ArticleNPJ science of learning2025
Choice-making in an adaptive learning system with motivational pedagogical agents.
Article in NPJ science of learning, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Adaptive learning systems increasingly employ pedagogical agents (PAs) to enhance students' engagement and learning outcomes, yet little is known about how motivational PAs influence students' conceptual understanding and strategic choice-making. This study compared 49 school students (at 9th and 10th grade) using an adaptive algebra learning environment with either motivational PAs or instructional prompts (non-PAs). Results revealed that while all students demonstrated learning gains, prior knowledge significantly moderated outcomes. Lower-knowledge students achieved the greatest gains through reflective engagement with foundational tasks, whereas higher-knowledge students often adopted intuitive but error-prone strategies. Notably, process mining and lag sequential analysis revealed distinct choice-making trajectories, uncovering how motivational PAs influenced self-regulation patterns over time. This study advances the field by operationalizing choice-making as a measurable self-regulated learning construct and reframing strategic disengagement as an adaptive, agentic behavior. Findings underscore the importance of designing adaptive systems that support both content mastery and strategic choice-making.
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.