Acta Informatica Pragensia 2026, 15(1), 109-125 | DOI: 10.18267/j.aip.292124

Evaluating Intrinsic Motivation in Robot-Supported Quiz-Based Learning: A Comparative Study of Verbal-Only and Multimodal Feedback with Sound Input

Rezaul Tutul ORCID...1, Ilona Buchem ORCID...2, André Jakob3, Niels Pinkwart ORCID...1
1 Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany
2 Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Berliner University of Applied Science, Berlin, Germany
3 Department of Electrical Engineering, Berliner University of Applied Science, Berlin, Germany

Background: Maintaining high motivation in robot-led educational activities is challenging when interactions rely solely on verbal communication. Incorporating multimodal feedback combining gestures, sounds and music may provide a richer and more engaging learning experience.

Objective: This study aims to examine whether integrating multimodal feedback with a real-time, fair first-responder detection system in a robot-led quiz game enhances students’ intrinsic motivation and engagement compared to a verbal-only, sequential turn-taking interaction.

Methods: A two-group experiment was conducted with 48 university students randomly assigned to two groups. The experimental group interacted with a Pepper robot using buzzer-based competition and synchronized multimodal feedback (gestures, sounds and music), while the control group experienced verbal-only interaction with sequential turn-taking. After the session, participants completed the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory questionnaire covering five subscales: interest/enjoyment, perceived competence, effort/importance, perceived choice and pressure/tension. Statistical analyses included t-tests, 95% confidence intervals and effect sizes (Cohen’s d) to compare group differences.

Results: The experimental group reported significantly higher scores in interest/enjoyment (p < 0.001, d = 3.11), perceived competence (p < 0.001, d = 2.28), effort/importance (p < 0.001, d = 4.59) and perceived choice (p = 0.048, d = 0.93). Pressure/tension scores were also higher (p < 0.001, d = 1.95), reflecting the excitement and mild stress of competitive gameplay.

Conclusion: Multimodal feedback combined with fair first-responder detection substantially enhances intrinsic motivation and engagement in robot-led learning environments. While competitive pressure increases tension, it also appears to stimulate focus and effort. These findings highlight the potential of multimodal, fair and interactive robot systems for creating more dynamic and emotionally engaging educational experiences.

Keywords: Human–robot interaction; HRI; Multimodal feedback; Intrinsic motivation.

Received: July 4, 2025; Revised: October 13, 2025; Accepted: October 16, 2025; Prepublished online: December 29, 2025; Published: January 3, 2026  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Tutul, R., Buchem, I., Jakob, A., & Pinkwart, N. (2026). Evaluating Intrinsic Motivation in Robot-Supported Quiz-Based Learning: A Comparative Study of Verbal-Only and Multimodal Feedback with Sound Input. Acta Informatica Pragensia, 15(1), 109-125. doi: 10.18267/j.aip.292
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Ackermann, H., Henke, A., Chevalère, J., Yun, H. S., Hafner, V. V., Pinkwart, N., & Lazarides, R. (2025). Physical embodiment and anthropomorphism of AI tutors and their role in student enjoyment and performance. Npj Science of Learning, 10(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00293-z Go to original source...
    2. Alam, A. (2022). Social Robots in Education for Long-Term Human-Robot Interaction: Socially Supportive Behaviour of Robotic Tutor for Creating Robo-Tangible Learning Environment in a Guided Discovery Learning Interaction. ECS Transactions, 107(1), 12389-12403. https://doi.org/10.1149/10701.12389ecst Go to original source...
    3. Bacula, A., & Knight, H. (2024). Dancing with Robots at a Science Museum: Coherent Motions Got More People to Dance, Incoherent Sends Weaker Signal. In Proceedings of the 2024 International Symposium on Technological Advances in Human-Robot Interaction ,(pp. 83-91). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3648536.3648546 Go to original source...
    4. Bagheri, E., Vanderborght, B., Roesler, O., & Cao, H.-L. (2020). A Reinforcement Learning Based Cognitive Empathy Framework for Social Robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 13(5), 1079-1093. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00683-4 Go to original source...
    5. Bartneck, C., Kulic, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1(1), 71-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-008-0001-3 Go to original source...
    6. Baur, K., Speth, F., Nagle, A., Riener, R., & Klamroth-Marganska, V. (2018). Music meets robotics: a prospective randomized study on motivation during robot aided therapy. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 15, Article 79. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-018-0413-8 Go to original source...
    7. Belpaeme, T., Kennedy, J., Ramachandran, A., Scassellati, B., & Tanaka, F. (2018). Social robots for education: A review. Science Robotics, 3(21), eaat5954. https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.aat5954 Go to original source...
    8. Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 386-400. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.386 Go to original source...
    9. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. Springer. Go to original source...
    10. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behaviour. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 Go to original source...
    11. Duncan, J. A., Alambeigi, F., & Pryor, M. W. (2024). A Survey of Multimodal Perception Methods for Human-Robot Interaction in Social Environments. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, 13(4), 1-50. https://doi.org/10.1145/3657030 Go to original source...
    12. Fernández-Herrero, J. (2024). Evaluating Recent Advances in Affective Intelligent Tutoring Systems: A Scoping Review of Educational Impacts and Future Prospects. Education Sciences, 14(8), Article 839. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14080839 Go to original source...
    13. Fridin, M., & Belokopytov, M. (2014). Acceptance of socially assistive humanoid robot by preschool and elementary school teachers. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 23-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.016 Go to original source...
    14. Fung, K. Y., Lee, L. H., Sin, K. F., Song, S., & Qu, H. (2024). Humanoid robot-empowered language learning based on self-determination theory. Education and Information Technologies, 29(14), 18927-18957. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12570-w Go to original source...
    15. Goldman, E.J., Baumann, A., & Poulin-Dubois, D. (2023). Pre-schoolers' anthropomorphizing of robots: Do human-like properties matter? Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1102370. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1102370 Go to original source...
    16. Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? - A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, (pp. 3025-3034). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377 Go to original source...
    17. Hirschmanner, M., Gross, S., Krenn, B., Neubarth, F., Trapp, M., & Vincze, M. (2018). Grounded Word Learning on a Pepper Robot. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents, (pp. 351-352). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3267851.3267903 Go to original source...
    18. Huang, P., Hu, Y., Nechyporenko, N., Kim, D., Talbott, W., & Zhang, J. (2024). EMOTION: Expressive Motion Sequence Generation for Humanoid Robots with In-Context Learning. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 10, 7699-7706. https://doi.org/10.1109/LRA.2025.3575983 Go to original source...
    19. Jacobs, E., Garbrecht, O., Kneer, R., & Rohlfs, W. (2023). Game-based learning apps in engineering education: requirements, design and reception among students. European Journal of Engineering Education, 48(3), 448-481. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2023.2169106 Go to original source...
    20. Kennedy, J., Baxter, P., & Belpaeme, T. (2016). The robot who tried too hard: Social behavior of a robot tutor can negatively affect child learning. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, (pp. 67-74). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2696454.2696457 Go to original source...
    21. Kim, J. (2017). Transforming Music Education for the Next Generation: Planting 'Four Cs' Through Children's Songs. International Journal of Early Childhood, 49(2), 181-193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-017-0187-3 Go to original source...
    22. Kim, S.-H., Nam, H., Choi, S.-M., & Park, Y.-H. (2024). Real-Time Sound Recognition System for Human Care Robot Considering Custom Sound Events. IEEE Access, 12, 42279-42294. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2024.3378096 Go to original source...
    23. Krogsager, A., Segato, N., & Rehm, M. (2014). Backchannel Head Nods in Danish First Meeting Encounters with a Humanoid Robot: The Role of Physical Embodiment. In Human-Computer Interaction. Advanced Interaction Modalities and Techniques, (pp. 651-662). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07230-2_62 Go to original source...
    24. Leite, I., Martinho, C., & Paiva, A. (2013). Social robots for long-term interaction: A survey. International Journal of Social Robotics, 5, 291-308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0178-y Go to original source...
    25. Louie, W.-Y. G., & Nejat, G. (2020). A Social Robot Learning to Facilitate an Assistive Group-Based Activity from Non-expert Caregivers. International Journal of Social Robotics, 12(5), 1159-1176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00621-4 Go to original source...
    26. Malhotra, D. (2010). The desire to win: The effects of competitive arousal on motivation and behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 111, 139-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.11.005 Go to original source...
    27. Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. SSOAR. Go to original source...
    28. Mubin, O., Stevens, C. J., Shahid, S., Al Mahmud, A., & Dong, J. J. (2013). A review of the applicability of robots in education. Technology for Education and Learning, 1, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.2316/Journal.209.2013.1.209-0015 Go to original source...
    29. Nasir, J., Dillenbourg, P., Norman, U., & Bruno, B. (2020). When Positive Perception of the Robot Has No Effect on Learning. In 2020 29th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, (pp. 313-320). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN47096.2020.9223343 Go to original source...
    30. Schiavo, F., Campitiello, L., Todino, M. D., & Di Tore, P. A. (2024). Educational Robots, Emotion Recognition and ASD: New Horizon in Special Education. Education Sciences, 14(3), 258. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14030258 Go to original source...
    31. Schreiter, T., Morillo-Méndez, L., Chadalavada, R.T., Rudenko, A., Billing, E.A., Magnusson, M., Arras, K.O., & Lilienthal, A.J. (2023). Advantages of Multimodal versus Verbal-Only Robot-to-Human Communication with an Anthropomorphic Robotic Mock Driver. In 2023 32nd IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, (pp. 293-300). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN57019.2023.10309629 Go to original source...
    32. Sorrentino, A., Fiorini, L., & Cavallo, F. (2024). From the Definition to the Automatic Assessment of Engagement in Human-Robot Interaction: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Social Robotics, 16(7), 1641-1663. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-024-01146-w Go to original source...
    33. Sripathy, A., Bobu, A., Li, Z., Sreenath, K., Brown, D.S., & Dragan, A.D. (2022). Teaching Robots to Span the Space of Functional Expressive Motion. In 2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, (pp. 13406-13413). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS47612.2022.9981964 Go to original source...
    34. Su, H., Qi, W., Chen, J., Yang, C., Sandoval, J., & Laribi, M.A. (2023). Recent advancements in multimodal human-robot interaction. Frontiers in Neurorobotics, 17, 1084000. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbot.2023.1084000 Go to original source...
    35. Tanaka, F., Isshiki, K., Takahashi, F., Uekusa, M., Sei, R., & Hayashi, K. (2015). Pepper learns together with children: Development of an educational application. In 2015 IEEE-RAS 15th International Conference on Humanoid Robots, (pp. 270-275). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HUMANOIDS.2015.7363546 Go to original source...
    36. Theodotou, E. (2025). Dancing With children or dancing for children? Measuring the effects of a dance intervention in children's confidence and agency. Early Child Development and Care, 195(1-2), 64-73. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2025.2452587 Go to original source...
    37. Tutul, R., Buchem, I., & Jakob, A. (2024). Towards a Gamified Human-Robot Interaction Framework for Enhanced Learning. In 17th annual International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation, (pp. 5412-5421). IATED. https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2024.1322 Go to original source...
    38. Tutul, R., Buchem, I., Jakob, A., & Pinkwart, N. (2024). Enhancing Learner Motivation, Engagement, and Enjoyment Through Sound-Recognizing Humanoid Robots in Quiz-Based Educational Games. In Digital Interaction and Machine Intelligence, (pp. 123-132). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66594-3_13 Go to original source...
    39. Tutul, R., Jakob, A., & Buchem, I. (2025). A dynamic template adaptation approach for noise-robust sound classification and distance determination in single-channel audio. International Journal of Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics, 5(1), 22-41. https://doi.org/10.53378/ijstem.353154 Go to original source...
    40. Tutul, R., & Pinkwart, N. (2025). Design and Evaluation of a Sound-Driven Robot Quiz System with Fair First-Responder Detection and Gamified Multimodal Feedback. Robotics, 14(9), 123. https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics14090123 Go to original source...
    41. Umbrico, A., Cesta, A., Cortellessa, G., & Orlandini, A. (2020). A Holistic Approach to Behavior Adaptation for Socially Assistive Robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 12(3), 617-637. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00617-9 Go to original source...
    42. Villegas-Ch, W., Buenano-Fernandez, D., Navarro, A. M., & Mera-Navarrete, A. (2025). Adaptive intelligent tutoring systems for STEM education: analysis of the learning impact and effectiveness of personalized feedback. Smart Learning Environments, 12(1), Article 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-025-00389-y Go to original source...
    43. Wang, H., Tlili, A., Huang, R., Cai, Z., Li, M., Cheng, Z., Yang, D., Li, M., Zhu, X., & Fei, C. (2023). Examining the applications of intelligent tutoring systems in real educational contexts: A systematic literature review from the social experiment perspective. Education and Information Technologies, 28(7), 9113-9148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11555-x Go to original source...
    44. Whittaker, S., Rogers, Y., Petrovskaya, E., & Zhuang, H. (2021). Designing Personas for Expressive Robots. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, 10, Article 8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3424153 Go to original source...
    45. Yang, Q.-F., Lian, L.-W., & Zhao, J.-H. (2023). Developing a gamified artificial intelligence educational robot to promote learning effectiveness and behaviour in laboratory safety courses for undergraduate students. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), Article 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00391-9 Go to original source...
    46. 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, 459-482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cne.920180503 Go to original source...
    47. Zhang, Y., & Zhu, Y. (2022). Effects of educational robotics on the creativity and problem-solving skills of K-12 students: a meta-analysis. Educational Studies, 50(6), 1539-1557. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2022.2107873 Go to original source...
    48. Zhang, X., Li, D., Tu, Y.-F., Hwang, G.-J., Hu, L., & Chen, Y. (2023). Engaging Young Students in Effective Robotics Education: An Embodied Learning-Based Computer Programming Approach. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 62(2), 532-558. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331231213548 Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content