通过人工智能分析情绪感知教育领域科学生产的社会指标

Jacobo Roda-Segarra, Santiago Mengual-Andrés, Andrés Payà Rico
{"title":"通过人工智能分析情绪感知教育领域科学生产的社会指标","authors":"Jacobo Roda-Segarra, Santiago Mengual-Andrés, Andrés Payà Rico","doi":"10.3389/frai.2024.1401162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research in the field of Artificial Intelligence applied to emotions in the educational context has experienced significant growth in recent years. However, despite the field’s profound implications for the educational community, the social impact of this scientific production on digital social media remains unclear. To address this question, the present research has been proposed, aiming to analyze the social impact of scientific production on the use of Artificial Intelligence for emotions in the educational context. For this purpose, a sample of 243 scientific publications indexed in Scopus and Web of Science has been selected, from which a second sample of 6,094 social impact records has been extracted from Altmetric, Crossref, and PlumX databases. A dual analysis has been conducted using specially designed software: on one hand, the scientific sample has been analyzed from a bibliometric perspective, and on the other hand, the social impact records have been studied. Comparative analysis based on the two dimensions, scientific and social, has focused on the evolution of scientific production with its corresponding social impact, sources, impact, and content analysis. The results indicate that scientific publications have had a high social impact (with an average of 25.08 social impact records per publication), with a significant increase in research interest starting from 2019, likely driven by the emotional implications of measures taken to curb the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, a lack of alignment has been identified between articles with the highest scientific impact and those with the highest social impact, as well as a lack of alignment in the most commonly used terms from both scientific and social perspectives, a significant variability in the lag in months for scientific research to make an impact on social media, and the fact that the social impact of the research did not emerge from the interest of Twitter users unaffiliated with the research, but rather from the authors, publishers, or scientific institutions. The proposed comparative methodology can be applied to any field of study, making it a useful tool given that current trends in accreditation agencies propose the analysis of the repercussion of scientific research in social media.","PeriodicalId":508738,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence","volume":"63 S14","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of social metrics on scientific production in the field of emotion-aware education through artificial intelligence\",\"authors\":\"Jacobo Roda-Segarra, Santiago Mengual-Andrés, Andrés Payà Rico\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frai.2024.1401162\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Research in the field of Artificial Intelligence applied to emotions in the educational context has experienced significant growth in recent years. However, despite the field’s profound implications for the educational community, the social impact of this scientific production on digital social media remains unclear. To address this question, the present research has been proposed, aiming to analyze the social impact of scientific production on the use of Artificial Intelligence for emotions in the educational context. For this purpose, a sample of 243 scientific publications indexed in Scopus and Web of Science has been selected, from which a second sample of 6,094 social impact records has been extracted from Altmetric, Crossref, and PlumX databases. A dual analysis has been conducted using specially designed software: on one hand, the scientific sample has been analyzed from a bibliometric perspective, and on the other hand, the social impact records have been studied. Comparative analysis based on the two dimensions, scientific and social, has focused on the evolution of scientific production with its corresponding social impact, sources, impact, and content analysis. The results indicate that scientific publications have had a high social impact (with an average of 25.08 social impact records per publication), with a significant increase in research interest starting from 2019, likely driven by the emotional implications of measures taken to curb the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, a lack of alignment has been identified between articles with the highest scientific impact and those with the highest social impact, as well as a lack of alignment in the most commonly used terms from both scientific and social perspectives, a significant variability in the lag in months for scientific research to make an impact on social media, and the fact that the social impact of the research did not emerge from the interest of Twitter users unaffiliated with the research, but rather from the authors, publishers, or scientific institutions. The proposed comparative methodology can be applied to any field of study, making it a useful tool given that current trends in accreditation agencies propose the analysis of the repercussion of scientific research in social media.\",\"PeriodicalId\":508738,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence\",\"volume\":\"63 S14\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2024.1401162\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2024.1401162","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,将人工智能应用于情感教育领域的研究取得了长足的发展。然而,尽管这一领域对教育界有着深远的影响,但这一科学成果对数字社交媒体的社会影响仍不明确。为了解决这个问题,我们提出了本研究,旨在分析在教育领域使用人工智能情感的科学成果的社会影响。为此,我们选取了 Scopus 和 Web of Science 中索引的 243 篇科学出版物作为样本,并从 Altmetric、Crossref 和 PlumX 数据库中提取了 6094 条社会影响记录作为第二样本。我们使用专门设计的软件进行了双重分析:一方面从文献计量学的角度分析了科学样本,另一方面研究了社会影响记录。基于科学和社会两个维度的比较分析侧重于科学成果的演变及其相应的社会影响、来源、影响和内容分析。结果表明,科学出版物具有较高的社会影响(平均每份出版物的社会影响记录为 25.08),从 2019 年开始,研究兴趣显著增加,这可能是由于为遏制 COVID-19 大流行而采取的措施所产生的情感影响。此外,还发现科学影响最大的文章与社会影响最大的文章之间缺乏一致性,从科学和社会角度来看,最常用的术语也缺乏一致性,科学研究在社交媒体上产生影响的滞后月数存在显著差异,而且研究的社会影响并非来自与研究无关的推特用户的兴趣,而是来自作者、出版商或科研机构。所提出的比较方法可应用于任何研究领域,鉴于当前认证机构的趋势是建议分析科学研究在社交媒体上的反响,因此该方法是一个有用的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Analysis of social metrics on scientific production in the field of emotion-aware education through artificial intelligence
Research in the field of Artificial Intelligence applied to emotions in the educational context has experienced significant growth in recent years. However, despite the field’s profound implications for the educational community, the social impact of this scientific production on digital social media remains unclear. To address this question, the present research has been proposed, aiming to analyze the social impact of scientific production on the use of Artificial Intelligence for emotions in the educational context. For this purpose, a sample of 243 scientific publications indexed in Scopus and Web of Science has been selected, from which a second sample of 6,094 social impact records has been extracted from Altmetric, Crossref, and PlumX databases. A dual analysis has been conducted using specially designed software: on one hand, the scientific sample has been analyzed from a bibliometric perspective, and on the other hand, the social impact records have been studied. Comparative analysis based on the two dimensions, scientific and social, has focused on the evolution of scientific production with its corresponding social impact, sources, impact, and content analysis. The results indicate that scientific publications have had a high social impact (with an average of 25.08 social impact records per publication), with a significant increase in research interest starting from 2019, likely driven by the emotional implications of measures taken to curb the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, a lack of alignment has been identified between articles with the highest scientific impact and those with the highest social impact, as well as a lack of alignment in the most commonly used terms from both scientific and social perspectives, a significant variability in the lag in months for scientific research to make an impact on social media, and the fact that the social impact of the research did not emerge from the interest of Twitter users unaffiliated with the research, but rather from the authors, publishers, or scientific institutions. The proposed comparative methodology can be applied to any field of study, making it a useful tool given that current trends in accreditation agencies propose the analysis of the repercussion of scientific research in social media.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Using synthetic dataset for semantic segmentation of the human body in the problem of extracting anthropometric data Enhancing educational Q&A systems using a Chaotic Fuzzy Logic-Augmented large language model AI can empower agriculture for global food security: challenges and prospects in developing nations Examining the impact of green technological specialization and the integration of AI technologies on green innovation performance: evidence from China Expandable-RCNN: toward high-efficiency incremental few-shot object detection
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1