[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-159454-105":59,"doc-detail-159454-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":124,"head_meta":126,"extra_data":128,"updated_unix":130},105,"en","comparison-of-outcomes-between-robot-assisted-language-learning-system-and-human-tutors-focusing-on-speaking-ability","Comparison of Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted Language Learning System and Human Tutors - Focusing on Speaking Ability","","The study evaluates how mainstream Robot-Assisted Language Learning (RALL) systems perform against human tutors in a typical English conversation lesson, targeting learners’ speaking outcomes. Twenty-six participants complete a pre-test, then receive 30 minutes of study per day for 7 days, followed by three post-tests. Results show the RALL group achieves larger gains in lexical/grammatical error reduction and speech fluency, while rhythm, pronunciation, complexity, and task achievement do not differ. Findings support using RALL where human tutoring is difficult.",{"@graph":69,"@context":123},[70,84,106],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/comparison-of-outcomes-between-robot-assisted-language-learning-system-and-human-tutors-focusing-on-speaking-ability/159454/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/comparison-of-outcomes-between-robot-assisted-language-learning-system-and-human-tutors-focusing-on-speaking-ability/159454.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Cipher","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-04","2026-08-29",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":105},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",11,{"@type":107,"mainEntity":108},"FAQPage",[109,115,119],{"name":110,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":112},"How is the experiment comparing RALL and human tutors designed?","Question",{"text":113,"@type":114},"The study assigns 26 participants to a RALL group (14) and a human tutor group (12). Participants take a pre-test, study 30 minutes per day for 7 days, and complete three post-tests on the final day.","Answer",{"name":116,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":117},"Which speaking-related outcomes improved more with the RALL system?",{"text":118,"@type":114},"The RALL group showed considerably improved lexical/grammatical error rates and speech fluency compared with the human tutor group.",{"name":120,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":121},"Did the two groups differ in other speech characteristics?",{"text":122,"@type":114},"No clear differences were found between groups for rhythm, pronunciation, complexity, and task achievement of speech.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":125,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":127,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":129,"site_id":62},159454,1788018146,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":132},{"doc_id":129,"user_id":133,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":105,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":56,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":130,"read_time":144},687208528416,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","Comparison of Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted Language Learning System and Human Tutors: Focusing on Speaking Ability  \nTakamasa Iio1 · Yuichiro Yoshikawa2 · Kohei Ogawa3 · Hiroshi Ishiguro2  \nAccepted: 19 March 2024 / Published online: 11 April 2024 © The Author(s) 2024  \nAbstract  \nThis study explores how much current mainstream Robot-Assisted Language Learning (RALL) systems produce outcomes compared to human tutors instructing a typical English conversation lesson. To this end, an experiment was conducted with 26 participants divided in RALL (14 participants) and human tutor (12 participants) groups. All participants took a pre-test on the first day, followed by 30 min of study per day for 7 days, and 3 post-tests on the last day. The test results indicated that the RALL group considerably improved lexical/grammatical error rates and fluency of speech compared to that for the human tutor group. The other characteristics, such as rhythm, pronunciation, complexity, and task achievement of speech did not indicate any differences between the groups. The results suggested that exercises with the RALL system enabled participants to commit the learned expressions to memory, whereas those with human tutors emphasized on communication with the participants. This study demonstrated the benefits of using RALL systems that can work well in lessons that human tutors find hard to teach.  \nKeywords Robot-assisted language learning · L2 learning · Human–robot interaction · Comparison between humans and robots  \n1 Introduction  \nRobot-assisted language learning (RALL) has been actively studied over the past two decades. Robots are now being  \nYuichiro Yoshikawa, Kohei Ogawa and Hiroshi Ishiguro have contributed equally to this work.  \nB Takamasa Iio[tiio@mail.doshisha.ac.jp](tiio@mail.doshisha.ac.jp)  \nYuichiro Yoshikawa  \n[yoshikawa@irl.sys.es.osaka-u.ac.jp](yoshikawa@irl.sys.es.osaka-u.ac.jp)  \nKohei Ogawa  \n[k-ogawa@nuee.nagoya-u.ac.jp](k-ogawa@nuee.nagoya-u.ac.jp)  \nHiroshi Ishiguro  \n[ishiguro@sys.es.osaka-u.ac.jp](ishiguro@sys.es.osaka-u.ac.jp)  \n1 Faculty of Culture and Information Science, Doshisha University, 1-3, Tatara-miyakodani, Kyotanabe-city 610-0394, Kyoto, Japan  \n2 Graduate School of Engineering Science, Osaka University, 1-3, Machikaneyama-cho, Toyonaka-city 560-8531, Osaka, Japan  \n3 Graduate School of Engineering, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya-city 464-8601, Aichi, Japan  \nexpected to provide students with high-quality education through face-to-face interactions [6, 21, 37, 43] . Compared to video-displayed agents, physical robots can yield more compliance to their requests [6], elicit social behavior from learners beneficial to learning [22], be more engaging and enjoyable [26, 27], and be perceived positively [31, 36, 45] . These findings suggest that robots can generate positive perceptions and improve task performance in educational situations because of their physical presence.  \nTherefore, this study focuses on a robot playing the role of a tutor in second language learning. In RALL studies, the robot plays several roles: teacher or teacher’s assistant in classrooms [1, 2, 8, 16, 17, 49, 51], tutor teaching via oneto-one interactions [13, 14, 18, 23, 29, 39], peer learning with students [5, 20, 33, 52], or novice instructed by students [35, 40, 41] . Although these classifications are not strict and sometimes ambiguous, tutoring roles have been adopted in past studies [6, 37] .  \nOne interesting question regarding RALL systems is the extent to which they can improve the students’ skills compared to that with a human tutor. The development of large language models has opened up the possibility for RALL systems which are able to teach as flexibly as human tutors.  \nHowever, even with LLM, it is still difficult for robots to progress through lessons, responding freely to students’questions. This study focuses on what the robot can certainly do with the current technology. Specifically, the robot acts as a tu","cbCair1twbM0n9Sy","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCair1twbM0n9Sy","pdf",1901416,"English","# Introduction\n## Study Motivation\n## Gap in Existing Comparisons","[{\"question\":\"How is the experiment comparing RALL and human tutors designed?\",\"answer\":\"The study assigns 26 participants to a RALL group (14) and a human tutor group (12). Participants take a pre-test, study 30 minutes per day for 7 days, and complete three post-tests on the final day.\"},{\"question\":\"Which speaking-related outcomes improved more with the RALL system?\",\"answer\":\"The RALL group showed considerably improved lexical/grammatical error rates and speech fluency compared with the human tutor group.\"},{\"question\":\"Did the two groups differ in other speech characteristics?\",\"answer\":\"No clear differences were found between groups for rhythm, pronunciation, complexity, and task achievement of speech.\"}]","Comparison of Outcomes Between Robot-Assisted Language Learning System and Human Tutors - Focusing on Speaking Ability | PDF",48]