The Dynamics of Affective Transitions in Simulation Problem-Solving Environments

  • Ryan S. J. d. Baker
  • Ma. Mercedes T. Rodrigo
  • Ulises E. Xolocotzin
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4738)


We analyze the antecedents of affective states in a simulation problem-solving environment, The Incredible Machine: Even More Contraptions, through quantitative field observations of high school students in the Philippines using that system. We investigate the transitions between affective states over time, finding that several affective states, including flow, boredom, and frustration, but not surprise, tend to persist over for relatively long periods of time. We also investigate how students’ usage choices influence their later affect, finding that gaming the system leads to reduced confusion but increased boredom.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Amershi, S., Conati, C., Maclaren, H.: Using feature selection and unsupervised clustering to identify affective expressions in educational games. In: Proceedings of the Workshop. Motivational and Affective Issues in ITS. In: conjunction with ITS, 8th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (2006), Jhongli, Taiwan (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baker, R.S.J.d., Corbett, A.T., Koedinger, K.R., Evenson, E., Roll, I., Wagner, A.Z., Naim, M., Raspat, J., Baker, D.J., Beck, J. Adapting to When Students Game an Intelligent Tutoring System. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pp. 392–401 (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baker, R.S., Corbett, A.T., Koedinger, K.R., Wagner, A.Z.: Off-Task Behavior in the Cognitive Tutor Classroom: When Students Game the System. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI: Computer-Human Interaction, pp. 383–390 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chaffar, S., Frasson, C.: Using and Emotional Intelligent Agent to Improve the Learner’s Performance. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Social and Emotional Intelligence in Learning Environments. In conjuction with Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Maceio, Brazil (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cohen, J.A.: Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 20, 37–46 (1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Conati, C., Chabbal, R., Maclaren, H.: A: study on using biometric sensors for detecting user emotions in educational games. In: Proceedings of the Workshop Assessing and Adapting to User Attitude and Affects: Why, When and How? In: conjunction with UM 2003, 9th International Conference on User Modeling, Pittsburgh, PA, U.S.A (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Craig, S.D., Graesser, A.C., Sullins, J., Gholson, B.: Affect and learning: an exploratory look into the role of affect in learning with AutoTutor. Journal of Educational Media 29(3), 241–250 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M.F.: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper and Row, New York (1990)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D’Mello, S.K., Craig, S.D., Witherspoon, A., McDaniel, B., Graesser, A.: Integrating affect sensors in an intelligent tutoring system. In: Affective Interactions: The Computer in the Affective Loop Worksho. In: conjunction with International conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, pp. 7-13 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    D’Mello, S., Taylor, R.S., Graesser, A.: Monitoring Affective Trajectories during Complex Learning. In: Proceedings of the 29th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (in press)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    de Vicente, A., Pain, H.: Informing the detection of the students’ motivational state: an empirical study. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pp. 933–943 (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guastello, S.J., Johnson, E.A., Rieke, M.L.: Nonlinear Dynamics of Motivational Flow. Nonlinear dynamics, psychology, and life sciences 3(3), 259–274 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Johnson, W.L., Kole, S., Shaw, E., Pain, H.: Socially Intelligent Learner-Agent Interaction Tactics. In: Proceedings of Artificial Intelligence in Education: Shaping the Future of Learning through Intelligent Technologies, pp. 431–433 (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Metropolis, N., Ulam, S.: The Monte Carlo Method. Journal of the American Statistical Association 44, 335 (1949)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mota, S., Picard, R.W.: Automated posture analysis for detecting learner’s interest level. In: Workshop on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition for Human-Computer Interaction, CVPR HCI (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rodrigo, M., Baker, R., Lagud, M., Lim, S., Macapanpan, A., Pascua, S., Santillano, J., Sevilla, R., Sugay, J., Tep, S., Viehland, N.: Affect and Usage Choices in Simulation Problem-Solving Environments. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Available online via Google Scholar (in press)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rosenthal, R., Rosnow, R.L.: Essentials of Behavioral Research: Methods and Data Analysis, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, Boston (1991)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sierra Online, Inc, The Incredible Machine: Even More Contraptions (2001)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Thayer, R.E.: The biopsychology of mood and arousal. Oxford University Press, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ziemek, T.: Two-D or not Two-D: gender implications of visual cognition in electronic games. In: Proceedings of the 2006 Symposium on Interactive 3D graphics and games, pp. 183–190 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ryan S. J. d. Baker
    • 1
  • Ma. Mercedes T. Rodrigo
    • 2
  • Ulises E. Xolocotzin
    • 1
  1. 1.Learning Sciences Research Institute, University of Nottingham, NottinghamUK
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science, Ateneo de Manila University, Quezon CityPhilippines

Personalised recommendations