Including Personality Traits, Inferred from Social Networks, in Building Next Generation of AEHS

  • Kenza Sakout Andaloussi
  • Laurence Capus
  • Ismail Berrada
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems book series (LNNS, volume 37)


User profile inference on online social networks is a promising way for building recommender and adaptive systems. In the context of adaptive learning systems, user models are still constructed by means of classical techniques such as questionnaires. Those are too time-consuming and present a risk of dissuading learners to use the system. This paper explores the feasibility of learner modeling based on a proposed set of features extracted and inferred from social networks, according to the IMS-LIP specification. A suitable general architecture of an AEHS is presented, whose adaptation combines three distinct aspects: Felder and Silverman learning style, knowledge level and personality traits. This latter is a novel adaptation criterion, it is an interesting user feature to be incorporated in user models, a feature that is not yet considered by existing AEHS. However, adapting such systems to personality traits contributes to achieving a better adaptation by varying learning approaches, integrating collaboration and adapting feedback. The aim of this paper is to show how this contribution is doable through the proposed framework.


Educational hypermedia system Adaptation Learner model FSLM Big five personality traits Social networks 


  1. 1.
    Brusilovsky, P.: Adaptive hypermedia. User Model. User Adap. Inter. 11(1–2), 87–110 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baki, A., Güven, B., Karal, H., Özyurt, Ö., Özyurt, H.: Evaluation of an adaptive and intelligent educational hypermedia for enhanced individual learning of mathematics: a qualitative study. Exp. Syst. Appl. 39, 12092–12104 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wilson, C., Scott, B.: Adaptive systems in education: a review and conceptual unification. Int. J. Inf. Learn. Technol. 34(1), 2–19 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sakout, A.K., Capus, L., Berrada, I.: Adaptive educational hypermedia systems: current developments and challenges. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Big Data, Cloud and Applications, BDCA 2017, Tetouan, Morocco, 29–30 March 2017. ACM (2017)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liu, Y., Wang, J., Jiang, Y.: PT-LDA: a latent variable model to predict personality traits of social network users. Neurocomputing 210, 155–163 (2016). SI:Behavior Analysis In SNCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Staiano, J., Lepri, B., Aharony, N., Pianesi, F., Sebe, N., Pentland, A.: Friends don’t lie: inferring personality traits from social network structure. In: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, UbiComp 2012, pp. 321–330. ACM, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Faria, A.R., Almeida, A., Martins, C., Gonçalves, R., Figueiredo, L.: Personality traits, learning preferences and emotions. In: Proceedings of the Eighth International C* Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering, C3S2E 2015, pp. 63–69. ACM, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hazrati-Viari, A., Rad, A.T., Torabi, S.S.: The effect of personality traits on academic performance: the mediating role of academic motivation. Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci. 32, 367–371 (2012). The 4th International Conference of Cognitive ScienceCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    IMS: IMS Learner Information Package Information Model v1 (2001). Accessed 20 Apr 2017
  10. 10.
    IMS: IMS Meta-data Best Practice Guide for IEEE 1484.12.1-2002 Standard for Learning Object Metadata (2006). Accessed 20 Apr 2017
  11. 11.
    ADL: Sharable Content Object Reference Model (SCORM) 2004, 4th Edition Content Aggregation Model (CAM) Version 1.1 (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    John, O.P., Naumann, L.P., Soto, C.J.: Paradigm shift to the integrative big-five trait taxonomy: history, measurement, and conceptual issues. In: John, O.P., Robins, R.W., Pervin, L.A. (eds.) Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, pp. 114–158. Guilford Press, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cobb-Clark, D.A., Schurer, S.: The stability of big-five personality traits. Econ. Lett. 115(1), 11–15 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Larsen, R.J., Buss, D.M.: Personality Psychology: Domains of Knowledge About Human Nature, 2nd edn. McGraw Hill, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnahm, A., Lewis, M.: Personality and approaches to learning predict preferences for different teaching methods. Learn. Individ. Differ. 17, 241–250 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Entwistle, N.: Motivational factors in students’ approaches to learning. In: Schmeck, R.R. (ed.) Learning Strategies and Learning Styles, pp. 21–49. Plenum Press, New York (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marcela, V.: Learning strategy, personality traits and academic achievement of university students. Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci. 174, 3473–3478 (2015). International Conference on New Horizons in Education, INTE 2014, 25–27 June 2014, Paris, FranceCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Heinström, J.: The impact of personality and approaches to learning on information behavior. Inf. Res. 5(3) (2000)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Johnson, J.A.: Measuring thirty facets of the Five Factor Model with a 120-item public domain inventory: development of the IPIP-NEO-120. J. Res. Pers. 51, 78–89 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Donnellan, M.B., Oswald, F.L., Baird, B.M., Lucas, R.E.: The mini-IPIP scales: tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality. Psychol. Assess. 18, 192–203 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Costa, P.T., McCrae, R.R.: Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Manual, Odessa, FL. Psychological Assessment Resources (1992)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D., Graepel, T.: Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 110(15), 5802–5805 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Felder, R.M., Silverman, L.K.: Learning styles and teaching styles in engineering education. Eng. Educ. 78(7), 674–681 (1988)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Franzoni, A.L., Assar, S.: Student learning styles adaptation method based on teaching strategies and electronic media. Educ. Technol. Soc. 12(4), 15–29 (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Karagiannidis, C., Sampson, D.: Adaptation rules relating learning styles research and learning objects meta-data. In: Workshop on Individual Differences in Adaptive Hypermedia, 3rd International Conference on Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Web-Based Systems, Eindhoven, The Netherlands (2004)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Index of Learning Styles Questionnaire. Accessed 23 Jan 2017
  27. 27.
    Draper, S.: Observing, measuring and evaluating a courseware: a conceptual introduction. In: Implementing Learning Technologies, Learning Technology Dissemination Initiative, pp. 58–65 (1996). Accessed 18 Jan 2017
  28. 28.
    Zatarain-Cabada, R., Barrón-Estrada, M.L., Angulo, V.P., García, A.J., García, C.A.R.: Identification of Felder-Silverman learning styles with a supervised neural network. In: Advanced Intelligent Computing Theories and Applications. With Aspects of Artificial Intelligence, pp. 479–486. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zatarain-Cabada, R., Barrón-Estrada, M., Zepeda-Sánchez, L., Sandoval, G., OsorioVelazquez, J., Urias-Barrientos, J.: A Kohonen network for modeling students’ learning styles in Web 2.0 collaborative learning systems. In: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, MICAI 2009, pp. 512–520 (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Carmona, C., Castillo, G., Millán, E.: Designing a Dynamic Bayesian Network for modeling student’s learning styles. In: Díaz, P., Kinshuk, A.I., Mora, E. (eds.) ICALT 2008, pp. 346–350. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2008)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Cristea, A., de Mooij, A.: LAOS: layered WWW AHS authoring model and their corresponding algebraic operators. In: WWW 2003 Proceedings of World Wide Web International Conference. ACM, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    IMS: IMS Learning Design Information Model Revision, 20 January 2003. Accessed 20 Apr 2017
  33. 33.
    ISO/IEC 19788-1: Information technology – Learning, education and training – Metadata for learning resources – Part 1: Framework (2011)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Grenier, N., Moldoveanu, M.: Differentiated pedagogy: a new teaching model in multiethnic elementary school settings in Quebec, Canada. In: EDULEARN11 Proceedings, pp. 758–765 (2011)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dennis, M., Masthoff, J., Mellish, C.: Adapting progress feedback and emotional support to learner personality. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 26, 877–931 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Siemens, G.: Connectivism: a learning theory for the digital age. Int. J. Instr. Technol. Distance Learn. 2(1), 3–10 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kenza Sakout Andaloussi
    • 1
  • Laurence Capus
    • 1
  • Ismail Berrada
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Software EngineeringLaval UniversityQuebec CityCanada
  2. 2.FSDM FES, LIMS LABUniversité Sidi Mohamed Ben AbdellahFezMorocco

Personalised recommendations