA (ASEE, 2015).
Michaelis, J. E., & Mutlu, B. (2017, May). Someone to read with: Design of and experiences with an in-home learning companion robot for reading. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 301-312).
Michaelis, J. E., & Mutlu, B. (2019, June). Supporting interest in science learning with a social robot. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 71-82).
Mutlu, B., Osman, S., Forlizzi, J., Hodgins, J., & Kiesler, S. (2006, September). Task structure and user attributes as elements of human-robot interaction design. In ROMAN 2006-The 15th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 74-79). IEEE.
Parise, S., Kiesler, S., Sproull, L., & Waters, K. (1999). Cooperating with life-like interface agents. Computers in human behavior, 15(2), 123-142.
Powers, A., & Kiesler, S. (2006, March). The advisor robot: tracing people′s mental model from a robot′s physical attributes. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on Human-robot interaction (pp. 218-225).
Roser, N. L., & Martinez, M. G. (1995). Book talk and beyond: Children and teachers respond to literature. Order Department, International Reading Association, 800 Barksdale Road, PO Box 8139, Newark, DE 19714-8139 (Book No. 129: $15 members, $21 nonmembers)..
Ruan, S., Willis, A., Xu, Q., Davis, G. M., Jiang, L., Brunskill, E., & Landay, J. A. (2019). Book Buddy: Turning Digital Materials Into Interactive Foreign Language Lessons Through a Voice Chatbot [Conference session]. Sixth (2019) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, United States.
Ryokai, K., Vaucelle, C., & Cassell, J. (2003). Virtual peers as partners in storytelling and literacy learning. Journal of computer assisted learning, 19(2), 195-208.
Steptoe, W.; Steed, A. High-fidelity avatar eye-representation. In Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE Virtual Reality Conference, Reno, NV, USA, 8–12 March 2008; pp. 111–114.
Sutoyo, R., Chowanda, A., Kurniati, A., Wongso, R.. Designing an emotionally realistic chatbot framework to enhance its believability with aiml and information states. Procedia Computer Science 2019;157:621–628.
Trevino, L. K., & Webster, J. (1992). Flow in computer-mediated communication: Electronic mail and voice mail evaluation and impacts. Communication research, 19(5), 539-573.
Tsao, F. F. (2004). Breaking the point of the difficulty of teaching English in Taiwan by applying reading education. Journal of English Teaching & Learning, 28(3), 1–16.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher mental processes (E. Rice, Ed. & Trans.).
Wang, J.; Wang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Yue, T.; Wang, C.; Yang, W.; Hansen, P.; You, F. Experimental Study on Abstract Expression of Human-Robot Emotional Communication. Symmetry 2021, 13, 1693. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/sym13091693
Warner, R. M., & Sugarman, D. B. (1986). Attributions of personality based on physical appearance, speech, and handwriting. Journal of personality and social psychology, 50(4), 792.
Webster, J., Trevino, L. K., & Ryan, L. (1993). The dimensionality and correlates of flow in human-computer interactions. Computers in human behavior, 9(4), 411-426.
Westlund, J. K., & Breazeal, C. (2015, March). The interplay of robot language level with children′s language learning during storytelling. In Proceedings of the tenth annual ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction extended abstracts (pp. 65-66).
Whalon, K., Delano, M., & Hanline, M. F. (2013). A rationale and strategy for adapting dialogic reading for children with autism spectrum disorder: RECALL. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 57(2), 93-101.
Whitehurst, G. J., Epstein, J. N., Angell, A. L., Payne, A. C., Crone, D. A., & Fischel, J. E. (1994). Outcomes of an emergent literacy intervention in Head Start. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(4), 542.
Xu, Y., Wang, D., Collins, P., Lee, H., & Warschauer, M. (2021). Same benefits, different communication patterns: Comparing Children′s reading with a conversational agent vs. a human partner. Computers & Education, 161, 104059.

指導教授

劉晨鐘(Chen-Chung Liu)

審核日期

2022-8-18

推文