Akyüz, H. İ. (2012). Çevrimiçi görev temelli öğrenme ortamında eğitsel ajanın rolünün ve biçim
özelliklerinin öğrencilerin motivasyonuna, bilişsel yüklenmesine ve problem çözme
becerisi algısına etkisi. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
Alessi, S.M. ve Trollip, S.R. (2001). Multimedia for learning: Methods and development (3. Ed.).
Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Allbeck, J. ve Badler, N. (2003). Representing and parameterizing agent behaviors. H. Prendinger
ve M. Ishizuka (Ed.) Life-like characters: Tools, affective functions and applications içinde
(syf. 19-38). Germany: Springer.
Arslan, A. (2006). Bilgisayar destekli eğitim yapmaya ilişkin tutum ölçeği. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi
Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(2), 24-33.
Atkinson, R. K. (2002). Optimizing learning from examples using animated pedagogical agents.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 416–427.
Atkinson, R. K., Mayer, R. E., ve Meril, M. M. (2005). Fostering social agency in multimedia
learning: Examining the impact of an animated agent’s voice. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 30(1), 117-139.
Bandura A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–
47.
Baylor, A. L. (2002). Expanding preservice teachers’ metacognitive awareness of instructional
planning through pedagogical agents. Educational Technology Research & Development,
50(2), 5–22.
Baylor, A. L. ve Kim, S. (2009). Designing nonverbal communication for pedagogical agents: When
less is more. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 450-457.
Baylor, A. L. ve Kim, Y. (2003). The role of gender and ethnicity in pedagogical agent perception. G.
Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate Government
Healthcare & Higher Education 2003 içinde (syf. 1503–1506). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Baylor, A. L. ve Kim, Y. (2005). Simulating instructional roles through pedagogical agents.
International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 15(1), 95–115.
Baylor, A. L., Shen, E. ve Huang, X. (2003). Which pedagogical agent do learners choose? The effects
of gender and ethnicity. G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World conference on e-learning
in corporate government healthcare & higher education 2003 içinde (syf. 1507–1510).
Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Beale, I., Kato, P., Marin-Bowling, V., Guthrie, N. ve Cole, S. (2007). Improvement in cancer-related
knowledge following use of a psychoeducational video game for adolescents and young
adults with cancer. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(3), 263–270.
Bickmore, T. W., Pfeifer, L. M. ve Orlow, M. K. (2009). Using computer agents to explain medical
documents to patients with low health literacy. Patient Education and Counseling, 75(3),
315-320.
Brave, S., Nass, C. ve Hutchinson, K., (2005). Computers that are care: investigating the effects of
orientation of emotion exhibited by an embodied computer agent. International Journal
of Human-Computer Studies, 62(2), 161-178.
Brenner, W., Zarnekow, R. ve Wittig, H. (1998). Intelligent software agents. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
96 Pamukkale University Journal of Education, Number 39 (January 2016/I)
S. Dinçer, A. Doğanay
Buisine, S. ve J. C. Martin (2007). The effects of speech-gesture cooperation in animated agents’
behavior in multimedia presentations. Interacting with Computers, 19(4), 484-493.
Carter, V. ve Good, E. (1973 ). Dictionary of education. New York: McGraw Hill.
Chan, T.W. (1995). Artificial agents in distance learning. International Journal of Educational
Telecommunications, 1(2/3), 263-282.
Chen, Z. H. (2012). We care about you: Incorporating pet characteristics with educational agents
through reciprocal caring approach. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1081-1088.
Clark, R. ve Mayer, R.E. (2003). E-learning and the science of instruction. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. ve Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6. Baskı.). New York:
Routledge.
Colangelo, N. ve Davi, G.A. (1997). Handbook of gifted education (2. Baskı). Boston: Allyn and
Bacon.
Dehn, D. M. ve van Mulken, S. (2000). The impact of animated interface agents: a review of empirical
research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 52(1), 1–22.
Dinçer. S. (2006). Bilgisayar destekli eğitim ve uzaktan eğitime genel bir bakış, Akademik Bilişim
2006 Bildiri Kitapçığı (syf. 65-76). Denizli: Pamukkale Üniversitesi.
Dinçer, S. (2015). Türkiye’de yapilan bilgisayar destekli öğretimin öğrenci başarisina etkisi ve diğer
ülkelerle karşilaştirilmasi: Bir meta-analiz çalişmasi. Journal of Turkish Science Education,
12(1), 99-118.
Dinçer, S. ve Yavuz, C. (2013). Eğitsel ajan kullanımının öğrenci başarısına etkisi: bir meta-analiz
çalışması. International Journal of Human Sciences, 10, 35-48.
Gulz, A. (2004). Benefits of virtual characters in computer based learning environments: Claims
and evidence. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 14(3), 313-334.
Gülbahar, Y. ve Alper, A. (2009). Öğretim teknolojileri alanında yapılan araştırmalar konusunda bir
içerik analizi. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 42(2), 93-111.
Haddad, H. ve Klobas, J. (2003). The relationship between visual abstraction and the effectiveness
of a pedagogical character-agent. Proceedings of AAMAS 2002 Workshop on Embodied
Conversational Agents-Let’s Specify and Evaluate Them, 1-8.
Hong, Z. W., Chen, Y. L. ve Lan, C. H. (2012). A courseware to script animated pedagogical agents
in instructional material for elementary students in English education. Computer Assisted
Language Learning, (ahead-of-print), 1-16. DOI: 10.1080/09588221.2012.733712
Hubal, R. C., Fishbein, D. H., Sheppard, M. S., Paschall, M. J., Eldreth, D. L. ve Hyde, C. T. (2008).
How do varied populations interact with embodied conversational agents? Findings from
inner-city adolescents and prisoners. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 1104-1138.
İnceoğlu M.( 2004). Tutum, algi, iletişim. Ankara: Kesit Tanıtım Ltd. Şti.
Jin, S. A. A. (2010). The effects of incorporating a virtual agent in a computer-aided test designed
for stress management education: The mediating role of enjoyment. Computers in Human
Behavior, 26(3), 443-451.
Johnson, A. M., DiDonato, M. D. ve Reisslein, M. (2013). Animated agents in K-12 engineering
outreach: Preferred agent characteristics across age levels. Computers in Human Behavior,
29(4), 1807-1815.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P. ve Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in
multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13(1), 351-371
Kerly, A., Ellis, R. ve Bull, S. (2008). CALMsystem: A Conversational Agent for Learner Modelling.
Knowledge-Based Systems, 21(3), 238-246.
Kızılkaya, G. ve Aşkar, P. (2006). Öğretim yazılımlarında eğitsel yardımcı kullanımı: Eğitsel ara yüz
ajanı. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 31, 25-31.
Kim, Y. ve Wei, Q. A. (2011). The impact of learner attributes and learner choice in an agent-based
environment. Computers & Education, 56(2), 505-514.
Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı 39 (Ocak 2016/I) 97
Bilgisayar Destekli Öğretimde Eğitsel Arayüzlerin Kullanımı: Bir Sentez Çalışması
Kim, Y., Baylor, A. L. ve Reed, G. (2003). The impact of image and voice with pedagogical agents. G.
Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World conference on elearning in corporate, government,
healthcare, & higher education 2003 içinde (syf. 2237–2240). AACE: Chesapeake, VA.
Kocasaraç, H. (2003). Bilgisayarların öğretim alanında kullanımına ilişkin öğretmen yeterlilikleri.
The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 2(3), 77-85.
Lester, J., Towns, S., Callaway, C., Voerman, J. ve Fitzgerald, P. (2000). Deictic and emotive
communication in animated pedagogical agents. J. Cassell, J. Sullivan, S. Prevost ve E.
Churchill (Ed.), Embodied conversational agents içinde (syf. 123-155). Cambridge, MA: The
MIT Press.
Lim, M. Y., Leichtenstern, K., Kriegel, M., Enz, S., Aylett, R., Vannini, N., Hall, L. ve Rizaao, P. (2011).
Technology-enhanced role-play for social and emotional learning context – Intercultural
empathy. Entertainment Computing, 2(4), 223-231.
Lim, S. ve Reeves, B., (2010). Computer agents versus avatars: Responses to interactive game
characters controlled by a computer or other player. International Journal of Human-
Computer Studies, 68(1), 57-68.
Lin, L., Atkinson, R., Christopherson, R., Joseph, S.ve Harrison, C. (2013). Animated agents and
learning: Does the type of verbal feedback they provide matter? Computers & Education,
67(1), 239-249.
Mayer, R. E., Johnson, W. L., Shaw, E. ve Sandhu, S. (2006). Constructing computer-based tutors
that are socially sensitive: Politeness in educational software. International Journal of
Human-Computer Studies, 64(1), 36-42.
Mayer, R. E., Sobko, K. ve Mautone, P. D. (2003). Social cues in multimedia learning: role of speaker’s
voice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 419–425.
McQuiggan, S. W. ve Lester, J. C. (2007). Modeling and evaluating empathy in embodied companion
agents. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65(4), 348-360.
Moreno, R. (1999). Introducing social cues in multimedia learning: The role of pedagogic agents
image and language in a scientific lesson. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, University of
California, Santa Barbara.
Moreno, R. ve Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia design: The role of modality
and contiguity, Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 358–368.
Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A. ve Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computerbased
teaching: do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated
pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction, 19(2), 177–213.
Mumm, J. ve Mutlu, B. (2011). Designing motivational agents: The role of praise, social comparison,
and embodiment in computer feedback. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1643-1650.
Osman, K. ve Lee, T. T. (2013). Impact of Interactıve Multımedıa Module Wıth Pedagogıcal Agents on
Students’understandıng and Motıvatıon ın The Learnıng of Electrochemıstry. International
Journal of Science and Mathematics Education (ahead-of-print). DOI: 10.1007/s10763-
013-9407-y
Peker, M. ve Mirasyedioğlu, Ş. (2003) Ortaöğretim öğrencilerinin matematik ve fen dersine yönelik
tutumları ve başarı arasındaki ilişki. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(14),
157- 166.
Perez-Marin, D. ve Pascual-Nieto, I. (2013). An exploratory study on how children interact with
pedagogic conversational agents. Behaviour & Information Technology, 32(9), 955-964.
Plant, E. A., Baylor, A. L., Doerr, C. E. ve Rosenberg-Kima, R. B. (2009). Changing middle-school
students’ attitudes and performance regarding engineering with computer-based social
models. Computers & Education, 53(2), 209-215.
Prendinger, H., Ma, C. L. ve Ishizuka, M. (2007). Eye movements as indices for the utility of life-like
interface agents: A pilot study. Interacting with Computers, 19(2), 281-292.
98 Pamukkale University Journal of Education, Number 39 (January 2016/I)
S. Dinçer, A. Doğanay
Reategui, E., Polonia, E. ve Roland, L. (2007). The role of animated pedagogical agents in scenariobased
language e-learning: A case-study. Proceedings of the International Conference of
Interactive computer aided learning ICL2007: E Portofolio and Quality in e-Learning, 7, 1-7.
Reeves, B. ve Nass, C. (1996). The media equation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rodicio, H. G. ve Sánchez, E. (2012). Aids to computer-based multimedia learning: A comparison
of human tutoring and computer support. Interactive Learning Environments, 20(5), 423-
439.
Ropero, J., Gómez, A., Carrasco, A. ve Leon, C. (2012). A Fuzzy Logic intelligent agent for Information
Extraction: Introducing a new Fuzzy Logic-based term weighting scheme. Expert Systems
with Applications 39(4), 4567-4581.
Rosenberg-Kima, R. B., Baylor, A. L. Plant, E. A. ve Doen C. E. (2008). Interface agents as social
models for female students: The effects of agent visual presence and appearance on
female students’ attitudes and beliefs. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6), 2741-2756.
Salim, S.S., Marzuki, N. ve Kasirun, Z. (2007). Modelling the requirements of an animated
pedagogical agent for a web-based learning environment through inputprocess-output
relationships. Austria: Conference ICL2007.
Schrader, C. ve Bastiaens, T. J. (2012). The influence of virtual presence: Effects on experienced
cognitive load and learning outcomes in educational computer games. Computers in
Human Behavior, 28(2), 648-658.
Serenko, A. (2007). The development of an instrument to measure the degree of animation
predisposition of agent users. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 478-495.
Silverman, S. ve Scrabis, K.A. (2004) A Review of research on ınstructional theory in physical
education. International Journal of Physical Education, 41(1), 4-12.
Şahin, E. (2011). Açıklayıcı ve kuralcı öğretim kuramları ve model örnekleri. S. Fer (Ed.), Öğrenme
öğretme kuram ve yaklaşımları içinde, (syf. 83-107). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
Şen, A. İ. ve Koca, S. A. (2005). Orta öğretim öğrencilerinin matematik ve fen dersine yönelik
tutumları ve nedenleri. Eğitim Araştırmaları, 18, 236–252.
Şimşek, A. (1999) Yeni öğrenme modeli ve eğitimde bilişim teknolojileri: Bilgisayar destekli eğitim
raporu (syf: 1-19), İstanbul: Koç Üniversitesi.
Tavşancıl, E. ve Aslan, E. (2001). İçerik analizi ve uygulama örnekleri. İstanbul: Epsilon Yayınları.
TDK. (2014). TC. Başbakanlık Atatürk Kültür, Dil ve Tarih Yüksek Kurumu, Türk Dil Kurumu.
http://www.tdk.gov.tr/index.php?option=com_gts&arama=gts&guid=TDK.
GTS.52e7e801a9ef68.12698548 adresinden, 15.01.2014 tarihinde alınmıştır.
Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P. ve Sweller, J. (1997). When two sensory modes are better than one.
Journal of Applied Experimental Psychology, 3(4), 257-287.
Ünal-Çolak, F. ve Ozan, Ö. (2012). The effects of animated agents on students’ achievement and
attitudes. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 13(2), 96-111.
Van Der Meij, H. (2013). Motivating agents in software tutorials. Computers in Human Behavior,
29(3), 845-857.
Veletsianos, G. (2012). How do learners respond to pedagogical agents that deliver socialoriented
non-task messages? Impact on student learning, perceptions, and experiences.
Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 275-283.
Wang, N., Johnson, W. L., Mayer, R. R., Rizzo, P., Shaw, E. ve Collins, H. (2008). The politeness effect:
Pedagogical agents and learning outcomes. International Journal of Human-Computer
Studies, 66(2), 98-112.
Wooldridge, M. ve Jennings, N. R. (1995). Intelligent agents: Theory and practice. Knowledge
Engineering Review. 10(2), 115-152.
Xu, D. M. ve Wang, H. Q. (2006). Intelligent agent supported personalization for virtual learning
environments. Decision Support Systems, 42(2), 825-843.
Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı 39 (Ocak 2016/I) 99
Bilgisayar Destekli Öğretimde Eğitsel Arayüzlerin Kullanımı: Bir Sentez Çalışması
Yenice, N., Sümer, Ş., Oktaylar, H. C. ve Erbil, E. (2003). Fen bilgisi derslerinde bilgisayar destekli
öğretimin ders hedeflerine ulaşma düzeyine etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi
Dergisi, 24, 152-158.
Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin
Yayıncılık.
Yılmaz, R. ve Kılıç-Çakmak, E. (2011). Sanal öğrenme ortamlarında sosyal model olarak eğitsel
arayüz ajanları. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(4), 243-264.
Yılmaz, R. ve Kılıç-Çakmak, E. (2012). Educational interface agents as social models to influence
learner achievement, attitude and retention of learning. Computers & Education, 59(2),
828-838.
Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com