UNIVERSITATIS OULUENSIS ACTA E SCIENTIAE RERUM SOCIALIUM E 184 ACTA Héctor Javier Pijeira Díaz OULU 2019 E 184 Héctor Javier Pijeira Díaz ELECTRODERMAL ACTIVITY AND SYMPATHETIC AROUSAL DURING COLLABORATIVE LEARNING UNIVERSITY OF OULU GRADUATE SCHOOL; UNIVERSITY OF OULU, FACULTY OF EDUCATION
104
Embed
Electrodermal activity and sympathetic arousal during ...
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
UNIVERSITY OF OULU P .O. Box 8000 F I -90014 UNIVERSITY OF OULU FINLAND
A C T A U N I V E R S I T A T I S O U L U E N S I S
University Lecturer Tuomo Glumoff
University Lecturer Santeri Palviainen
Senior research fellow Jari Juuti
Professor Olli Vuolteenaho
University Lecturer Veli-Matti Ulvinen
Planning Director Pertti Tikkanen
Professor Jari Juga
University Lecturer Anu Soikkeli
Professor Olli Vuolteenaho
Publications Editor Kirsti Nurkkala
ISBN 978-952-62-2218-9 (Paperback)ISBN 978-952-62-2219-6 (PDF)ISSN 0355-323X (Print)ISSN 1796-2242 (Online)
U N I V E R S I TAT I S O U L U E N S I SACTAE
SCIENTIAE RERUM SOCIALIUM
E 184
AC
TAH
éctor Javier Pijeira D
íaz
OULU 2019
E 184
Héctor Javier Pijeira Díaz
ELECTRODERMAL ACTIVITY AND SYMPATHETIC AROUSAL DURING COLLABORATIVE LEARNING
UNIVERSITY OF OULU GRADUATE SCHOOL;UNIVERSITY OF OULU,FACULTY OF EDUCATION
ACTA UNIVERS ITAT I S OULUENS I SE S c i e n t i a e R e r u m S o c i a l i u m 1 8 4
HÉCTOR JAVIER PIJEIRA DÍAZ
ELECTRODERMAL ACTIVITY AND SYMPATHETIC AROUSAL DURING COLLABORATIVE LEARNING
Academic dissertation to be presented with the assent ofthe Doctoral Training Committee of Human Sciences ofthe University of Oulu for public defence in the OPauditorium (L10), Linnanmaa, on 3 May 2019, at 12 noon
Supervised byProfessor Sanna JärveläProfessor Paul A. KirschnerProfessor Hendrik Drachsler
Reviewed byProfessor Petri NokelainenAssociate Professor Daniel Spikol
ISBN 978-952-62-2218-9 (Paperback)ISBN 978-952-62-2219-6 (PDF)
ISSN 0355-323X (Printed)ISSN 1796-2242 (Online)
Cover DesignRaimo Ahonen
JUVENES PRINTTAMPERE 2019
OpponentProfessor Timo Tobias Ley
Pijeira Díaz, Héctor Javier, Electrodermal activity and sympathetic arousal duringcollaborative learning. University of Oulu Graduate School; University of Oulu, Faculty of EducationActa Univ. Oul. E 184, 2019University of Oulu, P.O. Box 8000, FI-90014 University of Oulu, Finland
Abstract
This dissertation investigates high school students’ individual and interpersonal physiology ofelectrodermal activity (EDA) during collaborative learning in naturalistic settings. EDA is anindex of sympathetic arousal, which is concomitant with cognitive and affective processes.
Two data collections were organized with students working collaboratively in triads. The firstone took place during the performance of a science task, and the second during two runs of a six-week advanced physics course. The data collected included EDA (measured unobtrusively usingEmpatica® E3 and E4 wristbands), performance measures (pre- and post-tests, task solutions, andcourse exam), and questionnaires on cognitive, affective, and collaborative aspects of learning.The work was reported in three articles.
The results indicate that, on average, students spent more than half (60%) of the class at a lowarousal level, possibly signaling relaxation, disengagement, or boredom. Most of the time(≈60–95% of the lesson), triad members were at a different arousal level, which might indicatethat students took turns (alternating task-doers) in executing the task or applied some division oflabor rather than truly collaborating. In terms of achievement, sympathetic arousal during theexam was a predictor of the exam grades, and pairwise directional agreement of EDA waspositively and highly correlated to the dual learning gain. Arousal contagion could have occurredin up to 41% of the high arousal intervals found. The possible arousal contagion cases took placemostly on a 1:1 basis (71.3%), indicating that interactions in a collaborative learning triad seem tooccur mainly between two members rather than among the three.
The findings provide an ecologically-valid picture of the students’ EDA responses in theclassroom, both individually and collaboratively, benefiting from the connection of arousal tocognitive and affective processes to increase the saliency of otherwise elusive phenomena.Methodologically, the study contributes to the exploration and exploitation ofpsychophysiological approaches for collaborative learning research. On a practical level, itprovides physiological indices that could be incorporated into learning analytics dashboards tosupport students’ awareness and reflection, and teachers’ pedagogical practices.
Pijeira Díaz, Héctor Javier, Elektrodermaalinen aktiivisuus ja sympaattinenvireystila yhteisöllisen oppimisen aikana. Oulun yliopiston tutkijakoulu; Oulun yliopisto, Kasvatustieteiden tiedekuntaActa Univ. Oul. E 184, 2019Oulun yliopisto, PL 8000, 90014 Oulun yliopisto
Tiivistelmä
Tässä väitöstutkimuksessa tarkastellaan elektrodermaalista aktiivisuutta (EDA) ja tästä johdet-tua sympaattista vireystilaa ja fysiologisia indeksejä, samanaikaisesti yksilöiden ja yksilöidenvälisten kognitiivisten ja affektiivisten prosessien kanssa.
Tutkimusaineisto kerättiin yhteisöllisen oppimisen tilanteista, joissa oppilaat työskentelivätkolmen hengen ryhmissä. Ensimmäinen osa aineistosta kerättiin oppilaiden suorittaessa luon-nontieteiden alan tehtävää ja toinen kahden fysiikan syventävän kurssin aikana. Aineistoon sisäl-tyi EDA (Empatica® E3- ja E4-rannekkeista), oppimisen mittaukset (alku- ja lopputestit, tehtä-vien ratkaisut ja kurssikokeet) sekä kyselylomakkeet oppimisen kognitiivisista, affektiivisista jayhteisöllisen työskentelyn näkökulmista. Tutkimus on raportoitu kolmessa artikkelissa.
Tulokset osoittavat, että opiskelijoiden sympaattisen hermoston vireystila oli keskimäärin ylipuolet (60 %) luokkatyöskentelystä alhainen, mikä viittaa mahdolliseen rentoutumiseen, osallis-tumisen puutteeseen tai tylsistymiseen. Ryhmänjäsenet olivat suurimman osan ajasta (≈60-95 %)eri vireystilan tasoilla, mikä voi tarkoittaa, että he suorittivat tehtävää vuorotellen (tehtävän suo-rittajaa vaihdellen) tai jonkinlaista työnjakoa käyttäen, yhteisöllisen työskentelyn sijaan. Sym-paattinen vireystila kurssikokeessa ennusti kokeen arvosanoja. Lisäksi oppilasparien EDA:nsamansuuntaisuus korreloi vahvasti oppimistulosten kanssa. Yksilöiden välillä tapahtuvaa sym-paattisen vireystilan ”tarttumista” on voinut esiintyä jopa 41 prosentissa todetuista korkean vire-ystilan intervalleista. Mahdolliset ”tarttumiset” ilmenivät enimmäkseen (71,3 %) 1:1 suhteessa,mikä viittaa siihen, että vuorovaikutus yhteisöllisessä oppimisessa näyttäisi tapahtuvan pääasias-sa kahden yksilön välillä kaikkien kolmen sijaan.
Tulokset tarjoavat ekologisesti validin kuvan opiskelijoiden EDA-reaktioista luokkahuonees-sa sekä yksilöllisesti että yhteisöllisesti tarkasteltuna, selventäen samalla kuvaa sympaattisenvireystilan yhteydestä kognitiivisiin ja affektiivisiin prosesseihin. Menetelmällisesti tutkimuskartoittaa psykofysiologisen lähestymistavan mahdollisuuksia yhteisöllisen oppimisen tutkimuk-sessa. Se esittelee fysiologisia indeksejä, jotka voitaisiin visualisoida oppimisen analytiikansovelluksissa opiskelijoiden tietoisuuden ja reflektion sekä opettajien pedagogisten käytäntöjentukemiseksi.
gratitude, and the list goes on. Therefore, beyond the academic setting, friends and
family play an indispensable role in helping us regulate those emotions, keeping
the motivation high, putting things in perspective, and strengthening our resilience.
In Oulu, I have found an amazing gang from the four corners of the earth, who, in
one way or another, have contributed to this journey. There are so many of them
that it is virtually impossible to name them all, but huge thanks to each and every
one of them for their kindness, time, company, and generosity. In addition to those
aforementioned, I would like to offer my special appreciation to my YOK18 partner
in crime and close friend Uzair Khan, Laura Jalkanen (to whom I am also indebted
for the initial version of the Finnish abstract of this dissertation), Sonia Saher, Lisi
Herrera, Onel Alcaraz López, and Ilaria Gabbatore. Friendship blossoms anywhere.
Naturally, due to geographical reasons, I have spent more time during the Ph.D.
with my friends in Oulu. However, my gratitude also goes to my dear friends from
Spain and Cuba, and family therein. Special mention to Alejandro Reyes
Bascuñana, Marielena García López, Guillermo López Lagomasino, Carmen
Gutiérrez Rodríguez, and Lucía Hidalgo Sánchez. In Oulu, volleyball has been my
favorite hobby during these Ph.D. years. Playing volleyball several times a week
has proved an effective strategy to maintaining a positive attitude and my signature
smile on my face, especially on moments of setback and despair. Accordingly, I
would like to acknowledge the host of people with whom I have played volleyball
through these years. I am glad I discovered this healthy hobby early enough in my
Ph.D. studies.
Last but not least, my whole life would not be enough to thank the two persons
this dissertation is dedicated to, my parents. You have stimulated my passion for
learning since my early days. You have supported me in every possible way, and
you have given your all for my education, not only in terms of knowledge, but also
in values and principles. I owe you everything. Thanks for the gift of life, the
unconditional love, and for being there through thick and thin. This is for you both.
March 14th, 2019 Héctor J. Pijeira Díaz
13
Abbreviations EDA electrodermal activity
GSR galvanic skin response
MSLQ motivated strategies for learning questionnaire
PCI physiological coupling index
PGR psychogalvanic response
RQ research question
SCL skin conductance level
SCR skin conductance response
14
15
List of original publications This thesis is based on the following publications, which are referred throughout
the text by their Roman numerals:
I Pijeira-Díaz, H. J., Drachsler, H., Järvelä, S., & Kirschner, P. A. (2016). Investigating collaborative learning success with physiological coupling indices based on electrodermal activity. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (pp. 64–73). New York, NY: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2883851.2883897
II Pijeira-Díaz, H. J., Drachsler, H., Kirschner, P. A., & Järvelä, S. (2018). Profiling sympathetic arousal in a physics course: How active are students? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(4), 397–408. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12271
III Pijeira-Díaz, H. J., Drachsler, H., Järvelä, S., & Kirschner, P. A. (2019). Sympathetic arousal commonalities and arousal contagion during collaborative learning: How attuned are triad members? Computers in Human Behavior, 92(March), 188–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.008
The articles are co-authored with the three supervisors of this dissertation, who
offered guidance during the process. The author of this dissertation, first author in
all three publications, was responsible for empirical data collection, data analysis,
theoretical grounding and writing.
16
17
Contents Abstract
Tiivistelmä
Acknowledgements 9 Abbreviations 13 List of original publications 15 Contents 17 1 Introduction 19 2 Theoretical framework 27
2.3.1 Cognition, affect, and arousal ....................................................... 34 2.3.2 Arousal and performance ............................................................. 38 2.3.3 Arousal in the classroom .............................................................. 39
2.4 Interpersonal physiology ......................................................................... 40 2.4.1 Previous work on interpersonal physiology in
4.3 Procedure ................................................................................................ 56 4.3.1 Data collection I ........................................................................... 56 4.3.2 Data collection II .......................................................................... 57
4.5 Research evaluation ................................................................................ 64 4.6 Ethics ....................................................................................................... 67
5 Overview of the articles 69 5.1 Article I: Investigating collaborative learning success with
physiological coupling indices based on electrodermal activity ............. 69 5.2 Article II: Profiling sympathetic arousal in a physics course:
How active are students? ......................................................................... 70 5.3 Article III: Sympathetic arousal commonalities and arousal
contagion during collaborative learning: How attuned are triad
members? ................................................................................................ 71 6 Main findings and discussion 73
6.1 Triad arousal levels in collaborative learning .......................................... 73 6.2 Arousal during exams and achievement .................................................. 75 6.3 Pairwise directional agreement and dual learning gain ........................... 76 6.4 Within-triad high arousal contagion in collaborative learning ................ 77
7 Conclusions 79 List of references 83 Original publications 99
19
1 Introduction Successful collaborative learning endeavors have long been promoted and pursued
by educational institutions at national and international levels as a way to attend to
students’ academic needs and future employability as well as to the practical
consideration of sharing scarce resources (e.g., computers and laboratory
equipment; M. Baker, 2015). Collaborative learning has been used in instruction to
a greater or lesser extent since at least the second half of the 19th century (Johnson
& Johnson, 2002), as it is widely believed that individual outcomes (e.g., learning
gain) will be favored by mutual intellectual engagement (Kuhn, 2015).
Collaborative learning has been actively and extensively studied since it entered
the educational research agenda in the 1970s (M. Baker, 2015), spurred by
awareness of societal relevance and embraced by a vibrant community of learning
scientists (Hoadley, 2018). Apart from the desired higher order thinking, an early
review (Slavin, 1980) reported other benefits of collaborative learning such as the
development of prosocial behavior. Furthermore, efficient collaboration is among
those skills beyond domain knowledge that are permanently in high demand in
today’s extremely specialized labor market. Specialization translates into
distributed expertise that, when synergistically combined, constitutes a competitive
advantage for organizations. Thus, organizations need expert collaborators or team
players to thrive in a highly competitive global ecosystem. Such orientation to
collaboration is expected to have already been developed as students advance
through their academic years. Therefore, the development of collaborative learning
has been embraced and promoted by educational stakeholders including
practitioners, organizational administrators, and policy-makers.
Shaped by theoretical and/or technological advances, as efforts to capitalize on
the affordances of collaborative learning, a variety of methods has been applied
across the decades in schools such as jigsaw (Aronson, Blaney, Sikes, & Snapp,
Panadero, Klug, & Järvelä, 2015), I believe that triangulation of different data
modalities, including physiological data, has the potential to provide stronger
evidence and lead us as a community to draw sounder conclusions.
Several directions could be considered for future work. First, more
physiological signals can be explored as long as it makes theoretical sense. Second,
other indices could be developed or reused from the literature. It is important to
keep it simple for interpretability and practical usefulness. Previous research
reported that the simplest measures used were shown to be the most sensitive ones,
which has led to the claim that physiological indices, both at individual and
interpersonal levels, should be straightforward and uncomplicated (Elkins et al.,
2009), which extends to other measures as well. Third, the study of the combination
of indices from different signals and/or data modalities (e.g., physiological, self-
reported, and observation), since the eyes of science are on multimodal approaches,
should be pursued so that the limitations of individual modalities can be overcome,
leading to higher validity of the conclusions drawn. Physiological data, as opposed
to self-reports, is objective, but cannot be interpreted without knowledge of the
context. In this sense, qualitative data are needed to further characterize and
82
understand the variations in PCIs and sympathetic arousal at individual and
interpersonal levels, in terms of, for example, why a triad reaches full directional
agreement in one lesson but not in another, and what situations cause triad members
to sustain full arousal directional agreement during several min. Fourth, although
here a general profile of the class and relations of the physiological measures to
academic achievement were pursued, the methodology can be applied to the study
of specific events of interest (e.g., directional agreement or arousal levels within a
response window).
The physiological indices used in this dissertation could be fed back to the
students via a learning analytics dashboard to support their reflection upon and
awareness of the learning process. Both retrospective and real-time applications
(e.g., alarms when certain thresholds are surpassed) are possible. It is known that
individuals vary in their ability to perceive their autonomic physiological state,
known as interoceptive awareness, which they need to inform cognitions and
behaviors (Critchley et al., 2013). For example, people rely partly on information
from their physiological state in judging their capabilities (Bandura, 1982). At the
collaboration level, it has been argued that groups should become aware of their
interpersonal processes and take time to discuss how they are doing as a group
(Cohen, 1994). For both individual and interpersonal level purposes, the
incorporation of physiological measures would enrich and provide a new
dimension to learning analytics dashboards, which to date largely focus on log data
(Schwendimann et al., 2017). From the teacher’s perspective, such a dashboard
could assist in group composition (Ahonen et al., 2018) and identify those activities
which cause more students to be active and engaged. Similarly, it could help in
distinguishing those tasks leading to actual group work rather than to alternating
task doers or division of labor. In sum, the findings of this study have applications
to learning dashboards, prompts (e.g., in intelligent tutoring systems or online
learning environments), and in general, to the development of tools for better
collaboration.
83
List of references Ahn, S., Cho, H., Kwon, M., Kim, K., Kwon, H., Kim, B. S., … Jun, S. C. (2018). Interbrain
phase synchronization during turn-taking verbal interaction – A hyperscanning study using simultaneous EEG/MEG. Human Brain Mapping, 39(1), 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.23834
Ahonen, L., Cowley, B., Torniainen, J., Ukkonen, A., Vihavainen, A., & Puolamäki, K. (2016). Cognitive collaboration found in cardiac physiology: Study in classroom environment. PLoS One, 11(7), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159178
Ahonen, L., Cowley, B. U., Hellas, A., & Puolamäki, K. (2018). Biosignals reflect pair-dynamics in collaborative work: EDA and ECG study of pair-programming in a classroom environment. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-21518-3
Aritzeta, A., Soroa, G., Balluerka, N., Muela, A., Gorostiaga, A., & Aliri, J. (2017). Reducing anxiety and improving academic performance through a biofeedback relaxation training program. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 42(3), 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10484-017-9367-z
Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
Aronson, E., & Patnoe, S. (2011). Cooperation in the classroom: The jigsaw method (3rd ed.). London, UK: Pinter & Martin.
Arroyo, I., Cooper, D. G., Burleson, W., Woolf, B. P., Muldner, K., & Christopherson, R. (2009). Emotion sensors go to school. In Proceedings of the Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 17–24). Amsterdam, Netherlands: IOS Press.
Azevedo, R. (2015). Defining and measuring engagement and learning in science: Conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and analytical issues. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1004069
Baker, M. (2015). Collaboration in collaborative learning. Interaction Studies, 16(3), 451–473. https://doi.org/10.1075/is.16.3.05bak
Baker, R., D’Mello, S. K., Rodrigo, M. T., & Graesser, A. C. (2010). Better to be frustrated than bored: The incidence and persistence of affect during interactions with three different computer-based learning environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(4), 223–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2009.12.003
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–147. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122
Barron, B. (2000). Achieving coordination in collaborative problem-solving groups. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 403–436. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS0904
Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1203_1
Bear, J. B., & Woolley, A. W. (2011). The role of gender in team collaboration and performance. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 36(2), 146–153. https://doi.org/10.1179/030801811X13013181961473
Beers, P. J., Boshuizen, H. P. A., Kirschner, P. A., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2007). The analysis
84
of negotiation of common ground in CSCL. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 427–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LEARNINSTRUC.2007.04.002
Benedek, M., & Kaernbach, C. (2010a). A continuous measure of phasic electrodermal activity. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 190(1), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2010.04.028
Benedek, M., & Kaernbach, C. (2010b). Decomposition of skin conductance data by means of nonnegative deconvolution. Psychophysiology, 47(4), 647–658. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00972.x
Berger, S. M. (1962). Conditioning through vicarious instigation. Psychological Review, 69(5), 450–466. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046466
Bettiga, D., Lamberti, L., & Noci, G. (2017). Do mind and body agree? Unconscious versus conscious arousal in product attitude formation. Journal of Business Research, 75(June), 108–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.02.008
Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823
Blikstein, P., & Worsley, M. (2016). Multimodal learning analytics and education data mining: using computational technologies to measure complex learning tasks. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(2), 220–238. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.32.11
Boekaerts, M., & Corno, L. (2005). Self regulation in the classroom: A perspective on assessment and intervention. Applied Psychology, 54(2), 199–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00205.x
Boucsein, W. (1992). Electrodermal activity. New York, NY: Plenum Press. Boucsein, W. (2012). Electrodermal activity (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer. Boucsein, W., & Backs, R. W. (2000). Engineering psychophysiology as a discipline:
Historical and theoretical aspects. In R. W. Backs & W. Boucsein (Eds.), Engineering psychophysiology. Issues and applications (pp. 3–30). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Boucsein, W., Fowles, D. C., Grimnes, S., Ben-Shakhar, G., Roth, W. T., Dawson, M. E., & Filion, D. L. (2012). Publication recommendations for electrodermal measurements. Psychophysiology, 49(8), 1017–1034. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2012.01384.x
Braithwaite, J. J., Watson, D. G., Jones, R., & Rowe, M. (2015). A guide for analysing electrodermal activity (EDA) & skin conductance responses (SCRs) for psychological experiments. Birmingham, United Kingdom. Retrieved from https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-les/psych/saal/guide-electrodermal-activity.pdf
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.
Bruer, J. T. (1994). Classroom problems, school culture, and cognitive research. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 273–290). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
85
Butterworth, G. (1982). A brief account of the conflict between the individual & the social in models of cognitive growth. In G. Butterworth & P. Light (Eds.), Social cognition: Studies of the development of understanding (pp. 3–16). Brighton, United Kingdom: Harvester Press.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Tassinary, L. G. (1990a). Inferring psychological significance from physiological signals. American Psychologist, 45(1), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.45.1.16
Cacioppo, J. T., & Tassinary, L. G. (1990b). Psychophysiology and psychophysiological inference. In J. T. Cacioppo & L. G. Tassinary (Eds.), Principles of psychophysiology: Physical, social, and inferential elements (pp. 3–33). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Calderón, O. (2016). Oximetry: A reflective tool for the detection of physiological expression of emotions in a science education classroom. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(3), 653–667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-016-9731-y
Chanel, G., Bétrancourt, M., Pun, T., Cereghetti, D., & Molinari, G. (2013). Assessment of computer-supported collaborative processes using interpersonal physiological and eye-movement coupling. In Humaine Association Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction (pp. 116–122). Geneva, Switzerland: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACII.2013.26
Chanel, G., Kivikangas, J. M., & Ravaja, N. (2012). Physiological compliance for social gaming analysis: Cooperative versus competitive play. Interacting with Computers, 24(4), 306–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2012.04.012
Chanel, G., & Muhl, C. (2015). Connecting brains and bodies: Applying physiological computing to support social interaction. Interacting with Computers, 27(5), 534–550. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwv013
Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271–315. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0603_1
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543064001001
Cooper, D. G., Arroyo, I., Woolf, B. P., Muldner, K., Burleson, W., & Christopherson, R. (2009). Sensors model student self concept in the classroom. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization (pp. 30–41). Berlin, Germany: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02247-0_6
Critchley, H. D. (2002). Electrodermal responses: What happens in the brain. Neuroscientist, 8(2), 132–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/107385840200800209
Critchley, H. D., Eccles, J., & Garfinkel, S. N. (2013). Interaction between cognition, emotion, and the autonomic nervous system. In R. M. Buijs & D. F. Swaab (Eds.), Handbook of Clinical Neurology (Vol. 117, pp. 59–77). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53491-0.00006-7
Critchley, H. D., & Garfinkel, S. N. (2018). The influence of physiological signals on
86
cognition. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 19(6), 13–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2017.08.014
D’Mello, S. K., & Graesser, A. (2012). Dynamics of affective states during complex learning. Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LEARNINSTRUC.2011.10.001
Damasio, A. R., Tranel, D., & Damasio, H. C. (1991). Somatic markers and the guidance of behavior: Theory and preliminary testing. In H. S. Levin, H. M. Eisenberg, & A. L. Benton (Eds.), Frontal Lobe Function and Dysfunction. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Dawson, M. E., Schell, A. M., & Filion, D. L. (1990). The electrodermal system. In J. T. Cacioppo & L. G. Tassinary (Eds.), Principles of psychophysiology: Physical, social, and inferential elements (pp. 295–324). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Dawson, M. E., Schell, A. M., & Filion, D. L. (2007). The electrodermal system. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary, & G. G. Berntson (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (3rd ed., pp. 159–181). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Dawson, M. E., Schell, A. M., & Filion, D. L. (2017). The electrodermal system. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary, & G. G. Berntson (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (4th ed., pp. 217–243). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Dawson, S., & Siemens, G. (2014). Analytics to literacies: The development of a learning analytics framework for multiliteracies assessment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(4), 284–305.
De Lecea, L., Carter, M. E., & Adamantidis, A. (2012). Shining light on wakefulness and arousal. Biological Psychiatry, 79(12), 1046–1052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2012.01.032
Delaherche, E., Chetouani, M., Mahdhaoui, A., Saint-Georges, C., Viaux, S., & Cohen, D. (2012). Interpersonal synchrony: A survey of evaluation methods across disciplines. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing, 3(3), 349–365. https://doi.org/10.1109/T-AFFC.2012.12
Dich, Y., Reilly, J., & Schneider, B. (2018). Using physiological synchrony as an indicator of collaboration quality, task performance and learning. In C. P. Rosé, R. Martínez-Maldonado, H. U. Hoppe, R. Luckin, M. Mavrikis, K. Porayska-Pomsta, … B. du Boulay (Eds.), International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 98–110). London, United Kingdom: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93843-1
Dikker, S., Wan, L., Davidesco, I., Kaggen, L., Oostrik, M., McClintock, J., … Poeppel, D. (2017). Brain-to-brain synchrony tracks real-world dynamic group interactions in the classroom. Current Biology, 27(9), 1375–1380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.04.002
Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by “collaborative learning”? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 1–19). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O’Malley, C. (1996). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In P. Reimann & H. Spada (Eds.), Learning in humans and
87
machine: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp. 189–211). Oxford, United Kingdom: Pergamon. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9827-7_1
DiMascio, A., Boyd, R. W., & Greenblatt, M. (1957). Physiological correlates of tension and antagonism during psychotherapy: A study of interpersonal physiology. Psychosomatic Medicine, 19(2), 99–104. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006842-195703000-00002
Doise, W., & Mugny, G. (1984). The social development of the intellect. Oxford, United Kingdom: Pergamon.
Duffy, E. (1962). Activation and behavior. New York, NY: Wiley. Edelberg, R. (1967). Electrical properties of the skin. In C. C. Brown (Ed.), Methods in
psychophysiology (pp. 1–53). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins. Edelberg, R. (1972a). Electrodermal recovery rate, goal-orientation, and aversion.
Edelberg, R. (1972b). The electrodermal system. In N. S. Greenfield & R. A. Sternbach (Eds.), Handbook of Psychophysiology. New York, NY: Holt.
Edelson, D. C., Gordin, D. N., & Pea, R. D. (1999). Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3–4), 391–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.1999.9672075
Elkins, A. N., Muth, E. R., Hoover, A. W., Walker, A. D., Carpenter, T. L., & Switzer, F. S. (2009). Physiological compliance and team performance. Applied Ergonomics, 40(6), 997–1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2009.02.002
Empatica Inc. (2017). Have you done comparative studies or validation on electrodermal activity sensor? Retrieved May 28, 2018, from https://support.empatica.com/hc/en-us/articles/203005295-Have-you-done-comparative-studies-or-validation-on-Electrodermal-activity-sensor-
Empatica Inc. (2018). Recommended tools for signal processing and data analysis. Retrieved March 1, 2018, from https://support.empatica.com/hc/en-us/articles/202872739-Recommended-tools-for-signal-processing-and-data-analysis
Enyedy, N., & Stevens, R. (2014). Analyzing collaboration. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 191–212). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.013
Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., Pavesi, G., & Rizzolatti, G. (1995). Motor facilitation during action observation: A magnetic stimulation study. Journal of Neurophysiology, 73(6), 2608–2611.
Féré, C. (1888). Note sur les modifications de la résistance électrique sous l’influence des excitations sensorielles et des émotions [Note on the modification of electric resistance under the influence of sensory excitement and emotions]. Comptes Rendus Société de Biologie, 5, 217–219.
Ferreira, E., Ferreira, D., Kim, S., Siirtola, P., Röning, J., Forlizzi, J. F., & Dey, A. K. (2014). Assessing real-time cognitive load based on psycho-physiological measures for younger and older adults. In Computational Intelligence, Cognitive Algorithms, Mind,
88
and Brain (CCMB), 2014 IEEE Symposium on (pp. 39–48). Orlando, FL: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CCMB.2014.7020692
Field, T. (2012). Relationships as regulators. Psychology, 3(6), 467–479. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/psych.2012.36066
Finger, B., & Murphy, R. O. (2011). Using skin conductance in judgment and decision making research. In M. Schulte-Mecklenbeck, A. Kuehberger, & R. Ranyard (Eds.), A handbook of process tracing methods for decision research (pp. 163–184). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Finnish Advisory Board on Research Ethics. (2009). Ethical principles of research in the humanities and social and behavioural sciences and proposals for ethical review. Helsinki. Retrieved from http://www.tenk.fi/sites/tenk.fi/files/ethicalprinciples.pdf
Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity. (2012). Responsible conduct of research and procedures for handling allegations of misconduct in Finland. Helsinki. Retrieved from http://www.tenk.fi/sites/tenk.fi/files/HTK_ohje_2012.pdf
Fox, E., Russo, R., Bowles, R., & Dutton, K. (2001). Do threatening stimuli draw or hold visual attention in subclinical anxiety? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(4), 681–700.
Fransen, J., Weinberger, A., & Kirschner, P. A. (2013). Team effectiveness and team development in CSCL. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 9–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.747947
Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Garbarino, M., Lai, M., Tognetti, S., Picard, R. W., & Bender, D. (2014). Empatica E3 – A wearable wireless multi-sensor device for real-time computerized biofeedback and data acquisition. In International Conference on Wireless Mobile Communication and Healthcare (pp. 39–42). Athens, Greece: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.4108/icst.mobihealth.2014.257418
Garfinkel, S. N., Critchley, H. D., & Pollatos, O. (2017). The interoceptive system: Implications for cognition, emotion and health. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary, & G. G. Berntson (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (4th ed., pp. 427–443). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Gillies, R. M., Carroll, A., Cunnington, R., Rafter, M., Palghat, K., Bednark, J., & Bourgeois, A. (2016). Multimodal representations during an inquiry problem-solving activity in a year 6 science class: A case study investigating cooperation, physiological arousal and belief states. Australian Journal of Education, 60(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944116650701
Gonzalez-Sanchez, J., Baydogan, M., Chavez-Echeagaray, M. E., Atkinson, R. K., & Burleson, W. (2017). Affect measurement: A roadmap through approaches, technologies, and data analysis. In M. Jeon (Ed.), Emotions and affect in human factors and human-computer interaction (pp. 255–288). London, United Kingdom: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-801851-4.00011-2
Goyal, N., & Fussell, S. R. (2017). Intelligent interruption management using electro dermal activity based physiological sensor for collaborative sensemaking. In Proceedings of
89
the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies. New York, NY: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3130917
Guastello, S. J., Pincus, D., & Gunderson, P. R. (2006). Electrodermal arousal between participants in a conversation: Nonlinear dynamics and linkage effects. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 10(3), 365–399.
Hanoch, Y., & Vitouch, O. (2004). When less is more: Information, emotional arousal and the ecological reframing of the Yerkes-Dodson law. Theory & Psychology, 14(4), 427–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354304044918
Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1994). Emotional contagion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Hebb, D. O. (1955). Drives and the CNS (conceptual nervous system). Psychological Review, 62(4), 243–254. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0041823
Henning, R. A., Armstead, A. G., & Ferris, J. K. (2009). Social psychophysiological compliance in a four-person research team. Applied Ergonomics, 40(6), 1004–1010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2009.04.009
Henning, R. A., Boucsein, W., & Gil, M. C. (2001). Social-physiological compliance as a determinant of team performance. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 40(3), 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8760(00)00190-2
Hertz-Lazarowitz, R. (1989). Cooperation and helping in the classroom: A contextual approach. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(1), 113–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(89)90020-7
Hoadley, C. (2018). A short history of the learning sciences. In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 11–23). New York, NY: Routledge.
Järvelä, S. [Sanna], Hadwin, A. F., Malmberg, J., & Miller, M. (2018). Contemporary perspectives of regulated learning in collaboration. In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 127–136). New York, NY: Routledge.
Järvelä, S. [Sanna], Kirschner, P. A., Panadero, E., Malmberg, J., Phielix, C., Jaspers, J., … Järvenoja, H. (2015). Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: Designing for CSCL regulation tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(1), 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9358-1
Järvelä, S. [Simo], Kivikangas, J. M., Katsyri, J., & Ravaja, N. (2014). Physiological linkage of dyadic gaming experience. Simulation & Gaming, 45(1), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878113513080
Järvenoja, H., Järvelä, S., & Malmberg, J. (2015). Understanding regulated learning in situative and contextual frameworks. Educational Psychologist, 50(3), 204–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1075400
Jeong, H., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2016). Seven affordances of computer-supported collaborative learning: How to support collaborative learning? How can technologies help? Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 247–265.https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1158654
Jeong, H., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Yu, Y. (2014). An examination of CSCL methodological
90
practices and the influence of theoretical frameworks 2005–2009. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9(3), 305–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-014-9198-3
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2002). Learning together and alone: Overview and meta�analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 22(1), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/0218879020220110
Juvina, I., Larue, O., & Hough, A. (2018). Modeling valuation and core affect in a cognitive architecture: The impact of valence and arousal on memory and decision-making. Cognitive Systems Research, 48(May), 4–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsys.2017.06.002
Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Kaplan, H. B. (1967). Physiological correlates (GSR) of affect in small groups. Journal of
Kaplan, H. B., & Bloom, S. W. (1960). The use of sociological and social-psychological concepts in physiological research: A review of selected experimental studies. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 131(2), 128–134. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005053-196008000-00006
Kaplan, H. B., Burch, N. R., Bedner, T. D., & Trenda, J. D. (1965). Physiologic (GSR) activity and perceptions of social behavior in positive, negative and neutral pairs. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 140(6), 457–463.
Kaplan, H. B., Burch, N. R., Bloom, S. W., & Edelberg, R. (1963). Affective orientation and physiological activity (GSR) in small peer groups. Psychosomatic Medicine, 25(3), 245–252.
Karvonen, A., Kykyri, V. L., Kaartinen, J., Penttonen, M., & Seikkula, J. (2016). Sympathetic nervous system synchrony in couple therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 42(3), 383–395. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmft.12152
Kelly, N., Thompson, K., & Yeoman, P. (2015). Theory-led design of instruments and representations in learning analytics: Developing a novel tool for orchestration of online collaborative learning. Journal of Learning Analytics, 2(2), 14–43. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2015.22.4
Kim, T., Mcfee, E., Olguin, D. O., Waber, B., & Pentland, A. (2012). Sociometric badges: Using sensor technology to capture new forms of collaboration. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(3), 412–427. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1776
Kirschner, F., Paas, F., & Kirschner, P. A. (2011). Task complexity as a driver for collaborative learning efficiency: The collective working-memory effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(4), 615–624. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1730
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., Kirschner, F., & Zambrano, J. (2018). From cognitive load theory to collaborative cognitive load theory. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(2), 213–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9277-y
Knierim, M. T., Rissler, R., Dorner, V., Maedche, A., & Weinhardt, C. (2018). The psychophysiology of flow: A systematic review of peripheral nervous system features.
91
In F. Davis, R. Riedl, J. vom Brocke, P.-M. Léger, & A. B. Randolph (Eds.), Information Systems and Neuroscience: Gmunden Retreat on NeuroIS 2017. Gmunden, Austria: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67431-5_13
Koole, S. L. (2009). The psychology of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Cognition & Emotion, 23(1), 4–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930802619031
Koschmann, T. (1996). Paradigm shifts and instructional technology: An introduction. In T. Koschmann (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm (pp. 1–23). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Koskimäki, H., Mönttinen, H., Siirtola, P., Huttunen, H.-L., Halonen, R., & Röning, J. (2017). Early detection of migraine attacks based on wearable sensors – Experiences of data collection using Empatica E4. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers (pp. 506–511). New York, NY: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3123024.3124434
Kreibig, S. D. (2010). Autonomic nervous system activity in emotion: A review. Biological Psychology, 84(3), 394–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2010.03.010
Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3), 335–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00057-2
Kuhn, D. (2015). Thinking together and alone. Educational Researcher, 44(1), 46–53. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X15569530
Kuppens, P., Tuerlinckx, F., Russell, J. A., & Barrett, L. F. (2013). The relation between valence and arousal in subjective experience. Psychological Bulletin, 139(4), 917–940. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030811
Lacey, J. I. (1967). Somatic response patterning and stress: Some revisions of activation theory. In M. H. Appley & R. Trumbull (Eds.), Psychological stress: Issues in research (pp. 14–42). New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Liu, S., Zhou, Y., Palumbo, R. V., & Wang, J.-L. (2016). Dynamical correlation: A new method for quantifying synchrony with multivariate intensive longitudinal data. Psychological Methods, 21(3), 291–308. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000071
Lyytinen, H. (1984). The psychophysiology of anticipation and arousal. Jyväskylä, Finland: Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psychology and Social Research.
Mandler, G. (1982). Mind and emotion (2nd ed.). Malabar, FL: Krieger. Mandler, G. (1984). Mind and body: Psychology of emotion and stress. New York, NY:
Norton & Company. Marchewka, A., Wypych, M., Moslehi, A., Riegel, M., Michalowski, J. M., & Jednoróg, K.
(2016). Arousal rather than basic emotions influence long-term recognition memory in humans. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00198
McCarthy, C., Pradhan, N., Redpath, C., & Adler, A. (2016). Validation of the Empatica E4 wristband. In IEEE EMBS International Student Conference. Ottawa, ON: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBSISC.2016.7508621
92
McQuiggan, S. W., Mott, B. W., & Lester, J. C. (2008). Modeling self-efficacy in intelligent tutoring systems: An inductive approach. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 18(1–2), 81–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-007-9040-y
Mikroyannidis, A., Okada, A., Scott, P., Rusman, E., Specht, M., Stefanov, K., … Chaimala, F. (2013). weSPOT: A personal and social approach to inquiry-based learning. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 19(14), 2093–2111. https://doi.org/10.3217/jucs-019-14-2093
Miyake, N. (1986). Constructive interaction and the iterative process of understanding. Cognitive Science, 10(2), 151–177. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1002_2
Miyake, N., & Kirschner, P. A. (2014). The social and interactive dimensions of collaborative learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 418–438). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.026
Montague, E., Xu, J., & Chiou, E. (2014). Shared experiences of technology and trust: An experimental study of physiological compliance between active and passive users in technology-mediated collaborative encounters. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 44(5), 614–624. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2014.2325859
Mullins, D., Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2011). Are two heads always better than one? Differential effects of collaboration on students’ computer-supported learning in mathematics. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(3), 421–443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9122-z
Neumann, E., & Blanton, R. (1970). The early history of electrodermal research. Psychophysiology, 6(4), 453–475. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1970.tb01755.x
Neumann, S. A., & Waldstein, S. R. (2001). Similar patterns of cardiovascular response during emotional activation as a function of affective valence and arousal and gender. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 50(5), 245–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3999(01)00198-2
Novak, D., Mihelj, M., & Munih, M. (2012). A survey of methods for data fusion and system adaptation using autonomic nervous system responses in physiological computing. Interacting with Computers, 24(3), 154–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2012.04.003
Noy, L., Levit-Binun, N., & Golland, Y. (2015). Being in the zone: Physiological markers of togetherness in joint improvisation. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00187
OECD. (2017). PISA 2015 collaborative problem-solving framework. In PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematic, financial literacy and collaborative problem solving (pp. 131–188). Paris, France: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264281820-8-en
Palumbo, R. V., Marraccini, M. E., Weyandt, L. L., Wilder-Smith, O., McGee, H. A., Liu, S., & Goodwin, M. S. (2017). Interpersonal autonomic physiology: A systematic review of the literature. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21(2), 99–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316628405
93
Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422
Panadero, E., Klug, J., & Järvelä, S. (2015). Third wave of measurement in the self-regulated learning field: When measurement and intervention come hand in hand. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 60(6), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2015.1066436
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91–105. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3702
Pentland, A. (2004). Healthwear: Medical technology becomes wearable. Computer, 37(5), 42–49. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2004.1297238
Picard, R. W., Fedor, S., & Ayzenberg, Y. (2016). Multiple arousal theory and daily-life electrodermal activity asymmetry. Emotion Review, 8(1), 62–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073914565517
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Technical Report No. 91-B-004. Ann Arbor, MI.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(3), 801–813. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164493053003024
Poh, M. Z., Swenson, N. C., & Picard, R. W. (2010). A wearable sensor for unobtrusive, long-term assesment of electrodermal activity. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 57(5), 1243–1252. https://doi.org/10.1109/tbme.2009.2038487
Porges, S. W., Bohrer, R., Cheung, M., Drasgow, F., McCabe, P., & Keren, G. (1980). New time-series statistic for detecting rhythmic co-occurrence in the frequency domain: The weighted coherence and its application to psychophysiological research. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 580–587.
Raskin, D. C. (1973). Attention and arousal. In W. F. Prokasy & D. C. Raskin (Eds.), Electrodermal activity in psychological research (pp. 125–155). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Reeck, C., Ames, D. R., & Ochsner, K. N. (2016). The social regulation of emotion: An integrative, cross-disciplinary model. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(1), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.09.003
Reisenzein, R. (1983). The Schachter theory of emotion: Two decades later. Psychological Bulletin, 94(2), 239–264. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.94.2.239
Reiter-Palmon, R., Sinha, T., Gevers, J., Odobez, J.-M., & Volpe, G. (2017). Theories and models of teams and groups. Small Group Research, 48(5), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496417722841
Rizzolatti, G., & Arbib, M. A. (1998). Language within our grasp. Trends in Neurosciences, 21, 188–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-2236(98)01260-0
Rizzolatti, G., & Fabbri-Destro, M. (2008). The mirror system and its role in social cognition.
94
Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 18(2), 179–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2008.08.001
Robbins, T. W. (1997). Arousal systems and attentional processes. Biological Psychology, 45(1–3), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-0511(96)05222-2
Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. D. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In C. O’Malley (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 69–97). Berlin, Germany: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-85098-1_5
Roy, J.-C., Boucsein, W., Fowles, D. C., & Gruzelier, J. H. (Eds.). (1993). Progress in electrodermal research. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Rummel, N. (2018). One framework to rule them all? Carrying forward the conversation started by Wise and Schwarz. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(1), 123–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9273-2
Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(6), 1161–1178. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0077714
Russell, J. A., & Barrett, L. F. (1999). Core affect, prototypical emotional episodes, and other things called emotion: Dissecting the elephant. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(5), 805–819. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.5.805
Sacks, H. (1972). An initial investigation of the usability of conversational data for doing sociology. In D. Sudnow (Ed.), Studies in social interaction (pp. 31–74). New York, NY: Free Press.
Sanbonmatsu, D. M., & Kardes, F. R. (1988). The effects of physiological arousal on information processing and persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(3), 379–385. https://doi.org/10.1086/209175
Sbarra, D. A., & Hazan, C. (2008). Coregulation, dysregulation, self-regulation: An integrative analysis and empirical agenda for understanding adult attachment, separation, loss, and recovery. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(2), 141–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868308315702
Schachter, S., & Singer, J. (1962). Cognitive, social, and physiological determinants of emotional state. Psychological Review, 69(5), 379–399. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046234
Schmitz, B., & Skinner, E. (1993). Perceived control, effort, and academic performance: Interindividual, intraindividual, and multivariate time-series analyses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(6), 1010–1028. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.64.6.1010
Schneider, J., Börner, D., van Rosmalen, P., & Specht, M. (2015). Augmenting the senses: A review on sensor-based learning support. Sensors, 15(2), 4097–4133. https://doi.org/10.3390/s150204097
Schwartz, G. E., & Shapiro, D. (1973). Social psychophysiology. In W. F. Prokasy & D. C. Raskin (Eds.), Electrodermal activity in psychological research (pp. 377–416). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Schwartz, M. S., Collura, T. F., Kamiya, J., & Schwartz, N. M. (2017). The history and definitions of biofeedback and applied psychophysiology. In M. S. Schwartz & F.
95
Andrasik (Eds.), Biofeedback: A practitioner’s guide (4th ed., pp. 3–23). New York, NY: Guilford.
Schwendimann, B. A., Rodriguez-Triana, M., Vozniuk, A., Prieto, L., Boroujeni, M., Holzer, A., … Dillenbourg, P. (2017). Perceiving learning at a glance: A systematic literature review of learning dashboard research. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 10(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2016.2599522
Sharot, T., & Phelps, E. A. (2004). How arousal modulates memory: Disentangling the effects of attention and retention. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 4(3), 294–306. https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.4.3.294
Shi, Y., Ruiz, N., Taib, R., Choi, E. H. C., & Chen, F. (2007). Galvanic skin response (GSR) as an index of cognitive load. In CHI ’07 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2651–2656). New York, NY: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240866.1241057
Singer, N., Jacobi, N., Lin, T., Raz, G., Shpigelman, L., Gilam, G., … Hendler, T. (2016). Common modulation of limbic network activation underlies the unfolding of musical emotions and its temporal attributes. NeuroImage, 141(November), 517–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.07.002
Slavin, R. E. (1980). Cooperative learning. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 315–342. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543050002315
Slovák, P., Tennent, P., Reeves, S., & Fitzpatrick, G. (2014). Exploring skin conductance synchronisation in everyday interactions. In Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 511–520). New York, NY: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2639189.2639206
Spangler, G. (1997). Psychological and physiological responses during an exam and their relation to personality characteristics. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 22(6), 423–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4530(97)00040-1
Spangler, G., Pekrun, R., Kramer, K., & Hofmann, H. (2002). Students’ emotions, physiological reactions, and coping in academic exams. Anxiety, Stress and Coping, 15(4), 413–432. https://doi.org/10.1080/1061580021000056555
Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2014). Computer-supported collaborative learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 479–500). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.029
Strauss, M., Reynolds, C., Hughes, S., Park, K., McDarby, G., & Picard, R. W. (2005). The HandWave Bluetooth skin conductance sensor. In International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction (pp. 699–706). Berlin, Germany: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/11573548_90
Swan, M. (2012). Sensor mania! The Internet of things, wearable computing, objective metrics, and the quantified self 2.0. Journal of Sensor and Actuator Networks, 1(3), 217–253. https://doi.org/10.3390/jsan1030217
Taylor, S., Jaques, N., Chen, W., Fedor, S., Sano, A., & Picard, R. W. (2015). Automatic identification of artifacts in electrodermal activity data. In 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC) (pp.
96
1934–1937). Milan, Italy: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2015.7318762 Thorson, K. R., West, T. V., & Mendes, W. B. (2018). Measuring physiological influence
in dyads: A guide to designing, implementing, and analyzing dyadic physiological studies. Psychological Methods, 23(4), 595–616. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000166
Tomasello, M. (1995). Joint attention as social cognition. In C. Moore & P. J. Dunham (Eds.), Joint attention: Its origins and role in development (pp. 103–130). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Torniainen, J., Cowley, B., Henelius, A., Lukander, K., & Pakarinen, S. (2015). Feasibility of an electrodermal activity ring prototype as a research tool. In 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC) (pp. 6433–6436). Milan, Italy: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2015.7319865
van Bruggen, J. M., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2002). External representation of argumentation in CSCL and the management of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00019-6
van Dooren, M., de Vries, J. J. G., & Janssen, J. H. (2012). Emotional sweating across the body: Comparing 16 different skin conductance measurement locations. Physiology and Behavior, 106(2), 298–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2012.01.020
Venables, P. H., & Christie, M. J. (1973). Mechanisms, instrumentation, recording techniques, and quantification of responses. In W. F. Prokasy & D. C. Raskin (Eds.), Electrodermal activity in psychological research (pp. 1–124). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Venables, P. H., & Christie, M. J. (1980). Electrodermal activity. Techniques in Psychophysiology, 54(3).
Venables, P. H., & Martin, I. (1967). Skin resistance and skin potential. In P. H. Venables & I. Martin (Eds.), A manual of psychophysiological methods. Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland.
Vigouroux, R. (1879). Sur le rôle de la résistance électrique des tissues dans l’électro-diagnostic [On the role of electrical resistance of tissue in electro-diagnosis]. Comptes Rendus Société de Biologie, 31, 336–339.
Visnovcova, Z., Mestanik, M., Gala, M., Mestanikova, A., & Tonhajzerova, I. (2016). The complexity of electrodermal activity is altered in mental cognitive stressors. Computers in Biology and Medicine, 79(December), 123–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2016.10.014
Vogel, F., & Weinberger, A. (2018). Quantifying qualities of collaborative learning processes. In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), International handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 500–510). New York, NY: Routledge.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wang, G. H. (1957). The galvanic skin reflex: A review of old and recent works from a physiologic point of view. Part I. American Journal of Physical Medicine, 36, 295–320.
97
Webb, N. M. (1991). Task-related verbal interaction and mathematics learning in small groups. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(5), 366–389. https://doi.org/10.2307/749186
Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2007). Knowledge convergence in collaborative learning: Concepts and assessment. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 416–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.03.007
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). A sociocultural approach to socially shared cognition. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 85–100). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10096-004
Winne, P. H. (2010). Improving measurements of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 267–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2010.517150
Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531–566). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50045-7
Wise, A. F., & Schwarz, B. B. (2017). Visions of CSCL: Eight provocations for the future of the field. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 12(4), 423–467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9267-5
Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18(5), 459–482. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0073415
98
99
Original publications I Pijeira-Díaz, H. J., Drachsler, H., Järvelä, S., & Kirschner, P. A. (2016). Investigating
collaborative learning success with physiological coupling indices based on electrodermal activity. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (pp. 64–73). New York, NY: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2883851.2883897
II Pijeira-Díaz, H. J., Drachsler, H., Kirschner, P. A., & Järvelä, S. (2018). Profiling sympathetic arousal in a physics course: How active are students? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(4), 397–408. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12271
III Pijeira-Díaz, H. J., Drachsler, H., Järvelä, S., & Kirschner, P. A. (2019). Sympathetic arousal commonalities and arousal contagion during collaborative learning: How attuned are triad members? Computers in Human Behavior, 92(March), 188–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.008
Copyright of Article I held by the author. Article II reprinted with permission from
John Wiley and Sons. Permission is not required from the publisher of Article III
(i.e., Elsevier), as the author retains the right to include the article in a thesis or
dissertation, provided it is not published commercially.
Original publications are not included in the electronic version of the dissertation.
100
A C T A U N I V E R S I T A T I S O U L U E N S I S
Book orders:Granum: Virtual book storehttp://granum.uta.fi/granum/
S E R I E S E S C I E N T I A E R E R U M S O C I A L I U M
168. Oikarinen, Juho (2016) Technology-enhanced statistics learning experiment : acase study at upper secondary level
169. Knihtilä, Aila (2016) Eetoksena hyvyys ja kauneus : taiteilija ja musiikkikasvattajaAnna-Liisa Antila-Kaljusen toimintaelämäkerta
170. Suša, Rene (2016) Social cartographies of internationalization of higher educationin Canada : a study of exceptionalist tendencies and articulations
171. Lassila, Erkki T. (2017) Tensions in the relationships : exploring Japanesebeginning teachers’ stories
172. Rönkä, Anna Reetta (2017) Experiences of loneliness from childhood to youngadulthood : study of the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1986
173. Irjala, Marja (2017) Osallinen, syrjässä, marginaalissa, onnellinen? : tutkimusoppisopimuskoulutuksen erityisopiskelijoista Suomessa ja Saksassa
174. Kurki, Kristiina (2017) Young children’s emotion and behaviour regulation insocio-emotionally challenging situations
175. Lujala, Elise (2018) Pohjoisen varhaiskasvatuksen puolesta : Oulunlastentarhanopettajakoulutus vuosina 1967–1995
177. Pihkala, Suvi (2018) Touchable matters : reconfiguring sustainable change throughparticipatory design, education, and everyday engagement for non-violence
178. Mertala, Pekka (2018) Two worlds collide? : mapping the third space of ICTintegration in early childhood education
179. Juutinen, Jaana (2018) Inside or outside? : small stories about the politics ofbelonging in preschools
180. Välitalo, Riku (2018) The Philosophical Classroom : balancing educationalpurposes
181. Välimäki, Anna-Leena (2018) Kun työ tulee hymyillen kotiin : suomalaisenperhepäivähoidon 50 vuoden tarina 1960-luvulta 2010-luvulle
182. Tuomisto, Timo (2018) Kansanopistopedagogiikka kolmessa kristillisessäkansanopistossa
183. Uematsu-Ervasti, Kiyoko (2019) Global perspectives in teacher education : acomparative study of the perceptions of Finnish and Japanese student teachers
UNIVERSITY OF OULU P .O. Box 8000 F I -90014 UNIVERSITY OF OULU FINLAND
A C T A U N I V E R S I T A T I S O U L U E N S I S
University Lecturer Tuomo Glumoff
University Lecturer Santeri Palviainen
Senior research fellow Jari Juuti
Professor Olli Vuolteenaho
University Lecturer Veli-Matti Ulvinen
Planning Director Pertti Tikkanen
Professor Jari Juga
University Lecturer Anu Soikkeli
Professor Olli Vuolteenaho
Publications Editor Kirsti Nurkkala
ISBN 978-952-62-2218-9 (Paperback)ISBN 978-952-62-2219-6 (PDF)ISSN 0355-323X (Print)ISSN 1796-2242 (Online)
U N I V E R S I TAT I S O U L U E N S I SACTAE
SCIENTIAE RERUM SOCIALIUM
E 184
AC
TAH
éctor Javier Pijeira D
íaz
OULU 2019
E 184
Héctor Javier Pijeira Díaz
ELECTRODERMAL ACTIVITY AND SYMPATHETIC AROUSAL DURING COLLABORATIVE LEARNING
UNIVERSITY OF OULU GRADUATE SCHOOL;UNIVERSITY OF OULU,FACULTY OF EDUCATION