Biometric and Intelligent Self-Assessment of Student Progress System

  • Arturas KaklauskasEmail author
Part of the Intelligent Systems Reference Library book series (ISRL, volume 81)


All distance learning participants (students, professors, instructors, mentors, tutors and the rest) would like to know how well the students have assimilated the study materials being taught. The analysis and assessment of the knowledge students have acquired over a semester are an integral part of the independent studies process at the most advanced universities worldwide. A formal test or exam during the semester would cause needless stress for students. To resolve this problem, the author in conjunction with colleagues have developed a Biometric and Intelligent Self-Assessment of Student Progress (BISASP) System. The obtained research results are comparable with the results from other similar studies. This chapter ends with two case studies to demonstrate practical operation of the BISASP System. The first case study analyses the interdependencies between microtremors, stress and student marks. The second case study compares the marks assigned to students during the e-self-assessment, prior to the e-test and during the e-test.


Voice Stress Analysis (VSA) Microtremor Frequency Kaklauskas Komarraju Intelligence Quotient Tests 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. AlFallay I (2004) The role of some selected psychological and personality traits of the rater in the accuracy of self- and peer-assessment. System 32(3):407–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Austin Z, Gregory PAM, Galli M (2008) I just don’t know what I’m supposed to know: evaluating self-assessment skills of international pharmacy graduates in Canada. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy 4(2):115–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ballantine JA, McCourt Larres P, Oyelere P (2007) Computer usage and the validity of self-assessed computer competence among first-year business students. Comput Educ 49(4):976–990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bell AD, Ford WH, McQuiston CR (1976) Physiological response analysis method and apparatus. U.S. Patent. 3971034Google Scholar
  5. Borgen LA, Goodman LI (1973) Voice stress analysis of anxiolytic drug effects. Clin Pharmacol Ther 19(1):104Google Scholar
  6. Braak JPV (2004) Domains and determinants of university students’ self-perceived computer competence. Comput Educ 43:299–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brendt ER (1991) The practice of econometrics: classic and contemporary. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  8. Brenner M (1974) Stage fright and Steven’s law. In: Paper presented at the eastern psychological association convention, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Brockway BF (1979) Situational stress and temporal changes in self-report and vocal measurements. Nurs Res 28(1):20–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cestaro VL (1995) A comparison between decision accuracy rates obtained using the polygraph instrument and the computer voice analyzer (CVSA) in the absence of jeopardy. Department of Defense Polygraph Institute, Fort McClellan, ALGoogle Scholar
  11. Chapman J (1989) VSA as a tool for eliciting confessions. Department of Criminal Justice, State University of NY at Corning, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Clarke E (2005) Psychology and law. Juta and Co Ltd, Cape TownGoogle Scholar
  13. Durbin J (1961) Some methods of constructing exact tests. Biometrika 48(1–2):41–55CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. Fitzgerald JT, White CB, Gruppen LD (2003) A longitudinal study of self assessment accuracy. Med Educ 37:645–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Formative Assessment (2009) Formative assessment in computer supported learning. Accessed 5 Sept 2014
  16. Gribniak V (2009) Shrinkage influence on tension-stiffening of concrete structures. Dissertation, Vilnius Gediminas Technical UniversityGoogle Scholar
  17. Haddad D, Walter Sh, Ratley R, Smith M (2002) Investigation and evaluation of voice stress analysis technology. In: Technical report, National Criminal Justice Reference ServiceGoogle Scholar
  18. Heisse J (1974) Is the microtremor usable?—the micro-muscle tremor in the voice. In: U.S. Congress, House subcommittee of the committee on government operations the use of polygraphs and similar devices by federal agencies. Hearing, 93rd Congress, 2nd Session. Government Printing Office, Washington, pp 339–343, 4–5 June 1974Google Scholar
  19. Hopkins CS, Ratley RJ, Benincasa DS, Grieco DS (2005) Evaluation of voice stress analysis technology. In: Proceedings of the 38th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, pp 1–10, 3–6 Jan 2005Google Scholar
  20. Inbar GF, Eden G (1976) Psychological stress evaluators: EMG correlation with voice tremor. Biol Cybern 24(3):165–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Intelligence (2009) Leaning and teaching. Accessed 9 Sept 2014
  22. Intelligence Quotient (2009) Gender differences in math. Accessed 9 Sept 2014
  23. Kaklauskas A, Kaklauskas G, Krutinis M, Ditkevicius R (2005) Intelligence computer learning systems in VGTU. In: 6th international scientific conference, Public relation, quality, benefits and risks, RigaGoogle Scholar
  24. Kaklauskas A, Ditkevicius R, Gargasaite L (2006a) Intelligent tutoring system for real estate management. Int J Strateg Property Manage 10(2):113–130Google Scholar
  25. Kaklauskas A, Zavadskas EK, Ditkevicius R (2006b) An intelligent tutoring system for construction and real estate management master degree studies. In: Luo Y (ed) Cooperative design, visualization, and engineering. 3rd Conference on cooperative design, visualization and engineering, Mallorca. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4101. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 174–181, 17–20 Sept 2006Google Scholar
  26. Kaklauskas A, Zavadskas EK, Babenskas E, Seniut M, Vlasenko A, Plakys V (2007) Intelligent library and tutoring system for Brita in the PuBs project. In: Luo Y (ed) Cooperative design, visualization, and engineering. 4th International conference on cooperative design, visualization, and engineering, Shanghai. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, Heidelberg, pp 157–166, 16–20 Sept 2007Google Scholar
  27. Kaklauskas A, Zavadskas EK, Pruskus V, Vlasenko A, Seniut M, Kaklauskas G, Matuliauskaite A, Gribniak V (2010) Biometric and intelligent self-assessment of student progress system. Comput Educ 55(2):821–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Komarraju M, Karau SJ, Schmeck RR (2009) Role of the big five personality traits in predicting college students’ academic motivation and achievement. Learn Individ Differ 19(1):47–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lejk M, Wyvill M (2001) The effect of the inclusion of self-assessment with peer-assessment of contributions to a group project: a quantitative study of secret and agreed assessments. Assess Eval High Educ 26(6):551–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lippold O (1970) Oscillations in the stretch reflex arc and the origin of the rhythmical 8–12 c/s component of the physiological tremor. J Physiol 206(2):359–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lippold O, Redfearn J, Vuco R (1957) The rhythmical activity of groups of muscle units in the voluntary contraction of muscle. J Physiol 137:473–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Marsh HW, Overall JU, Kesler SP (1979) Validity of student evaluations of instructional effectiveness: a comparison of faculty self-evaluations and evaluations by their students. J Educ Psychol 71(2):149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Matsuno S (2009) Self-, peer-, and teacher-assessments in Japanese university EFL writing classrooms. Lang Test 26(1):75–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mynttinen S, Sundstrom A, Vissers J, Koivukoski M, Hakuli K, Keskinen E (2009) Self-assessed driver competence among novice drivers—a comparison of driving test candidate assessments and examiner assessments in a Dutchand Finnish sample. J Saf Res 40(4):301–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Noftle EE, Robins RW (2007) Personality predictors of academic outcomes: big five correlates of GPA and SAT scores. J Pers Soc Psychol 93(1):116–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Papinczak T, Young L, Groves M, Haynes M (2007) An analysis of peer, self, and tutor assessment in problem-based learning tutorials. Med Teach 29:122–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ruiz R, Legros C, Guell A (1990) Voice analysis to predict the psychological or physical state of a speaker. Aviat Space Environ Med 63(3):266–271Google Scholar
  38. Rutter M, Maughan B (2002) School effectiveness findings 1979–2002. J Sch Psychol 40(6):451–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Self-assessment (2009) Accessed 4 Sept 2014
  40. Selye H (1951) The general adaptation syndrome. Annu Rev Med 2:327–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Smith GA (1977) Voice analysis for measurement of anxiety. Br J Med Psychol 50(4):367–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sundström A (2008) Self-assessment of driving skill—A review from a measurement perspective. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 11(1):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sung YT, Chang KE, Chiou SK, Hou HT (2005) The design and application of a web-based self- and peer-assessment system. Comput Educ 45(2):187–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sung Y, Chang K, Chang T, Yu W (2009) How many heads are better than one? The reliability and validity of teenagers’ self- and peer assessments. J Adolesc 33(1):135–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tippett R (1994) Comparative analysis study of the computer voice stress analyzer and polygraph. University of Missouri, MissouriGoogle Scholar
  46. Trandis H (1989) The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts. Psychol Rev 96(3):506–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vainiunas P, Kaklauskas A (2005) Intelligent tutoring systems as created by VGTU. In: Proceedings of 5th AECEF symposium on civil engineering in the next decade (ASCEND): strategies for education, research, innovation and practice, Espoo, pp 143–148, 15–17 June 2005Google Scholar
  48. Wiggins SL, McCranie ML, Bailey P (1975) Assessment of voice stress in children. J Nerv Ment Disord 160(6):402–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Xiao Y, Lucking R (2008) The impact of two types of peer assessment on students’ performance and satisfaction within a Wiki environment. Internet High Educ 11(3–4):186–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zavadskas EK, Kaklauskas A (2000) Efficiency increase in research and studies while applying up-to-date information technologies. J Civ Eng Manage 6(6):397–414Google Scholar
  51. Zavadskas EK, Kaklauskas A, Vainiunas P, Gikys M (2000) Property management in postgraduate Internet studies in Vilnius Gediminas Technical University. In: 4th Baltic region seminar on engineering education, Copenhagen. Monash Engineering Education Series, pp 83–86, 1–3 Sept 2000Google Scholar
  52. Zavadskas EK, Kaklauskas A, Vlasenko A (2008) Web-based voice stress analyser decision support system for e-examination. In: 8th International conference on fuzzy logic and intelligent technologies in nuclear science (FLINS), Madrid. World scientific proceedings series on computer engineering and information science, pp 1153–1158, 2–24 Sept 2008Google Scholar
  53. Zimmerman B, Kitsantas A (2007) Reliability and validity of self-efficacy for learning form (SELF) scores of college students. Zeitschrift für Psychologie 215(3):157–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vilnius Gediminas Technical UniversityVilniusLithuania

Personalised recommendations