对比三种形式，发现聊天机器人最能说服人，但游戏反而学得更多。
Games That Teach, Chats That Convince: Comparing Interactive and Static Formats for Persuasive Learning
- 用相同内容比较静态文章、聊天机器人和叙事游戏三种形式。
- 游戏组24小时后测验得分最高，但自评学习感最低。
- 互动越久不等于学得越多，感知体验与实际效果常不一致。
交互式系统如聊天机器人和游戏在可持续性教育中日益普及，但不同信息传递形式如何影响学习与说服效果尚不明确。在内容完全一致的前提下，我们开展一项受控用户研究，比较三种信息传递方式：静态文章、对话式聊天机器人和叙事文本游戏。主观测评显示，聊天机器人条件在提升主题重要性感知方面始终优于其他模式；然而，自我报告的学习感并未与客观表现一致：文本游戏组虽自评学习较少，但在24小时后的知识测验中得分更高。进一步探索性分析表明，冗长对话和互动时长等常见参与度指标更关联主观体验而非真实学习成效。研究揭示了说服体验的主观感受与实际记忆之间的脱节，提示在设计说服性系统与严肃游戏时需权衡互动性、真实感与学习效果。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Interactive systems such as chatbots and games are increasingly used to persuade and educate on sustainability-related topics, yet it remains unclear how different delivery formats shape learning and persuasive outcomes when content is held constant. Grounding on identical arguments and factual content across conditions, we present a controlled user study comparing three modes of information delivery: static essays, conversational chatbots, and narrative text-based games. Across subjective measures, the chatbot condition consistently outperformed the other modes and increased perceived importance of the topic. However, perceived learning did not reliably align with objective outcomes: participants in the text-based game condition reported learning less than those reading essays, yet achieved higher scores on a delayed (24-hour) knowledge quiz. Additional exploratory analyses further suggest that common engagement proxies, such as verbosity and interaction length, are more closely related to subjective experience than to actual learning. These findings highlight a dissociation between how persuasive experiences feel and what participants retain, and point to important design trade-offs between interactivity, realism, and learning in persuasive systems and serious games.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。