chapter

Socially Interactive Agents as Peers

Author:

The Handbook on Socially Interactive Agents: 20 years of Research on Embodied Conversational Agents, Intelligent Virtual Agents, and Social Robotics Volume 2: Interactivity, Platforms, Application

October 2022

Pages 331 - 366

https://doi.org/10.1145/3563659.3563670

Published: 03 November 2022 Publication History

Get Access

References

[1]

J. Allwood. 2000. An activity based approach to pragmatics. In H. Bunt and W. Black (Eds.), Abduction, Belief and Context in Dialogue. John Benjamin’s Publishing, 47–80.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[2]

American Psychiatric Association. 2013. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.)

Google Scholar

[3]

J. R. Anderson, C. F. Boyle, and B. J Reiser. 1985. Intelligent tutoring systems. Science 228, 4698, 456–462.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[4]

M. Azmitia and R. Montgomery. 1993. Friendship, transactive dialogues, and the development of scientific reasoning. Soc. Dev. 2, 3, 202–221.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[5]

N. Bauminger. 2002. The facilitation of social-emotional understanding and social interaction in high-functioning children with autism: Intervention outcomes. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 32, 283–98.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[6]

N. Bauminger, C. Shulman, and G. Agam. 2003. Peer interaction and loneliness in high-functioning children with autism. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 33, 489–507.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[7]

P. Baxter, E. Ashurst, R. Read, J. Kennedy, and T. Belpaeme. 2017. Robot education peers in a situated primary school study: Personalisation promotes child learning. PLoS One, 12, 5, e0178126.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[8]

A. Baylor, and Y. Kim. 2005. Simulating instructional roles through pedagogical agents. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 15, 2, 95–115.

Google Scholar

[9]

L. Beardon. 2017. Autism and Asperger Syndrome in Adults. Sheldon Press, London.

Google Scholar

[10]

B. Benson. 2019. Why Are We Yelling? Learn the Life-Changing Art of Productive Disagreement. Portfolio/Penguin Press.

Google Scholar

[11]

T. Belpaeme, J. Kennedy, A. Ramachandran, B. Scassellati, and F. Tanaka. 2018. Social robots for education: A review. Sci. Robot. 3, 21, eaat5954.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[12]

B. Bernstein. 1961. Social class and linguistic development: A theory of social learning. In A. H. Halsey, J. Floud, and A. Anderson (Eds.), Education, Economy and Society. New York.

Google Scholar

[13]

T. Bickmore and J. Cassell. 2000. “How about this weather?” Social dialog with embodied conversational agents. In Proceedings of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) Fall Symposium on Narrative Intelligence. American Association for Artificial Intelligence, 4–8.

Google Scholar

[14]

G. Biswas, K. Leelawong, D. L. Schwartz, and N. Vye. 2005. Learning by teaching: A new agent paradigm for educational software. Appl. Artif. Intell. 19, 363–392.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[15]

S. Blum-Kulka and S. Dvir-Gvirsman. 2010. Peer interaction and learning. In P. McGaw (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Education (3rd. ed.). Elsevier, Oxford, England, 444–449.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[16]

L. Boccanfuso, E. Barney, C. Foster, Y. A. Ahn, K. Chawarska, B. Scassellati, and F. Shic. 2016. Emotional robot to examine different play patterns and affective responses of children with and without ASD. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (HRI). IEEE Press, 19–26.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[17]

C. C. Bonwell and J. A. Eison. 1991. Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1. ERIC Number: ED336049.

Google Scholar

[18]

C. Breazeal. 2002. Designing Sociable Robots. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Google Scholar

[19]

F. Burger, J. Broekens, and M. A. Neerincx. 2017. Fostering relatedness between children and virtual agents through reciprocal self-disclosure. In BNAIC 2016: 28th Benelux Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Springer, 137–154.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[20]

S. L. Calvert, M. M. Putnam, N. R. Aguiar, R. M. Ryan, C. A. Wright, Y. Liu, and E. Barba. 2020. Young children’s mathematical learning from intelligent characters. Child Dev. 91, 5, 1491–1508.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[21]

S. Campe, J. Denner, E. Green, and D. Torres. 2020. Pair programming in middle school: Variations in interactions and behaviors. Comput. Sci. Educ. 30, 1, 22–46.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[22]

J. N. Cappella. 1990. On defining conversational coordination and rapport. Psychol. Inq, 1, 4, 303–305.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[23]

J. Cassell. 2000. Nudge nudge wink wink: Elements of face-to-face conversation for embodied conversational agents. In J. Cassell, J. Sullivan, S. Prevost, and E. F. Churchill (Eds.), Embodied Conversational Agents. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1–27.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[24]

J. Cassell. 2002. “We have these rules inside”: The effects of exercising voice in a children’s online forum. In S. Calvert, R. Cocking, and A. Jordan (Eds.), Children in the Digital Age. Praeger Press, New York, 123–144.

Google Scholar

[25]

J. Cassell. 2004. Towards a model of technology and literacy development: Story listening systems. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 25, 1, 75–105.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[26]

J. Cassell. 2020. The ties that bind: Social interaction in conversational agents. Réseaux 220–221, 2–3, 21–45.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[27]

J. Cassell, M. Ananny, A. Basu, T. Bickmore, P. Chong, D. Mellis, K. Ryokai, H. Vilhjálmsson, J. Smith, H. Yan. 2000. Shared reality: Physical collaboration with a virtual peer. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). ACM, 259–260.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[28]

J. Cassell, A. Gill, and P. Tepper. 2007. Coordination in conversation and rapport. Proceedings of the Workshop on Embodied Natural Language. Association for Computational Linguistics, 41–50.

Google Scholar

[29]

A. Cekaite and K. Aronsson. 2005. Language play, a collaborative resource in children’s L2 learning. Appl. Linguist. 26, 2, 169–191.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[30]

T. W. Chan and A. Baskin. 1988. “Studying with the Prince”: The computer as a learning companion. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Montreal, Canada, 194–200.

Google Scholar

[31]

C. C. Chase, D. B. Chin, M. A. Oppezzo, and D. L. Schwartz. 2009. Teachable agents and the protégé effect: Increasing the effort towards learning. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 18, 334–352.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[32]

H. Chen, H. W. Park, and C. Breazeal. 2020. Teaching and learning with children: Impact of reciprocal peer learning with a social robot on children’s learning and emotive engagement. Comput. Educ. 150, 103836.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[33]

J. Christie and S. Stone. 1999. Collaborative literacy activity in print-enriched play centers: Exploring the “zone” in same-age and multi-age groupings. J. Lit. Res. 31, 2, 109–131.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[34]

J. Cook-Gumperz and A. Kyratzis. 2001. Child discourse. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, and H. Hamilton (Eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 590–611.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[35]

CNPEN: Comité National Pilote d’éthique Du Numérique, A. Grinbaum, L. Devillers, G. Adda, R. Chatila, et al. 2021. Agents Conversationnels: Enjeux d’éthique. [Rapport de recherche] Comité national pilote d’éthique du numérique; CCNE. 2021. ffcea-03432785v1f.

Google Scholar

[36]

W. A. Corsaro. 1997. The Sociology of Childhood. Pine Forge Press/Sage Publications.

Google Scholar

[37]

C. H. Crouch, J. Watkins, A. P. Fagen, and E. Mazur. 2007. Peer instruction: Engaging students one-on-one, all at once. Research-Based Reform of University Physics 1, 1, 40–95.

Google Scholar

[38]

J. Decety and J. Grèzes. 2006. The power of simulation: imagining one’s own and other’s behavior. Brain Res. 1079, 1, 4–14.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[39]

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV. 1994. American Psychiatric Association, Washington, DC.

Google Scholar

[40]

E. Eisenberg and C. Garvey. 1981. Children’s use of verbal strategies in resolving conflicts. Discourse Process. 4, 2, 149–170.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[41]

A. Elliott. 2021. Dasani Leaves Home. New York Times Magazine, October 1, 2021, Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com.

Google Scholar

[42]

G. Ferguson and J. Allen. 1998. TRIPS: The rochester interactive planning system. In Proceedings of IAAI ’99: Proceedings of the Sixteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and the Eleventh Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence July 1999. 906–907.

Google Scholar

[43]

S. Finkelstein. 2017. “Alex speaks with my voice!” Rapport and Science Discourse with Bidialectal Virtual Peers [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Carnegie Mellon University, CMU-HCII-17-109.

Google Scholar

[44]

S. Finkelstein, A. Ogan, E. Walker, R. Muller, and J. Cassell. 2012. Rudeness and rapport: Insults and learning gains in peer tutoring. In International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Vol. 7315: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, 11–21.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[45]

S. Finkelstein, E. Yarzebinski, C. Vaughn, A. Ogan, and J. Cassell. 2013. The effects of culturally-congruent educational technologies on student achievement. In Proceedings of Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED), Vol. 7926: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, 493–502.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[46]

D. Fuchs and L. S. Fuchs. 2005. Peer-assisted learning strategies: Promoting word recognition, fluency, and reading comprehension in young children. J. Spec. Educ. 39, 1, 34–44.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[47]

J. Gayda, A. Tartaro, Z. Li, J. Cassell, and J. Y. Chiao. 2008. Neural Basis of Social Perception of a Human versus Virtual Human. Poster presented at the 15th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society (CNS), San Francisco, CA, April 2008.

Google Scholar

[48]

C. Genishi and M. DiPaolo. 1982. Learning through argument in a preschool. In L. C. Wilkinson (Ed.), Communicating in the Classroom. Academic, New York, 49–68.

Google Scholar

[49]

R. Gonzalez. May. 2018. Alexa, what are you doing to my kid’s brain? Wired Magazine. https://www.wired.com/story/hey-alexa-what-are-you-doing-to-my-kids-brain/.

Google Scholar

[50]

M. H. Goodwin. 1993. Accomplishing social organization in girls’ play: Patterns of competition and cooperation in an African-American working-class girls’ group. In S. T. Hollis, L. Pershing, and M. J. Young (Eds.), Feminist Theory and the Study of Folklore. University of illinois Press, Urbana, IL, 149–165.

Google Scholar

[51]

J. Gratch and G. Lucas. 2021. Rapport between humans and socially interactive agents. In The Handbook on Socially Interactive Agents: 20 years of Research on Embodied Conversational Agents, Intelligent Virtual Agents, and Social Robotics Volume 1: Methods, Behavior, Cognition (1st. ed.). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, 433–462.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[52]

A. Guzman Garcia and J. Cassell. Unpublished. The impact of rapport on tutoring by virtual peers.

Google Scholar

[53]

M. H. Goodwin. 1990. Tactical uses of stories: Participation frameworks within girls’ and boys’ disputes. Discourse Process. 13:1, 33–71.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[54]

W. W. Hartup. 1996. Cooperation, close relationships, and cognitive development. In W. M. Bukowski, A. F. Newcomb, and W. W. Hartup (Eds.), The Company They Keep: Friendship in Childhood and Adolescence. Cambridge University Press, 213–237.

Google Scholar

[55]

D. Hood, S. Lemaignan, and P. Dillenbourg. 2015. When children teach a robot to write: An autonomous teachable humanoid which uses simulated handwriting. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (HRI’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, 83–90.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[56]

N. Humphrey and W. Symes. 2011. Peer interaction patterns among adolescents with autistic spectrum disorders (ASDs) in mainstream school settings. Autism 15, 4, 397–419. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1362361310387804#articleCitationDownloadContainer.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[57]

J. Jacobson, L. Thrope, D. Fisher, D. Lapp, N. Frey, and J. Flood. 2001. Cross-age tutoring: A literacy improvement approach for struggling adolescent readers. J. Adolesc. Adult Lit. 44, 6, 528–536. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40013564.

Google Scholar

[58]

D. Johnson, R. T. Johnson, and K. Smith. 1991. Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom. Interaction Book Company, Edina, MN.

Google Scholar

[59]

W. Kallmeyer and I. Keim. 2003. Linguistic variation and the construction of social identity in a German-Turkish setting: A case study of an immigrant youth-group in Mannheim, Germany. In: J. Androutsopoulos and A. Georgakopoulou (Eds.), Discourse Constructions of Youth Identities. John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 29–46.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[60]

T. Kanda, R. Sato, N. Saiwaki, and H. Ishiguro. 2007. A two-month field trial in an elementary school for long-term human–robot interaction. IEEE Trans. Robot. 23, 5, 962–971.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[61]

W. Kelly. 1961. Pogo Primer for Parents (TV Division). Children’s Bureau Headliner Series, number 2. US Dept. of Health Education and Welfare, Social Security Administration, Children’s Bureau.

Google Scholar

[62]

J. Kennedy, P. Baxter, and T. Belpaeme. 2014. Comparing robot embodiments in a guided discovery learning interaction with children. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 7, 293–308.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[63]

Y. Kim and A. L. Baylor. 2006. Pedagogical agents as learning companions: The role of agent competency and type of interaction. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 54, 3, 223–243. Retrieved December 30, 2021, from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/67659/.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[64]

K. Koedinger and A. Corbett. 2005. Cognitive tutors: Technology bringing learning sciences to the classroom. In R. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 61–78.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[65]

J. Kory, S. Jeong, and C. Breazeal. 2013. Robotic learning companions for early language development. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM on International Conference on Multimodal Interaction (ICMI’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, 71–72.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[66]

V. Kühne, A. M. Rosenthal-von der Pütten, and N. C. Krämer. August. 2013. Using linguistic alignment to enhance learning experience with pedagogical agents: The special case of dialect. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Intelligent Virtual Agents, Vol. 8108: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, 149–158.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[67]

A. Kyratzis. 2004. Talk and interaction among children and the co-construction of peer groups and peer culture. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 33, 625–649.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[68]

D. Labotka and S. A. Gelman. 2020. The development of children’s identification of foreigner talk. Dev. Psychol. 56, 9, 1657–1670.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[69]

G. Ladd. 2005. Children’s Peer Relations and Social Competence: A Century of Progress. Yale University Press.

Google Scholar

[70]

H. C. Lane and N. Schroeder. 2022. Pedagogical agents. In B. Lugrin, C. Pelachaud, and D. Traum (Eds.), Handbook on Socially Interactive Agents: 20 Years of Research on Embodied Conversational Agents, Intelligent Virtual Agents, and Social Robotics: Volume 2: Interactivity, Platforms, Applications. ACM Press, 307–329.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[71]

H. C. Lane, C. Cahill, S. Foutz, D. Auerbach, D. Noren, C. Lussenhop, and W. Swartout. 2013. The effects of a pedagogical agent for informal science education on learner behaviors and self-efficacy. In Proceedings of 16th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, AIED 2013, Vol. 7926: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, 309–318.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[72]

A. Lauricella, A. A. Gola, and S. L. Calvert. 2011. Toddlers’ learning from socially meaningful video characters. Media Psychol. 14, 216–232.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[73]

R. Looije, M. A. Neerincx, and V. de Lange. 2008. Children’s responses and opinion on three bots that motivate, educate and play. J. Phys. Agents 2, 2, 13–20.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[74]

B. Lugrin, E. Ströle, D. Obremski, F. Schwab, and B. Lange. 2020. What if it speaks like it was from the village? Effects of a robot speaking in regional language variations on users’ evaluations. In 2020 29th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN). IEEE, 1315–1320.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[75]

B. Lugrin, C. Pelachaud, and D. Traum. (Eds.). 2021. The Handbook on Socially Interactive Agents: 20 years of Research on Embodied Conversational Agents, Intelligent Virtual Agents, and Social Robotics Volume 1: Methods, Behavior, Cognition. ACM Press, 538 pages.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[76]

M. Madaio, K. Peng, A. Ogan, and J. Cassell. 2017. A climate of support: A process-oriented analysis of the impact of rapport on peer tutoring. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS). International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Google Scholar

[77]

L. Martin, E. Villemonte de la Clergerie, B. Sagot, and A. Bordes. 11–16 May. 2020. Controllable sentence simplification. In Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2020). European Language Resources Association, 4689–4698.

Google Scholar

[78]

R. E. Mayer and C. S. DaPra. 2012. An embodiment effect in computer-based learning with animated pedagogical agents. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 18, 3, 239–252.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[79]

D. W. Maynard. 1985. On the functions of social conflict among children. Am. Sociol. Rev. 50, 2, 207–223.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[80]

J. L. McClelland. 2009. The place of modeling in cognitive science. Top. Cogn. Sci. 1, 1, 11–38.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[81]

B. J. Millis and J. L. Rhem. 2010. Cooperative Learning in Higher Education: Across the Disciplines, Across the Academy.

Google Scholar

[82]

D. Milton. 2012. On the ontological status of autism: The “double empathy problem.” Disabil. Soc. 27, 6, 883–887.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[83]

O. Mubin, C. Stevens, S. Shahid, A. Mahmud, and J.-J. Dong. 2013. A review of the applicability of robots in education. Technol. Educ. Learn. 1.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[84]

G. Mugny and W. Doise. 1978. Socio-cognitive conflict and structure of individual and collective performances. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 8, 181–192.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[85]

T. Murray. 1999. Authoring intelligent tutoring systems: An analysis of the state of the art. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 10, 98–129.

Google Scholar

[86]

J. Nadel, O. Grynszpan, and J.-C. Martin. 2022. Autism and socially interactive agents. In B. Lugrin, C. Pelachaud, and D. Traum (Eds.), Handbook on Socially Interactive Agents: 20 Years of Research on Embodied Conversational Agents, Intelligent Virtual Agents, and Social Robotics: Volume 2: Interactivity, Platforms, Applications. ACM Press, 437–462.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[87]

J. Nasir, B. Bruno, M. Chetouani, and P. Dillenbourg. 2021. What if social robots look for productive engagement? Automated assessment of goal-centric engagement in learning applications. Int. J. Soc. Robotics 14, 55–71.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[88]

S. Neuman and K. Roskos. 1992. Literacy objects as cultural tools: Effects on children’s literacy behaviors in play. Read. Res. Q. 27, 3, 202–226.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[89]

A. Newcomb and J. Brady. 1982. Mutuality in boys’ friendship relations. Child Dev. 53, 2, 392–395.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[90]

J. U. Ogbu. 1992. Understanding cultural diversity and learning. Educ. Res. 21, 8, 5–24.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[91]

J. U. Ogbu (Ed.). 2008. Minority Status, Oppositional Culture, & Schooling. Routledge, New York.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[92]

A. S. Palincsar and A. L. Brown. 1984. Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cogn. Instr. 1, 2, 117–175.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[93]

B. Paranjape, Z. Bai, and J. Cassell. 2018. Predicting the temporal and social dynamics of curiosity in small group learning. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED), Vol. 10947: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Cham, 420–435.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[94]

H. W. Park, R. Rosenberg-Kima, M. Rosenberg, G. Gordon, and C. Breazeal. 2017. Growing growth mindset with a social robot peer. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction. ACM, 137–145.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[95]

A. Pazylbekov, D. Kalym, A. Otynshin, and A. Sandygulova. 2019. Similarity attraction for robot’s dialect in language learning using social robots. In 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (HRI). IEEE, 532–533.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[96]

A. Pellegrini, L. Galda, M. Bartini, and D. Charak. 1998. Oral language and literacy learning in context: The role of social relationships. Merrill Palmer Q. 44, 1, 38–54.

Google Scholar

[97]

A. M. Perry and N. Lee. September. 2019. AI is coming to schools, and if we’re not careful, so will its biases. The Avenue. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2019/09/26/ai-is-coming-to-schools-and-if-were-not-careful-so-will-its-biases/.

Google Scholar

[98]

J. Piaget. (1947:1950). The psychology of intelligence. In M. Piercy and D. E. Berlyne (Trans.). Routledge & Kegan Paul, London (Original work published 1947).

Google Scholar

[99]

L. Porter, C. Bailey Lee, and B. Simon. March. 2013. Halving fail rates using peer instruction: A study of four computer science courses. In Proceeding of the 44th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, 177–182.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[100]

J. Piaget. 1959. The Language and Thought of the Child (3rd ed.). (M. Gabain and R. Gabain, Trans.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Google Scholar

[101]

E. Rader, M. Echelbarger, and J. Cassell. May. 2011. Brick by brick: Iterating interventions to bridge the achievement gap with virtual peers. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). ACM, 2971–2974.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[102]

B. Rampton. 1995. Language crossing and the problematisation of ethnicity and socialisation. Pragmatics 5, 4, 485–513.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[103]

Y. Raphalen, C. Clavel, and J. Cassell. 2022. “You might think about slightly revising the title”: Identifying hedges in peer-tutoring interactions. In Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). Association for Computational Linguistics, 2160–2174.

Google Scholar

[104]

M. A. Rau, V. Aleven, and Rummel, N. July. 2009. Intelligent tutoring systems with multiple representations and self-explanation prompts support learning of fractions. In Proceedings of Artificial Intelligence and Education (AIED). IOS Press, 441–448.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[105]

D. Robinson, J. Schofield, and K. Steers-Wentzell. 2005. Peer and cross-age tutoring in math: Outcomes and their design implications. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 17, 4, 327–362.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[106]

C. Rohrbeck, M. D. Ginsburg-Block, J. Fantuzzo, and T. Miller. 2003. Peer-assisted learning interventions with elementary school students: A meta-analytic review. J. Educ. Psychol. 95, 2, 240–257.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[107]

S. Roller, E. Dinan, N. Goyal, D. Ju, M. Williamson, Y. Liu, J. Xu, M. Ott, K. Shuster, E. M. Smith, Y. L. Boureau, and J. Weston. 2021. Recipes for building an open-domain chatbot. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Main Volume. Association for Computational Linguistics, 300–325.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[108]

A. M. Roth, S. Reig, U. Bhatt, J. Shulgach, T. Amin, A. Doryab, F. Fang, M. Veloso. October. 2019. A robot’s expressive language affects human strategy and perceptions in a competitive game. In 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN). IEEE, 1–8.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[109]

M. Sato and S. Ballinger (Eds.), 2016. Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning: Pedagogical Potential and Research Agenda, Vol. 45. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[110]

S. S. Sebo, L. L. Dong, N. Chang, and B. Scassellati. March. 2020. Strategies for the inclusion of human members within human–robot teams. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction. ACM, 309–317.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[111]

A. Senju. 2012. Spontaneous theory of mind and its absence in autism spectrum disorders. Neuroscientist 18, 2, 108–113.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[112]

A. M. Sharpley, J. W. Irvine, and C. F. Sharpley. 1983. An examination of the effectiveness of a cross-age tutoring program in mathematics for elementary school children. Am. Educ. Res. J. 20, 1, 103–111.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[113]

D. Y. E. Sin, T. C. T. Chew, T. K. Chia, J. S. Ser, A. Sayampanathan, and G. C. H. Koh. 2019. Evaluation of constructing care collaboration—Nurturing empathy and peer-to-peer learning in medical students who participate in voluntary structured service learning programmes for migrant workers. BMC Med. Educ. 19, 1, 1–13.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[114]

T. Sinha, Z. Bai, and J. Cassell. 2017. A new theoretical framework for curiosity for learning in social contexts. In E. Lavoué, H. Drachsler, K. Verbert, J. Broisin, and M. Pérez-Sanagustin (Eds.), Proceedings of 12th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning (EC-TEL 2017), Vol. 10474: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Cham, 254–269.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[115]

T. Sinha, J. Bai, and J. Cassell. 2022. A Novel Multimodal Approach for Studying the Dynamics of Curiosity in Small Group Learning. arXiv:2204.00545.

Google Scholar

[116]

D. Sleeman and J. Brown. 1982. Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Academic Press, New York.

Google Scholar

[117]

M. Soni, B. Cowan, and V. Wade. 2021. Enhancing self-disclosure in neural dialog models by candidate re-ranking. arXiv:2109.05090. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.05090.

Google Scholar

[118]

B. Tärning, Y. Joo Lee, R. Andersson, K. Månsson, A. Gulz, and M. Haake. 2020. Assessing the black box of feedback neglect in a digital educational game for elementary school. J. Learn. Sci. 29, 4–5, 511–549.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[119]

A. Tartaro and J. Cassell. 2006. Using virtual peer technology as an intervention for children with autism. In Universal Usability: Designing Computer Interfaces for Diverse User Populations. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 231–262.

Google Scholar

[120]

A. Tartaro and J. Cassell. 2008. Playing with virtual peers: Bootstrapping contingent discourse in children with autism. In Proceedings of International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2008). International Society of the Learning Sciences, 382–389.

Google Scholar

[121]

A. Tartaro, J. Cassell, C. Ratz, J. Lira, V. Nanclares-Nogues. 2015. Accessing peer social interaction: Using authorable virtual peer technology as a component of a group social skills intervention program. ACM Trans. Access. Comput. 6, 1, 1–29.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[122]

W. H. Teale, and E. Sulzby. 1986. Emergent literacy as a perspective for examining how young children become writers and readers. In Emergent Literacy: Writing and Reading. Ablex, Norwood, NJ.

Google Scholar

[123]

M. L. Traeger, S. S. Sebo, M. Jung, B. Scassellati, and N. A. Christakis. 2020. Vulnerable robots positively shape human conversational dynamics in a human–robot team. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 117, 12, 6370–6375.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[124]

J. Tudge and P. Winterhoff. 1993. Can young children benefit from collaborative problem solving? Tracing the effects of partner competence and feedback. Soc. Dev. 2, 3, 242–259.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[125]

L. S. Vygotsky. 1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Google Scholar

[126]

A. Wang and J. Cassell. 2003. Co-authoring, corroborating, criticizing: Collaborative storytelling between virtual and real children. In Proceedings of the Workshop of Educational Agents: More than Virtual Tutors.

Google Scholar

[127]

W. Wang, S. Finkelstein, A. Ogan, A. Black, and J. Cassell. 2012. “Love ya jerkface!”: Using sparse log-linear models to build positive (and impolite) relationships with teens. In Proceedings of the 13th Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue. Association for Computational Linguistics, 20–29.

Google Scholar

[128]

N. M. Webb. 1989. Peer interaction and learning in small groups. Int. J. Educ. Res. 13, 1, 21–39.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[129]

T. E. Weeks. October. 1971. Speech registers in young children. Child Dev. 42, 4, 119–131.

Google Scholar

[130]

J. Weizenbaum. 1966. ELIZA—A computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine. Commun. ACM 9, 1, 36–45.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[131]

Y. Xu, J. Aubele, V. Vigil, A. S. Bustamante, Y.-S. Kim, and M. Warschauer. 2021. Dialogue with a conversational agent promotes children’s story comprehension via enhancing engagement. Child Dev. 93, 2, e149–e167.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[132]

Y. Xu, V. Vigil, A. Bustamante, and Warschauer, M. 2022. “Elinor’s talking to me!”: Integrating conversational AI into children’s narrative science programming. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI). ACM, 1–16.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[133]

J. Yip, K. Sobel, X. Gao, A. Hishikawa, A. Lim, L. Meng, R. F. Ofiana, J. Park, and A. Hiniker. 2019. Laughing is scary, but farting is cute: A conceptual model of children’s perspectives of creepy technologies. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’19). ACM, 1–15.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[134]

S. Zadunaisky Ehrlich and S. Blum-Kulka. 2010. Peer talk as a ‘double opportunity space’: The case of argumentative discourse. Discourse Soc. 21, 2, 211–233.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[135]

K. Zakharov, A. Mitrovic, and L. Johnston. 2008. Towards emotionally-intelligent pedagogical agents. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Vol. 5091: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, 19–28.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[136]

L. Zhang, A. Z. Amat, H. Zhao, A. Swanson, A. S. Weitlauf, Z. Warren, and N. Sarkar. 2020a. Design of an intelligent agent to measure collaboration and verbal-communication skills of children with autism spectrum disorder in collaborative puzzle games. IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. 14, 3, 338–352.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[137]

Y. Zhang, S. Sun, M. Galley, Y. C. Chen, C. Brockett, X. Gao, J. Gao, J. Liu, and W. B. Dolan. July. 2020b. DIALOGPT: Large-scale generative pre-training for conversational response generation. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations. Association for Computational Linguistics, 270–278.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[138]

R. Zhao, A. Papangelis, J. Cassell. 2014. Towards a dyadic computational model of rapport management for human–virtual agent interaction. In T. Bickmore, C. Sidner, and S. Marsella (Eds.), Intelligent Virtual Agents (IVA) 2014, Vol. 8637: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Cham, 514–527.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[139]

B. Zhong, Q. Wang, and J. Chen. 2016. The impact of social factors on pair programming in a primary school. Comput. Hum. Behav. 64, 423–431.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[140]

L. Zhou, J. Gao, D. Li, and H. Y. Shum. 2020. The design and implementation of Xiaolce, an empathetic social chatbot. Comput. Linguist. 46, 1, 53–93.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

Cited By

View all

Bonnaire JDumas GCassell J(2024)Bringing together multimodal and multilevel approaches to study the emergence of social bonds between children and improve social AIFrontiers in Neuroergonomics10.3389/fnrgo.2024.12902565Online publication date: 17-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnrgo.2024.1290256
Höhn SNasir JPaikan AZiafati PAndré E(2024)Using Large Language Models for Robot-Assisted Therapeutic Role-Play: Factuality is not enough!Proceedings of the 6th ACM Conference on Conversational User Interfaces10.1145/3640794.3665886(1-6)Online publication date: 8-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3640794.3665886
Xu YThomas TLi ZChan MLin GMoore K(2024)Examining Children’s Perceptions of AI-Enabled Interactive Media CharactersInternational Journal of Child-Computer Interaction10.1016/j.ijcci.2024.100700(100700)Online publication date: Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2024.100700
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Socially Interactive Agents as Peers
1. Information systems

Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

Recommendations

Self-Organization of Peers in Agent Societies
WI-IAT '09: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology - Volume 02

This paper investigates how tags can be used to achieve self-organization of groups in a multi agent society where nodes of a P2P system are modeled as simple interacting agents located in different groups. The context of interaction between agents is ...
Believable agents and intelligent story adaptation for interactive storytelling
TIDSE'06: Proceedings of the Third international conference on Technologies for Interactive Digital Storytelling and Entertainment

Interactive Narrative is an approach to interactive entertainment that enables the player to make decisions that directly affect the direction and/or outcome of the narrative experience being delivered by the computer system. Interactive narrative ...
Towards conscientious peers

In the last years, Video-on-Demand (VoD) systems, such as Youtube, have become a very popular way to watch videos. Researches in Multiagent Systems (MAS) and Peer-to-Peer (P2P) for VoD have focused on using agents to assist peers to share video segments ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

The Handbook on Socially Interactive Agents: 20 years of Research on Embodied Conversational Agents, Intelligent Virtual Agents, and Social Robotics Volume 2: Interactivity, Platforms, Application

October 2022

710 pages

ISBN:9781450398961

DOI:10.1145/3563659

Editors:
Birgit Lugrin
Julius-Maximilians-Universität of Würzburg
,
Catherine Pelachaud
CNRS-ISIR, Sorbonne Université
,
David Traum
University of Southern California

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 03 November 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Qualifiers

Chapter

Appears in

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

5
Total Citations
View Citations
35
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)20
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)4

Reflects downloads up to 16 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

Bonnaire JDumas GCassell J(2024)Bringing together multimodal and multilevel approaches to study the emergence of social bonds between children and improve social AIFrontiers in Neuroergonomics10.3389/fnrgo.2024.12902565Online publication date: 17-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnrgo.2024.1290256
Höhn SNasir JPaikan AZiafati PAndré E(2024)Using Large Language Models for Robot-Assisted Therapeutic Role-Play: Factuality is not enough!Proceedings of the 6th ACM Conference on Conversational User Interfaces10.1145/3640794.3665886(1-6)Online publication date: 8-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3640794.3665886
Xu YThomas TLi ZChan MLin GMoore K(2024)Examining Children’s Perceptions of AI-Enabled Interactive Media CharactersInternational Journal of Child-Computer Interaction10.1016/j.ijcci.2024.100700(100700)Online publication date: Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2024.100700
Lane HSchroeder N(2022)Pedagogical AgentsThe Handbook on Socially Interactive Agents10.1145/3563659.3563669(307-330)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3563659.3563669
Kory-Westlund JWon Park HGrover IBreazeal C(2022)Long-Term Interaction with Relational SIAsThe Handbook on Socially Interactive Agents10.1145/3563659.3563667(195-260)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3563659.3563667

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

Self-Organization of Peers in Agent Societies

Believable agents and intelligent story adaptation for interactive storytelling

Towards conscientious peers