The Impact of Doing Assignments with Chatbots on The Students’ Working Memory

Mehdi Rostami; Parichehr Mehdi Abadi

doi:10.61838/kman.hn.1.1.10

Authors

Mehdi Rostami Department of Psychology and Counseling, KMAN Research Institute, Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada

Parichehr Mehdi Abadi MSc Student, School of Psychology, University of East London, London, UK

https://doi.org/10.61838/kman.hn.1.1.10

Keywords:

chatbots, students, working memory

Abstract

This study aimed to investigates the effects of chatbot usage on working memory in students who do their assignments with chatbots. The research employed a Single-Subject AB design involving three participants, with each phase consisting of four measurements. Remarkably, the study revealed diverse outcomes: one participant exhibited no significant change in working memory, another showed a decrease, and the third experienced a gradual increase. These varied results suggest that chatbots can have differential impacts on working memory, potentially explained by cognitive load theory. This theory emphasizes the importance of optimizing technology use in learning environments to support working memory functions. The study's findings indicate that chatbots, as an educational tool, can have complex and varying effects on students' cognitive abilities, particularly in terms of working memory.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Gan L, Wu J, Dai J, Funahashi S. The Mechanism for Allocating Limited Working Memory Resources in Multitasking. Neurosci Bull. 2022;38(7):829-33. [PMID: 35399137] [PMCID: PMC9276901]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12264-022-00853-6

2. Oka M, Muta J, Sato K, Ikuta E, Iramina K, editors. Effect of Working Memory Training on Learning Ability of High School Students. 2021 13th Biomedical Engineering International Conference (BMEiCON); 2021 19-21 Nov. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1109/

BMEiCON53485.2021.9745247

3. Plass JL, Kalyuga S. Four Ways of Considering Emotion in Cognitive Load Theory. Educational Psychology Review. 2019;31(2):339-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09473-5

4. Chen X, Li B, Liu Y. The impact of object complexity on visual working memory capacity. Psychology. 2017;8(06):929. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2017.86060

5. Swart J, Janeke C. Investigating the influence of expressive writing exercises on the working memory of middle adolescents and young adults in South Africa. South African Journal of Psychology. 2022;52(2):227-37. https://doi.org/10.1177/00812463211043450

6. Sweller J. Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development. 2020;68(1):1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09701-3

7. Squires DR. Bridging the Learning Gap Augmented Reality's Impact on Associative Information Processing, Cognitive Load, and Working Memory: A Mixed-Methods Research Study. Journal of Educational Technology. 2018;15(1):17-25. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.15.1.14618

8. Montrieux H, Schellens T, editors. The impact of tablet devices on high school students' cognitive load and learning. 12th International Technology, Education and Development Conference (INTED); 2018. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2018.0277

9. Price MM, Crumley-Branyon JJ, Leidheiser WR, Pak R. Effects of information visualization on older adults’ decision-making performance in a medicare plan selection task: a comparative usability study. JMIR human factors. 2016;3(1):e5106. [PMID: 27251110] [PMCID: PMC4909975]. https://doi.org/10.2196/humanfactors.5106

10. Zhai C, Wibowo S, Cowling MA. Work-in-Progress - Embedding cross-cultural humorous and empathetic functions to facilitate language acquisition. 2022. p. 1-4. https://doi.org/10.23919/iLRN55037.2022.9815992

11. Ubah AE, Onakpojeruo EP, Ajamu J, Mangai TR, Isa AM, Ayansina NB, Al-Turjman F, editors. A Review of Artificial Intelligence in Education. 2022 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence of Things and Crowdsensing (AIoTCs); 2022: IEEE. [PMID: 36412793] [PMCID: PMC9680436]. https://doi.org/10.1109/AIoTCs58181.2022.00104

12. Bohomolova I, Kushnir N, Moshkovska S. Using Chatbots to Approach Individual Learning Trajectories in Physics for Foreign Students. 2021. p. 253-63.

13. Galvão VF, Maciel C, Garcia ACB. Creating chatbots to talk with humans: HCI evaluations and perspectives. 2019. p. 20:1-:11. [PMID: 30522057] https://doi.org/10.1145/3357155.3358460

14. Pamina J, Ajeykanth S, Arjun P, JittheshKrishna T. Medical Assistant Chat-Bot for Health Care Application. International Journal of Scientific Research in Computer Science, Engineering and Information Technology. 2019. https://doi.org/10.32628/CSEIT195271

15. Hockey A, Geffen G. The concurrent validity and test–retest reliability of a visuospatial working memory task. Intelligence. 2004;32(6):591-605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2004.07.009

16. Jaeggi SM, Buschkuehl M, Perrig WJ, Meier B. The concurrent validity of the N-back task as a working memory measure. Memory. 2010;18(4):394-412. [PMID: 20408039] https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211003702171

17. Puma S, Tricot A. Cognitive load theory and working memory models: Comings and goings. Advances in cognitive load theory: Routledge; 2019. p. 41-52. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429283895-4

18. Ricker TJ, Vergauwe E. Boundary conditions for observing cognitive load effects in visual working memory. Mem Cognit. 2022;50(6):1169-85. [PMID: 35505223] https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-022-01320-3

19. Sisakhti M, Sachdev PS, Batouli SAH. The Effect of Cognitive Load on the Retrieval of Long-Term Memory: An fMRI Study. Front Hum Neurosci. 2021;15:700146. [PMID: 34720904] [PMCID: PMC8548369]. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2021.700146

20. Wang Z, Shah P. The effect of pressure on high‐and low‐working‐memory students: An elaboration of the choking under pressure hypothesis. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 2014;84(2):226-38. [PMID: 24164334] [PMCID: PMC7002872]. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpheart.00208.2015