---
title: "PATS — paper by Rooein et al. (2026) — summary and ideas"
description: "To address this, the paper draws on learning-sciences literature to build a taxonomy that pairs low and high levels of each Big… 83 references."
authors: ["Donya Rooein", "Sankalan Pal Chowdhury", "Mariia Eremeeva", "Yuan Qin", "Debora Nozza", "Mrinmaya Sachan", "Dirk Hovy"]
year: 2026
venue: "Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EACL 2026"
source: "https://aclanthology.org/2026.findings-eacl.219/"
doi: "10.18653/v1/2026.findings-eacl.219"
licence: "CC BY 4.0 (ACL Anthology)"
licence_url: "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"
summary_licence: "Elamur Cosmic License"
canonical: "https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/rooein-2026-pats-personality-aware-teaching-strategies/"
---
[Elamur Research](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/rooein-2026-pats-personality-aware-teaching-strategies/)

[home](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [papers](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/) / [2026](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/2026/page/15/) / PATS: Personality-Aware Teaching Strategies with Large Language Model Tutors

# PATS: Personality-Aware Teaching Strategies with Large Language Model Tutors

**Authors:** [Donya Rooein](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/donya-rooein/), [Sankalan Pal Chowdhury](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/sankalan-pal-chowdhury/), Mariia Eremeeva, Yuan Qin, [Debora Nozza](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/debora-nozza/), [Mrinmaya Sachan](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/mrinmaya-sachan/) and [Dirk Hovy](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/dirk-hovy/) · **Year:** 2026 · **Venue:** [Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EACL 2026](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/venues/findings/) ([Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics 2026](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/venues/findings/2026/)) · **Publisher:** [Association for Computational Linguistics](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/publishers/association-for-computational-linguistics/) · **Licence:** [CC BY 4.0 (ACL Anthology)](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

**Links:** [Publisher's page](https://aclanthology.org/2026.findings-eacl.219/) · [PDF](https://aclanthology.org/2026.findings-eacl.219.pdf) · [DOI 10.18653/v1/2026.findings-eacl.219](https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2026.findings-eacl.219) · [OpenAlex](https://openalex.org/W7140091937)

**Citations:** 1 citations (OpenAlex, 2026-10-14)

## Summary

LLM tutors usually treat all learners alike, even though pedagogical research suggests that the best teaching strategy depends on a student's personality. The authors first looked at a real deployment: a GPT-4o tutor used for language learning at an Italian high school. Its 281 anonymized chat logs show that the tutor almost always fell back on plain question answering, whatever the student was like.

To address this, the paper draws on learning-sciences literature to build a taxonomy that pairs low and high levels of each Big Five (OCEAN) trait with suitable teaching strategies. Strategies are kept only if they work in one-on-one LLM tutoring. In the PATS framework, LLM-simulated students with assigned personality profiles converse with an LLM tutor, which identifies the student's traits and picks a matching strategy. The simulations cover two educational tasks, one of which is image description.

Human teachers consistently preferred PATS dialogues over two baselines, and LLM judges agreed. PATS also drew more often on rarer, high-impact strategies such as role-play. The work shows that pedagogical theory can be built into LLM tutors through prompting, though some classroom strategies cannot be transferred this way.

## Key points

- The taxonomy links 17 teaching strategies to high and low levels of the OCEAN traits. A trait counts as "high" when its score exceeds 3 on the 44-item, 1–5 scale Big Five survey.
- The real-world grounding study was run with the Minerva Research Association at Instituto Pindemonte (Verona, Italy) in March 2025. It involved 7 teachers, 110 students aged 16–21, and 281 chat logs. The 10 most common personality profiles were extracted from this data.
- The classroom GPT-4o tutor relied mainly on question answering, which led to relatively low student engagement.
- Teachers and LLM annotators favoured PATS, especially on motivation, empathy, and proactive support.
- The annotated dataset is released under the MIT license, together with a demo (github.com/donya-rooein/PATS).

*Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.*

## Institutions

- [University of Zurich](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/universities/university-of-zurich/) — University, Zurich, Switzerland · 78 works · 12,260 citations
- [ETH Zurich](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/universities/eth-zurich/) — University, Zurich, Switzerland · 72 works · 5,176 citations
- [Bocconi University](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/universities/bocconi-university/) — University, Milan, Italy · 28 works · 3,077 citations

📚 Shelves (4): [🖥️ Computer Science](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/) · 16,667 works · [🤖 Artificial Intelligence](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/artificial-intelligence/) · 16,194 works · [🗄️ Information Systems](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/information-systems/) · 1,437 works · [🖥️ Computer Science Applications](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/computer-science-applications/) · 102 works

🧭 Topics (1): [🧠 Language models & pretraining](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/topics/language-models/) · 3,320 works

## Cite

Cite as: Donya Rooein, Sankalan Pal Chowdhury, Mariia Eremeeva, Yuan Qin, Debora Nozza, Mrinmaya Sachan and Dirk Hovy. 2026. PATS: Personality-Aware Teaching Strategies with Large Language Model Tutors. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EACL 2026.

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

```bibtex
@inproceedings{rooein2026pats,
  title = {{PATS: Personality-Aware Teaching Strategies with Large Language Model Tutors}},
  author = {Donya Rooein, Sankalan Pal Chowdhury, Mariia Eremeeva, Yuan Qin, Debora Nozza, Mrinmaya Sachan and Dirk Hovy},
  booktitle = {Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EACL 2026},
  year = {2026},
  doi = {10.18653/v1/2026.findings-eacl.219},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2026.findings-eacl.219}
}
```

- [← previous PatentVision: A multimodal method for drafting patent applications](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/yang-2026-patentvision-multimodal-method-drafting-patent/)
- [next → PBEBench: A Multi-Step Programming by Examples Reasoning Benchmark inspired by Historical Linguistics](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/naik-2026-pbebench-multi-step-programming-examples/)
- [↑ back to papers of 2026](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/2026/page/15/)

## References

83 references, 9 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Lin-Miao L Agler, Kelley Stricklin, and Larisa K Alfsen. 2020. Using personality-based propensity as a guide for teaching practice. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 9(3):45. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Lin%2DMiao+L+Agler%2C+Kelley+Stricklin%2C+and+Larisa+K+Alfsen%2E+2020%2E+Using+personality%2Dbased+propensity+as+a+guide+for+teaching+practice%2E+Journal+of+Curriculum+and+Teaching%2C+9%283%29%3A45%2E)
2. Khaleel Alarbi, Mohanad Halaweh, Hassan Tairab, Najeh Rajeh Alsalhi, Nagaletchimee Annamalai, and Fatima Aldarmaki. 2024. Making a revolution in physics learning in high schools with chatgpt: A case study in uae. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(9):em2499. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Khaleel+Alarbi%2C+Mohanad+Halaweh%2C+Hassan+Tairab%2C+Najeh+Rajeh+Alsalhi%2C+Nagaletchimee+Annamalai%2C+and+Fatima+Aldarmaki%2E+2024%2E+Making+a+revolution+in+physics+learning+in+high+schools+with+chatgpt%3A+A+case+s)
3. Rohan Anil, Sebastian Borgeaud, Jean-Baptiste Alayrac, Jiahui Yu, Radu Soricut, Johan Schalkwyk, Andrew M Dai, Anja Hauth, Katie Millican, et al. 2023. [Gemini: a family of highly capable multimodal models](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/gemini-team-2023-gemini-family-highly-capable-multimodal/). page arXiv:2312.11805.
4. H. S. Barrows. 1986. A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Medical Education, 20(6):481– 486. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=H%2E+S%2E+Barrows%2E+1986%2E+A+taxonomy+of+problem%2Dbased+learning+methods%2E+Medical+Education%2C+20%286%29%3A481%E2%80%93+486%2E)
5. Benjamin S. Bell and Steve W. Kozlowski. 2008. Active learning: Effects of core training design elements on self-regulatory processes, learning, and adaptability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2):296–316. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Benjamin+S%2E+Bell+and+Steve+W%2E+Kozlowski%2E+2008%2E+Active+learning%3A+Effects+of+core+training+design+elements+on+self%2Dregulatory+processes%2C+learning%2C+and+adaptability%2E+Journal+of+Applied+Psychology%2C+93%282%29%3A)
6. Matthew L. Bernacki, Meghan J. Greene, and Nikki G. Lobczowski. 2021. A systematic review of research on personalized learning: Personalized by whom, to what, how, and for what purpose(s)? Educational Psychology Review, 33(4):1675–1715. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Matthew+L%2E+Bernacki%2C+Meghan+J%2E+Greene%2C+and+Nikki+G%2E+Lobczowski%2E+2021%2E+A+systematic+review+of+research+on+personalized+learning%3A+Personalized+by+whom%2C+to+what%2C+how%2C+and+for+what+purpose%28s%29%3F+Educational)
7. Temi Bidjerano and David Yun Dai. 2007. The relationship between the big-five model of personality and self-regulated learning strategies. Learning and Individual Differences, 17(1):69–81. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Temi+Bidjerano+and+David+Yun+Dai%2E+2007%2E+The+relationship+between+the+big%2Dfive+model+of+personality+and+self%2Dregulated+learning+strategies%2E+Learning+and+Individual+Differences%2C+17%281%29%3A69%E2%80%9381%2E)
8. Gregory J. Boyle. 1995. Myers-briggs type indicator (mbti): Some psychometric limitations. Humanities & Social Sciences papers, 30. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Gregory+J%2E+Boyle%2E+1995%2E+Myers%2Dbriggs+type+indicator+%28mbti%29%3A+Some+psychometric+limitations%2E+Humanities+%26+Social+Sciences+papers%2C+30%2E)
9. Vittorio V Busato, Frans J Prins, Jan J Elshout, and Christiaan Hamaker. 1998. The relation between learning styles, the big five personality traits and achievement motivation in higher education. Personality and Individual Differences, 26(1):129–140. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Vittorio+V+Busato%2C+Frans+J+Prins%2C+Jan+J+Elshout%2C+and+Christiaan+Hamaker%2E+1998%2E+The+relation+between+learning+styles%2C+the+big+five+personality+traits+and+achievement+motivation+in+higher+education%2E+Per)
10. Paul Chandler and John Sweller. 1991. Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4):293–332. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Paul+Chandler+and+John+Sweller%2E+1991%2E+Cognitive+load+theory+and+the+format+of+instruction%2E+Cognition+and+Instruction%2C+8%284%29%3A293%E2%80%93332%2E)
11. Zhendong Chu, Shen Wang, Jian Xie, Tinghui Zhu, Yibo Yan, Jinheng Ye, Aoxiao Zhong, Xuming Hu, Jing Liang, Philip S Yu, et al. 2025. Llm agents for education: Advances and applications. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.11733. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Zhendong+Chu%2C+Shen+Wang%2C+Jian+Xie%2C+Tinghui+Zhu%2C+Yibo+Yan%2C+Jinheng+Ye%2C+Aoxiao+Zhong%2C+Xuming+Hu%2C+Jing+Liang%2C+Philip+S+Yu%2C+et+al%2E+2025%2E+Llm+agents+for+education%3A+Advances+and+applications%2E+arXiv+preprint)
12. Gary J. Conti and Rita C. McNeil. 2024. The association of personality characteristics with learning strategy preferences. Journal of Education and Learning. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Gary+J%2E+Conti+and+Rita+C%2E+McNeil%2E+2024%2E+The+association+of+personality+characteristics+with+learning+strategy+preferences%2E+Journal+of+Education+and+Learning%2E)
13. Mir Mohammad Seyed Danesh and Mir Mortazavi Soolmaz. 2010. Relationship between distance education and staff’s personality. In 2010 4th International Conference on Distance Learning and Education, pages 63–65. IEEE. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Mir+Mohammad+Seyed+Danesh+and+Mir+Mortazavi+Soolmaz%2E+2010%2E+Relationship+between+distance+education+and+staff%E2%80%99s+personality%2E+In+2010+4th+International+Conference+on+Distance+Learning+and+Education%2C+pag)
14. J M Digman. 1990. Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41(Volume 41, 1990):417–440. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=J+M+Digman%2E+1990%2E+Personality+structure%3A+Emergence+of+the+five%2Dfactor+model%2E+Annual+Review+of+Psychology%2C+41%28Volume+41%2C+1990%29%3A417%E2%80%93440%2E)
15. Abhimanyu Dubey, Abhinav Jauhri, Abhinav Pandey, Abhishek Kadian, Ahmad Al-Dahle, Aiesha Letman, Akhil Mathur, Alan Schelten, Amy Yang, Angela Fan, et al. 2024. [The llama 3 herd of models](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/grattafiori-2024-llama-3-herd-models/). arXiv e-prints, page arXiv:2407.21783.
16. Richard Felder. 1988. Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education -Washington-, 78:674–681. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Richard+Felder%2E+1988%2E+Learning+and+teaching+styles+in+engineering+education%2E+Journal+of+Engineering+Education+%2DWashington%2D%2C+78%3A674%E2%80%93681%2E)
17. Mehmet Firat. 2022. Exploring the relationship between personality traits and e-learning autonomy of distance education students. Open Praxis, 14(4):280–290. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Mehmet+Firat%2E+2022%2E+Exploring+the+relationship+between+personality+traits+and+e%2Dlearning+autonomy+of+distance+education+students%2E+Open+Praxis%2C+14%284%29%3A280%E2%80%93290%2E)
18. Alex Graf. 2023. Exploring the role of personalization in adaptive learning environments. International Journal Software Engineering and Computer Science (IJSECS), 3(2):50–56. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Alex+Graf%2E+2023%2E+Exploring+the+role+of+personalization+in+adaptive+learning+environments%2E+International+Journal+Software+Engineering+and+Computer+Science+%28IJSECS%29%2C+3%282%29%3A50%E2%80%9356%2E)
19. Juho Hamari, Jonna Koivisto, and Harri Sarsa. 2014. Does gamification work? – a literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pages 3025–3034. IEEE. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Juho+Hamari%2C+Jonna+Koivisto%2C+and+Harri+Sarsa%2E+2014%2E+Does+gamification+work%3F+%E2%80%93+a+literature+review+of+empirical+studies+on+gamification%2E+In+2014+47th+Hawaii+International+Conference+on+System+Sciences%2C)
20. Rick Harrington and Donald A Loffredo. 2010. Mbti personality type and other factors that relate to preference for online versus face-to-face instruction. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2):89–95. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Rick+Harrington+and+Donald+A+Loffredo%2E+2010%2E+Mbti+personality+type+and+other+factors+that+relate+to+preference+for+online+versus+face%2Dto%2Dface+instruction%2E+The+Internet+and+Higher+Education%2C+13%281%2D2%29%3A89)
21. Gaole He, Gianluca Demartini, and Ujwal Gadiraju. 2025. Plan-then-execute: An empirical study of user trust and team performance when using llm agents as a daily assistant. In Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ’25, page 1–22. ACM. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Gaole+He%2C+Gianluca+Demartini%2C+and+Ujwal+Gadiraju%2E+2025%2E+Plan%2Dthen%2Dexecute%3A+An+empirical+study+of+user+trust+and+team+performance+when+using+llm+agents+as+a+daily+assistant%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+2025+)
22. Tao He, Lizi Liao, Yixin Cao, Yuanxing Liu, Ming Liu, Zerui Chen, and Bing Qin. 2024. Planning like human: A dual-process framework for dialogue planning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.05374. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Tao+He%2C+Lizi+Liao%2C+Yixin+Cao%2C+Yuanxing+Liu%2C+Ming+Liu%2C+Zerui+Chen%2C+and+Bing+Qin%2E+2024%2E+Planning+like+human%3A+A+dual%2Dprocess+framework+for+dialogue+planning%2E+arXiv+preprint+arXiv%3A2406%2E05374%2E)
23. Joy He-Yueya, Noah D. Goodman, and Emma Brunskill. 2024. Evaluating and optimizing educational content with large language model judgments. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Joy+He%2DYueya%2C+Noah+D%2E+Goodman%2C+and+Emma+Brunskill%2E+2024%2E+Evaluating+and+optimizing+educational+content+with+large+language+model+judgments%2E)
24. Tiancheng Hu and Nigel Collier. 2024. [Quantifying the persona effect in LLM simulations](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/hu-2024-quantifying-persona-effect-llm-simulations/). In Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 10289–10307, Bangkok, Thailand. Association for Computational Linguistics.
25. Yuxuan Huang. 2024. Orca: Enhancing role-playing abilities of large language models by integrating personality traits. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Yuxuan+Huang%2E+2024%2E+Orca%3A+Enhancing+role%2Dplaying+abilities+of+large+language+models+by+integrating+personality+traits%2E)
26. Mikael Jensen. 2015. Personality traits, learning and academic achievements. Journal of Education and Learning, 4(4):91–118. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Mikael+Jensen%2E+2015%2E+Personality+traits%2C+learning+and+academic+achievements%2E+Journal+of+Education+and+Learning%2C+4%284%29%3A91%E2%80%93118%2E)
27. Hang Jiang, Xiajie Zhang, Xubo Cao, Cynthia Breazeal, Deb Roy, and Jad Kabbara. 2024. Personallm: Investigating the ability of large language models to express personality traits. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Hang+Jiang%2C+Xiajie+Zhang%2C+Xubo+Cao%2C+Cynthia+Breazeal%2C+Deb+Roy%2C+and+Jad+Kabbara%2E+2024%2E+Personallm%3A+Investigating+the+ability+of+large+language+models+to+express+personality+traits%2E)
28. Hyoungwook Jin, Minju Yoo, Jeongeon Park, Yokyung Lee, Xu Wang, and Juho Kim. 2025. Teachtune: Reviewing pedagogical agents against diverse student profiles with simulated students. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Hyoungwook+Jin%2C+Minju+Yoo%2C+Jeongeon+Park%2C+Yokyung+Lee%2C+Xu+Wang%2C+and+Juho+Kim%2E+2025%2E+Teachtune%3A+Reviewing+pedagogical+agents+against+diverse+student+profiles+with+simulated+students%2E)
29. Neil D. Fleming and Colleen Mills. 1992. Not another inventory, rather a catalyst for reflection. To Improve the Academy, 11(1):137–155. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Neil+D%2E+Fleming+and+Colleen+Mills%2E+1992%2E+Not+another+inventory%2C+rather+a+catalyst+for+reflection%2E+To+Improve+the+Academy%2C+11%281%29%3A137%E2%80%93155%2E)
30. Oliver P John, Laura P Naumann, and Christopher J Soto. 2008. Paradigm shift to the integrative big five trait taxonomy. Handbook of personality: Theory and research, 3(2):114–158. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Oliver+P+John%2C+Laura+P+Naumann%2C+and+Christopher+J+Soto%2E+2008%2E+Paradigm+shift+to+the+integrative+big+five+trait+taxonomy%2E+Handbook+of+personality%3A+Theory+and+research%2C+3%282%29%3A114%E2%80%93158%2E)
31. Arthur C Graesser, Katja Wiemer-Hastings, Peter Wiemer-Hastings, and Roger Kreuz. 1999. Autotutor: A simulation of a human tutor. Cognitive Systems Research, 1(1):35–51. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Arthur+C+Graesser%2C+Katja+Wiemer%2DHastings%2C+Peter+Wiemer%2DHastings%2C+and+Roger+Kreuz%2E+1999%2E+Autotutor%3A+A+simulation+of+a+human+tutor%2E+Cognitive+Systems+Research%2C+1%281%29%3A35%E2%80%9351%2E)
32. Irina Jurenka, Markus Kunesch, Kevin R McKee, Daniel Gillick, Shaojian Zhu, Sara Wiltberger, Shubham Milind Phal, Katherine Hermann, Daniel Kasenberg, Avishkar Bhoopchand, et al. 2024. Towards responsible development of generative ai for education: An evaluation-driven approach. arXiv preprint arXiv… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Irina+Jurenka%2C+Markus+Kunesch%2C+Kevin+R+McKee%2C+Daniel+Gillick%2C+Shaojian+Zhu%2C+Sara+Wiltberger%2C+Shubham+Milind+Phal%2C+Katherine+Hermann%2C+Daniel+Kasenberg%2C+Avishkar+Bhoopchand%2C+et+al%2E+2024%2E+Towards+respons)
33. David Kolb. 1984. Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Journal of Business Ethics, 1. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=David+Kolb%2E+1984%2E+Experiential+learning%3A+Experience+as+the+source+of+learning+and+development%2E+Journal+of+Business+Ethics%2C+1%2E)
34. Meera Komarraju and Steven J Karau. 2005. The relationship between the big five personality traits and academic motivation. Personality and individual differences, 39(3):557–567. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Meera+Komarraju+and+Steven+J+Karau%2E+2005%2E+The+relationship+between+the+big+five+personality+traits+and+academic+motivation%2E+Personality+and+individual+differences%2C+39%283%29%3A557%E2%80%93567%2E)
35. Xinyi Lu and Xu Wang. 2024. Generative students: Using llm-simulated student profiles to support question item evaluation. In Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale, L@S ’24, page 16–27, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Xinyi+Lu+and+Xu+Wang%2E+2024%2E+Generative+students%3A+Using+llm%2Dsimulated+student+profiles+to+support+question+item+evaluation%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+Eleventh+ACM+Conference+on+Learning+%40+Scale%2C+L%40S+%E2%80%9924%2C+p)
36. Yiping Ma, Shiyu Hu, Xuchen Li, Yipei Wang, Shiqing Liu, and Kang Hao Cheong. 2024. Students rather than experts: A new ai for education pipeline to model more human-like and personalised early adolescences. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Yiping+Ma%2C+Shiyu+Hu%2C+Xuchen+Li%2C+Yipei+Wang%2C+Shiqing+Liu%2C+and+Kang+Hao+Cheong%2E+2024%2E+Students+rather+than+experts%3A+A+new+ai+for+education+pipeline+to+model+more+human%2Dlike+and+personalised+early+adoles)
37. Meera Komarraju, Steven J. Karau, and Ronald R. Schmeck. 2009. Role of the big five personality traits in predicting college students’ academic motivation and achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(1):47–52. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Meera+Komarraju%2C+Steven+J%2E+Karau%2C+and+Ronald+R%2E+Schmeck%2E+2009%2E+Role+of+the+big+five+personality+traits+in+predicting+college+students%E2%80%99+academic+motivation+and+achievement%2E+Learning+and+Individual+Diff)
38. Jakub Macina, Nico Daheim, Sankalan Pal Chowdhury, Tanmay Sinha, Manu Kapur, Iryna Gurevych, and Mrinmaya Sachan. 2023. [Mathdial: A dialogue tutoring dataset with rich pedagogical properties grounded in math reasoning problems](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/macina-2023-mathdial-dialogue-tutoring-dataset-rich/). arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.14536.
39. Meera Komarraju, Steven J. Karau, Ronald R. Schmeck, and Alen Avdic. 2011. The big five personality traits, learning styles, and academic achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(4):472–477. Digit Ratio (2D:4D) and Individual Differences Research. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Meera+Komarraju%2C+Steven+J%2E+Karau%2C+Ronald+R%2E+Schmeck%2C+and+Alen+Avdic%2E+2011%2E+The+big+five+personality+traits%2C+learning+styles%2C+and+academic+achievement%2E+Personality+and+Individual+Differences%2C+51%284%29%3A472)
40. Julia M. Markel, Steven G. Opferman, James A. Landay, and Chris Piech. 2023. Gpteach: Interactive ta training with gpt-based students. In Proceedings of the Tenth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale, L@S ’23, page 226–236, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Julia+M%2E+Markel%2C+Steven+G%2E+Opferman%2C+James+A%2E+Landay%2C+and+Chris+Piech%2E+2023%2E+Gpteach%3A+Interactive+ta+training+with+gpt%2Dbased+students%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+Tenth+ACM+Conference+on+Learning+%40+Scale%2C+L)
41. William K Lawrence. 2015. Learning and personality: The experience of introverted reflective learners in a world of extroverts. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=William+K+Lawrence%2E+2015%2E+Learning+and+personality%3A+The+experience+of+introverted+reflective+learners+in+a+world+of+extroverts%2E+Cambridge+Scholars+Publishing%2E)
42. Hang Li, Tianlong Xu, Chaoli Zhang, Eason Chen, Jing Liang, Xing Fan, Haoyang Li, Jiliang Tang, and Qingsong Wen. 2024. Bringing generative ai to adaptive learning in education. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Hang+Li%2C+Tianlong+Xu%2C+Chaoli+Zhang%2C+Eason+Chen%2C+Jing+Liang%2C+Xing+Fan%2C+Haoyang+Li%2C+Jiliang+Tang%2C+and+Qingsong+Wen%2E+2024%2E+Bringing+generative+ai+to+adaptive+learning+in+education%2E)
43. Wenkai Li, Jiarui Liu, Andy Liu, Xuhui Zhou, Mona T. Diab, and Maarten Sap. 2025. [BIG5-CHAT: Shaping LLM personalities through training on human-grounded data](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/li-2025-big5-chat-shaping-llm-personalities/). In Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 20434– 20471, Vien…
44. Ben Liu, Jihai Zhang, Fangquan Lin, Xu Jia, and Min Peng. 2025. One size doesn’t fit all: A personalized conversational tutoring agent for mathematics instruction. In Companion Proceedings of the ACM on Web Conference 2025, WWW ’25, page 2401–2410, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machin… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Ben+Liu%2C+Jihai+Zhang%2C+Fangquan+Lin%2C+Xu+Jia%2C+and+Min+Peng%2E+2025%2E+One+size+doesn%E2%80%99t+fit+all%3A+A+personalized+conversational+tutoring+agent+for+mathematics+instruction%2E+In+Companion+Proceedings+of+the+ACM+)
45. Naiming Liu, Shashank Sonkar, Zichao Wang, Simon Woodhead, and Richard G Baraniuk. 2023. [Novice learner and expert tutor: Evaluating math reasoning abilities of large language models with misconceptions](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/liu-2023-novice-learner-expert-tutor-evaluating/). arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.02439.
46. Zhengyuan Liu, Stella Xin Yin, Geyu Lin, and Nancy F. Chen. 2024. Personality-aware student simulation for conversational intelligent tutoring systems. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 626– 642, Miami, Florida, USA. Association for Comp… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Zhengyuan+Liu%2C+Stella+Xin+Yin%2C+Geyu+Lin%2C+and+Nancy+F%2E+Chen%2E+2024%2E+Personality%2Daware+student+simulation+for+conversational+intelligent+tutoring+systems%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+2024+Conference+on+Empiric)
47. Daria Martynova, Jakub Macina, Nico Daheim, Nilay Yalcin, Xiaoyu Zhang, and Mrinmaya Sachan. 2025. Can LLMs effectively simulate human learners? teachers’ insights from tutoring LLM students. In Proceedings of the 20th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications (BEA 2025… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Daria+Martynova%2C+Jakub+Macina%2C+Nico+Daheim%2C+Nilay+Yalcin%2C+Xiaoyu+Zhang%2C+and+Mrinmaya+Sachan%2E+2025%2E+Can+LLMs+effectively+simulate+human+learners%3F+teachers%E2%80%99+insights+from+tutoring+LLM+students%2E+In+Proce)
48. Laura J. Massa and Richard E. Mayer. 2006. Testing the ati hypothesis: Should multimedia instruction accommodate verbalizer-visualizer cognitive style? Learning and Individual Differences, 16(4):321–335. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Laura+J%2E+Massa+and+Richard+E%2E+Mayer%2E+2006%2E+Testing+the+ati+hypothesis%3A+Should+multimedia+instruction+accommodate+verbalizer%2Dvisualizer+cognitive+style%3F+Learning+and+Individual+Differences%2C+16%284%29%3A321%E2%80%933)
49. Kaushal Kumar Maurya, Kv Aditya Srivatsa, Kseniia Petukhova, and Ekaterina Kochmar. 2025. Unifying AI tutor evaluation: An evaluation taxonomy for pedagogical ability assessment of LLM-powered AI tutors. In Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Kaushal+Kumar+Maurya%2C+Kv+Aditya+Srivatsa%2C+Kseniia+Petukhova%2C+and+Ekaterina+Kochmar%2E+2025%2E+Unifying+AI+tutor+evaluation%3A+An+evaluation+taxonomy+for+pedagogical+ability+assessment+of+LLM%2Dpowered+AI+tuto)
50. Robert R. McCrae and Paul T. Jr. Costa. 1999. A five-factor theory of personality. In Lawrence A. Pervin and Oliver P. John, editors, Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, 2 edition, pages 139–153. Guilford Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Robert+R%2E+McCrae+and+Paul+T%2E+Jr%2E+Costa%2E+1999%2E+A+five%2Dfactor+theory+of+personality%2E+In+Lawrence+A%2E+Pervin+and+Oliver+P%2E+John%2C+editors%2C+Handbook+of+Personality%3A+Theory+and+Research%2C+2+edition%2C+pages+139)
51. Antonija Mitrovic, Stellan Ohlsson, and Devon K. Barrow. 2013. The effect of positive feedback in a constraint-based intelligent tutoring system. Computers & Education, 60(1):264–272. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Antonija+Mitrovic%2C+Stellan+Ohlsson%2C+and+Devon+K%2E+Barrow%2E+2013%2E+The+effect+of+positive+feedback+in+a+constraint%2Dbased+intelligent+tutoring+system%2E+Computers+%26+Education%2C+60%281%29%3A264%E2%80%93272%2E)
52. Laurie Murphy, Nina B Eduljee, Karen Croteau, and Suzanne Parkman. 2017. Extraversion and introversion personality type and preferred teaching and classroom participation: A pilot study. Journal of Psychosocial Research, 12(2):437–450. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Laurie+Murphy%2C+Nina+B+Eduljee%2C+Karen+Croteau%2C+and+Suzanne+Parkman%2E+2017%2E+Extraversion+and+introversion+personality+type+and+preferred+teaching+and+classroom+participation%3A+A+pilot+study%2E+Journal+of+Ps)
53. OpenAI. 2024. [Gpt-4 technical report](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/openai-2023-gpt-4-technical-report/).
54. OpenAI. 2025. Bring ai to campus at scale, accessed: 2025-05-14. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=OpenAI%2E+2025%2E+Bring+ai+to+campus+at+scale%2C+accessed%3A+2025%2D05%2D14%2E)
55. Sayantan Pal, Souvik Das, and Rohini K. Srihari. 2024. Beyond discrete personas: Personality modeling through journal intensive conversations. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Sayantan+Pal%2C+Souvik+Das%2C+and+Rohini+K%2E+Srihari%2E+2024%2E+Beyond+discrete+personas%3A+Personality+modeling+through+journal+intensive+conversations%2E)
56. Keyu Pan and Yawen Zeng. 2023. [Do llms possess a personality? making the mbti test an amazing evaluation for large language models](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/pan-2023-llms-possess-personality-making-mbti/).
57. Romain Puech, Jakub Macina, Julia Chatain, Mrinmaya Sachan, and Manu Kapur. 2025. Towards the pedagogical steering of large language models for tutoring: A case study with modeling productive failure. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025, pages 26291–26311, Vienna,… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Romain+Puech%2C+Jakub+Macina%2C+Julia+Chatain%2C+Mrinmaya+Sachan%2C+and+Manu+Kapur%2E+2025%2E+Towards+the+pedagogical+steering+of+large+language+models+for+tutoring%3A+A+case+study+with+modeling+productive+failure%2E)
58. Boele De Raad and Henri C. Schouwenburg. 1996. Personality in learning and education: a review. European Journal of Personality, 10(5):303–336. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Boele+De+Raad+and+Henri+C%2E+Schouwenburg%2E+1996%2E+Personality+in+learning+and+education%3A+a+review%2E+European+Journal+of+Personality%2C+10%285%29%3A303%E2%80%93336%2E)
59. Ayu Retny, I Ketut Agus Jayaputra, and Ni Made Rat-miningsih. 2017. The effect of role play technique and personality types on the speaking competency of the eleventh grade students of s wira harapan tegal-jaya. International Journal of Language and Literature, 1(2):121–132. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Ayu+Retny%2C+I+Ketut+Agus+Jayaputra%2C+and+Ni+Made+Rat%2Dminingsih%2E+2017%2E+The+effect+of+role+play+technique+and+personality+types+on+the+speaking+competency+of+the+eleventh+grade+students+of+s+wira+harapan+)
60. Jennifer Robison, Scott McQuiggan, and James Lester. 2010. Developing empirically based student personality profiles for affective feedback models. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems: 10th International Conference, ITS 2010, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, June 14-18, 2010, Proceedings, Part I 10, pages 285–295.… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jennifer+Robison%2C+Scott+McQuiggan%2C+and+James+Lester%2E+2010%2E+Developing+empirically+based+student+personality+profiles+for+affective+feedback+models%2E+In+Intelligent+Tutoring+Systems%3A+10th+International+)
61. Donya Rooein. 2019. Data-driven edu chatbots. In Companion Proceedings of The 2019 World Wide Web Conference, WWW ’19, page 46–49, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Donya+Rooein%2E+2019%2E+Data%2Ddriven+edu+chatbots%2E+In+Companion+Proceedings+of+The+2019+World+Wide+Web+Conference%2C+WWW+%E2%80%9919%2C+page+46%E2%80%9349%2C+New+York%2C+NY%2C+USA%2E+Association+for+Computing+Machinery%2E)
62. Donya Rooein, Devis Bianchini, Francesco Leotta, Massimo Mecella, Paolo Paolini, and Barbara Pernici. 2022. achat-wf: Generating conversational agents for teaching business process models. Software and Systems Modeling, pages 1–24. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Donya+Rooein%2C+Devis+Bianchini%2C+Francesco+Leotta%2C+Massimo+Mecella%2C+Paolo+Paolini%2C+and+Barbara+Pernici%2E+2022%2E+achat%2Dwf%3A+Generating+conversational+agents+for+teaching+business+process+models%2E+Software+an)
63. Donya Rooein, Paul Röttger, Anastassia Shaitarova, and Dirk Hovy. 2024. Beyond flesch-kincaid: Prompt-based metrics improve difficulty classification of educational texts. In Proceedings of the 19th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications (BEA 2024), pages 54–67, Mexi… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Donya+Rooein%2C+Paul+R%C3%B6ttger%2C+Anastassia+Shaitarova%2C+and+Dirk+Hovy%2E+2024%2E+Beyond+flesch%2Dkincaid%3A+Prompt%2Dbased+metrics+improve+difficulty+classification+of+educational+texts%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+19th+W)
64. Barak Rosenshine. 2012. Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator, 36(1). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Barak+Rosenshine%2E+2012%2E+Principles+of+instruction%3A+Research%2Dbased+strategies+that+all+teachers+should+know%2E+American+Educator%2C+36%281%29%2E)
65. Alexander Scarlatos, Naiming Liu, Jaewook Lee, Richard Baraniuk, and Andrew Lan. 2025. Training LLM-Based Tutors to Improve Student Learning Outcomes in Dialogues, page 251–266. Springer Nature Switzerland. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Alexander+Scarlatos%2C+Naiming+Liu%2C+Jaewook+Lee%2C+Richard+Baraniuk%2C+and+Andrew+Lan%2E+2025%2E+Training+LLM%2DBased+Tutors+to+Improve+Student+Learning+Outcomes+in+Dialogues%2C+page+251%E2%80%93266%2E+Springer+Nature+Switze)
66. Robin Schmucker, Meng Xia, Amos Azaria, and Tom Mitchell. 2024. Ruffle&riley: Insights from designing and evaluating a large language model-based conversational tutoring system. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Robin+Schmucker%2C+Meng+Xia%2C+Amos+Azaria%2C+and+Tom+Mitchell%2E+2024%2E+Ruffle%26riley%3A+Insights+from+designing+and+evaluating+a+large+language+model%2Dbased+conversational+tutoring+system%2E)
67. Shashank Sonkar, Naiming Liu, Debshila Basu Mallick, and Richard G. Baraniuk. 2023. Class: A design framework for building intelligent tutoring systems based on learning science principles. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Shashank+Sonkar%2C+Naiming+Liu%2C+Debshila+Basu+Mallick%2C+and+Richard+G%2E+Baraniuk%2E+2023%2E+Class%3A+A+design+framework+for+building+intelligent+tutoring+systems+based+on+learning+science+principles%2E)
68. John Sweller. 1988. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2):257–285. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=John+Sweller%2E+1988%2E+Cognitive+load+during+problem+solving%3A+Effects+on+learning%2E+Cognitive+Science%2C+12%282%29%3A257%E2%80%93285%2E)
69. Karl K Szpunar, Novall Y Khan, and Daniel L Schacter. 2013. Interpolated memory tests reduce mind wandering and improve learning of online lectures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(16):6313–6317. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Karl+K+Szpunar%2C+Novall+Y+Khan%2C+and+Daniel+L+Schacter%2E+2013%2E+Interpolated+memory+tests+reduce+mind+wandering+and+improve+learning+of+online+lectures%2E+Proceedings+of+the+National+Academy+of+Sciences%2C+11)
70. Robert P Tett, Margaret J Toich, and S Burak Ozkum. 2021. Trait activation theory: A review of the literature and applications to five lines of personality dynamics research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 8(1):199– 233. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Robert+P+Tett%2C+Margaret+J+Toich%2C+and+S+Burak+Ozkum%2E+2021%2E+Trait+activation+theory%3A+A+review+of+the+literature+and+applications+to+five+lines+of+personality+dynamics+research%2E+Annual+Review+of+Organiza)
71. Ahmed Tlili, Fathi Essalmi, Mohamed Jemni, Nian-Shing Chen, et al. 2016. Role of personality in computer based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 64:805–813. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Ahmed+Tlili%2C+Fathi+Essalmi%2C+Mohamed+Jemni%2C+Nian%2DShing+Chen%2C+et+al%2E+2016%2E+Role+of+personality+in+computer+based+learning%2E+Computers+in+Human+Behavior%2C+64%3A805%E2%80%93813%2E)
72. Janneke van de Pol, Monique Volman, and Jos Beishuizen. 2010. Scaffolding in teacher–student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3):271–296. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Janneke+van+de+Pol%2C+Monique+Volman%2C+and+Jos+Beishuizen%2E+2010%2E+Scaffolding+in+teacher%E2%80%93student+interaction%3A+A+decade+of+research%2E+Educational+Psychology+Review%2C+22%283%29%3A271%E2%80%93296%2E)
73. Teun A. van Dijk and Walter Kintsch. 1983. Strategies of discourse comprehension. Academic Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Teun+A%2E+van+Dijk+and+Walter+Kintsch%2E+1983%2E+Strategies+of+discourse+comprehension%2E+Academic+Press%2E)
74. Kurt VanLehn, Brett van de Sande, Robert Shelby, and Sophia Gershman. 2010. The Andes Physics Tutoring System: An Experiment in Freedom, pages 421–443. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Kurt+VanLehn%2C+Brett+van+de+Sande%2C+Robert+Shelby%2C+and+Sophia+Gershman%2E+2010%2E+The+Andes+Physics+Tutoring+System%3A+An+Experiment+in+Freedom%2C+pages+421%E2%80%93443%2E+Springer+Berlin+Heidelberg%2C+Berlin%2C+Heidelberg%2E)
75. Alessandro Vanzo, Sankalan Pal Chowdhury, and Mrinmaya Sachan. 2024. Gpt-4 as a homework tutor can improve student engagement and learning outcomes. ArXiv, abs/2409.15981. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Alessandro+Vanzo%2C+Sankalan+Pal+Chowdhury%2C+and+Mrinmaya+Sachan%2E+2024%2E+Gpt%2D4+as+a+homework+tutor+can+improve+student+engagement+and+learning+outcomes%2E+ArXiv%2C+abs%2F2409%2E15981%2E)
76. Lei Wang, Wanyu Xu, Yihuai Lan, Zhiqiang Hu, Yunshi Lan, Roy Ka-Wei Lee, and Ee-Peng Lim. 2023a. Plan-and-solve prompting: Improving zero-shot chain-of-thought reasoning by large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.04091. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Lei+Wang%2C+Wanyu+Xu%2C+Yihuai+Lan%2C+Zhiqiang+Hu%2C+Yunshi+Lan%2C+Roy+Ka%2DWei+Lee%2C+and+Ee%2DPeng+Lim%2E+2023a%2E+Plan%2Dand%2Dsolve+prompting%3A+Improving+zero%2Dshot+chain%2Dof%2Dthought+reasoning+by+large+language+models%2E+arXi)
77. Lingzhi Wang, Mrinmaya Sachan, Xingshan Zeng, and Kam-Fai Wong. 2023b. Strategize before teaching: A conversational tutoring system with pedagogy self-distillation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13496. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Lingzhi+Wang%2C+Mrinmaya+Sachan%2C+Xingshan+Zeng%2C+and+Kam%2DFai+Wong%2E+2023b%2E+Strategize+before+teaching%3A+A+conversational+tutoring+system+with+pedagogy+self%2Ddistillation%2E+arXiv+preprint+arXiv%3A2302%2E13496%2E)
78. Yixuan Weng, Shizhu He, Kang Liu, Shengping Liu, and Jun Zhao. 2024. Controllm: Crafting diverse personalities for language models. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Yixuan+Weng%2C+Shizhu+He%2C+Kang+Liu%2C+Shengping+Liu%2C+and+Jun+Zhao%2E+2024%2E+Controllm%3A+Crafting+diverse+personalities+for+language+models%2E)
79. Haein Yeo, Taehyeong Noh, Seungwan Jin, and Kyungsik Han. 2025. PADO: Personality-induced multi-agents for detecting OCEAN in human-generated texts. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 5719–5736, Abu Dhabi, UAE. Association for Computational Lingui… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Haein+Yeo%2C+Taehyeong+Noh%2C+Seungwan+Jin%2C+and+Kyungsik+Han%2E+2025%2E+PADO%3A+Personality%2Dinduced+multi%2Dagents+for+detecting+OCEAN+in+human%2Dgenerated+texts%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+31st+International+Conference)
80. Zheyuan Zhang, Daniel Zhang-Li, Jifan Yu, Linlu Gong, Jinchang Zhou, Zhanxin Hao, Jianxiao Jiang, Jie Cao, Huiqin Liu, Zhiyuan Liu, Lei Hou, and Juanzi Li. 2025. [Simulating classroom education with LLM-empowered agents](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/zhang-2025-simulating-classroom-education-llm-empowered/). In Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of…
81. Barry J. Zimmerman and Anastasia Kitsantas. 2014. Comparing students’ self-discipline and self-regulation measures and their prediction of academic achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(2):145–155. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Barry+J%2E+Zimmerman+and+Anastasia+Kitsantas%2E+2014%2E+Comparing+students%E2%80%99+self%2Ddiscipline+and+self%2Dregulation+measures+and+their+prediction+of+academic+achievement%2E+Contemporary+Educational+Psychology%2C+39)
82. Xiaoyi Zuo, LuLu Zhao, Yue Li, Wanting He, Chengfu Yu, and Zhenhai Wang. 2024. Psychological mechanisms of english academic stress and academic burnout: the mediating role of rumination and moderating effect of neuroticism. Frontiers in psychology, 15:1309210. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Xiaoyi+Zuo%2C+LuLu+Zhao%2C+Yue+Li%2C+Wanting+He%2C+Chengfu+Yu%2C+and+Zhenhai+Wang%2E+2024%2E+Psychological+mechanisms+of+english+academic+stress+and+academic+burnout%3A+the+mediating+role+of+rumination+and+moderating)
83. Thorsten Zylowski and Matthias Wölfel. 2023. An NLP analysis of ChatGPT‘s personality simulation capabilities and implications for human-centric explainable AI interfaces. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Natural Language and Speech Processing (ICNLSP 2023), pages 168–177, Onlin… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Thorsten+Zylowski+and+Matthias+W%C3%B6lfel%2E+2023%2E+An+NLP+analysis+of+ChatGPT%E2%80%98s+personality+simulation+capabilities+and+implications+for+human%2Dcentric+explainable+AI+interfaces%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+6th+In)

*Updated 31 October 2026*