Adapting based on Affect

As previously stated, results indicates that on 70% (reader is directed to Figure 7.12) of occasions that affect was elicited children indicated they were happy. Albeit, that it is difficult to determine the reason for such a result qualitative data (Table 7.22) suggests that P.A.C.T. may be a contributing factor. In addition, Table 7.19 provides data, which supports this finding, as Valerie reports on the effectiveness of P.A.C.T. in dissolving frustration or anger through the suggestion of appropriate tutoring tactics.

Table 7.19 The Effect of Adapting Based of Affect

Valerie – If he really does feel, if we do get a bit tense and he really is feeling a bit frustrated or cross or I got a bit cross about something and it got a bit tense or whatever and if he really puts in well then I find that after whatever comes up, whatever the praising him or a motivational game or whatever that after that he is usually ok and we are back on track so it actually kind of works, it actually kind of work.

However, an interesting observation by all parents is the curiosity among children in expressing affective states other than that which they are currently experiencing. It appears that depending on the nature of the child and perhaps the parent-child dynamic there may be a risk of the child attempting to game the system (Baker et al, 2006). These activities vary in severity and for the purpose of this study can be defined as experimentation, trickery and definite gaming. Experimentation can be described as the

selection of an emoticon other than that which best represents the current emotional state based on a curiosity of what would happen. Trickery involves pretending that one is experiencing a different emotion than ones actual affective state. Gaming the system involves using the system rules against itself for the child’s own benefit. It is important to note that these instances are reported from parents’ perspectives. Examples of each type of activity are illustrated in Table 7.20.

In terms of experimentation with P.A.C.T. Valerie and Maebh, describe how their children choose alternative emoticons in an endeavour to see what will happen. There is a curiosity to see which activity will be suggested. Valerie and her child have agreed on a strategy for managing this experimentation whereby once during each session her son can select an emoticon, which does not represent the current affective state.

Chloe and Sarah report instances of trickery. Chloe reports that her child liked clicking on the sad face when she was happy. Sarah reports that her son said he was angry or sad when he was not.

Table 7.20 Effect of Adapting Based on Affect

Maebh – Oh she is watching for that her self and to be honest with you she plays a little bit with it in that one day she put in fearful and she wasn’t a bit . . . . but she wanted to see herself because she said oh I’ve done happy every day let’s see what happens if I do this.

(Experimentation)

Valerie – most of the faces that he clicks on are the happy faces but he wants to click on the other ones so how we have worked it is he gets to do all the clicking on the computer and then he can choose one of his times anyone of the times when he gets to choose how he is feeling he can pick one of the other faces even though he’s not but just to see what they bring up. (Experimentation)

Chloe – she’d trick it by clicking the sad face when she was feeling happy. (Trickery)

Sarah – Loved the idea of being able to decide what mood he is in but it has nothing to do, it is no reflection at all on the mood he is actually in. He thinks it is funny saying he is angry or he’s sad even when he is not. (Trickery)

Nina – Always said happy because he thought if he said happy he would get out of it quicker . . . all about getting it over with so he can get on to the Nintendo. (Gaming)

132

Finally, Nina has experienced an instance where her child has attempted to game the system, where her child continuously selected the happy emoticon in order to complete the practice as quickly a possible. However, when the affective state of a child is one of happiness the child is directed through the core elements of any practice, review, practice of homework and repetitions. Therefore, albeit that it is difficult to determine the level of learning, which will take place if the child has a desire to be somewhere else they are not effectively gaming the system as they are completing all required elements of a practice. Interestingly, if a child wished to truly game the system it would involve selecting the angry or sad emoticon a number of times in a row, P.A.C.T. would then suggest that now may not be a good time for practice and maybe they should try again later. Chloe and Valerie report instances of this occurring. However, in these cases it was clearly unintentional. This data is illustrated in Table 7.21

Table 7.21 Gaming the System

Chloe – she was feeling happy but she clicked on the sad face, she clicked on the sad face too much . . . the program ended . . . we had to start again

Valerie – it’s just it gets annoying, we have found if he does it too much then it tells you to come again later then we have to go and log in again and all that and then I get a bit annoyed

As a result of the design of P.A.C.T., attempts to game the system may not necessary result in lack of learning. This is because all paths through P.A.C.T. promote learning and fundamentally encourage review, completion of homework and a number of repetitions of the new concept/skill. Of course, this is different to other intelligent tutoring systems where gaming can limit learning gain as students may arrive at an answer without working through the required learning process (Beck, 2005; Murray & vanLehn, 2005; Johns & Woolf, 2006; Walonoski & Heffernan, 2006).