MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1843317122 · doi:10.21432/t2v315

Human-Computer Interaction: A Review of the Research on its Affective and Social Aspects

2003· review· en· W1843317122 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Learning and Technology · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Communication and Language
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLocus of controlPsychologyQualitative researchCognitionUsabilitySocial psychologyHuman–computer interactionCognitive psychologyComputer scienceSocial scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prevailing research influenced by cognitive psychology has dealt mainly with the cognitive aspects of the human-computer interaction (HCI). The advent of computers in schools should prompt educational researchers to scrutinize the affective and social aspects of student-computer interactions since they play an important role in learning. A review of 34 qualitative and non-qualitative studies was conducted. Its main purpose is to synthesize results and to highlight important issues that research has left unsolved. Results concern the nature of the HCI (social or parasocial), the interface (mainly a comparison between graphic and text types), and the relation between variables linked to HCI (mainly trust, locus of control, attitude, ease of use, and liking).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it