ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021
Personalized Online Learning Resource Recommendation Based on Artificial Intelligence and Educational Psychology.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing clinical training evaluation: leveraging artificial intelligence algorithms for effective online practicum assessment.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Attitudes toward artificial intelligence and the relationship between critical thinking tendencies and social intelligence: a study on sports science students.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- The role of working memory for learning with context-personalized tasks in elementary school.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Virtual Active Learning to Maximize Knowledge Acquisition in Nursing Students: A Comparative Study.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2024Article
- Application of random forest based on semi-automatic parameter adjustment for optimization of anti-breast cancer drugs.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of the study is to explore an effective way for providing students with the appropriate learning resources in the remote education scenario. Artificial intelligence (AI) technology and educational psychology theory are applied for designing a personalized online learning resource recommendation scheme to improve students' learning outcomes. First, according to educational psychology, students' learning ability can be obtained by analyzing their learning behaviors. Their identities can be classified into three main groups. Then, features of learning resources such as difficulty degree are extracted, and a LinUCB-based learning resource recommendation algorithm is proposed. In this algorithm, a personalized exploration coefficient is carefully constructed according to student's ability and attention scores. It can adaptively adjust the ratio of exploration and exploitation during recommendation. Finally, experiments are conducted for evaluating the superior performance of the proposed scheme. The experimental results show that the proposed recommendation scheme can find appropriate learning resources which will match the student's ability and satisfy the student's personalized demands. Meanwhile, by comparing with existing state-of-the-art recommendation schemes, the proposed scheme can achieve accurate recommendations, so as to provide students with the most suitable online learning resources and reduce the risk brought by exploration. Therefore, the proposed scheme can not only control the difficulty degree of learning resources within the student's ability but also encourage their potential by providing suitable learning resources.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.