Achievement emotions with location‐based mobile augmented reality: An examination of discourse processes in simulated guided walking tours
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The purpose of this study is to experimentally manipulate discourse processes hypothesized to impact the emotions students experience when interacting with handheld augmented reality devices in informal learning settings. Research conducted in the field is often limited by practical constraints, requiring heavy investments in time and resources to collect data from large samples of students. To demonstrate the feasibility of our proposed method, a guided walking tour with 60 students using a location‐based augmented reality app was simulated in the context of a controlled laboratory setting. The difference between groups of students clustered into distinct profiles of positive and negative self‐reported emotions was attributed to patterns in the mined dialog between students and tour guide. Furthermore, student engagement predicted the ability to recall topics covered in the tour. We discuss the implications and directions for future research in tour simulations conducted in a laboratory setting as a means to evaluate the role of mobile technologies in enhancing learning and desirable emotions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it