Search and Filter

Repository Feedback

Your feedback helps us improve the repository's content relevance and usability. Please share your thoughts to help us better serve researchers and practitioners.

Submit feedback

Submit a research study

Contribute to the repository:

Add a paper

Enhancing Procedural Writing Through Personalized Example Retrieval: A Case Study On Cooking Recipes

Date
Publisher
arXiv
Writing high-quality procedural texts is a challenging task for many learners. While example-based learning has shown promise as a feedback approach, a limitation arises when all learners receive the same content without considering their individual input or prior knowledge. Consequently, some learners struggle to grasp or relate to the feedback, finding it redundant and unhelpful. To address this issue, we present RELEX, an adaptive learning system designed to enhance procedural writing through personalized example-based learning. The core of our system is a multi-step example retrieval pipeline that selects a higher quality and contextually relevant example for each learner based on their unique input. We instantiate our system in the domain of cooking recipes. Specifically, we leverage a fine-tuned Large Language Model to predict the quality score of the learner's cooking recipe. Using this score, we retrieve recipes with higher quality from a vast database of over 180,000 recipes. Next, we apply BM25 to select the semantically most similar recipe in real-time. Finally, we use domain knowledge and regular expressions to enrich the selected example recipe with personalized instructional explanations. We evaluate RELEX in a 2 x 2 controlled study (personalized vs. non-personalized examples, reflective prompts vs. none) with 200 participants. Our results show that providing tailored examples contributes to better writing performance and user experience.
Study at a glance
  • Question: How do personalized examples and reflective prompts affect procedural writing performance, revision behavior, and user experience?
  • Setting and data: Online experiment via Prolific, 187 participants aged 18–30 with at least an undergraduate degree.
  • Method: Randomized controlled trial with a 2x2 factorial design plus a control group, mixed with qualitative surveys and keystroke analysis.
Why it matters

Writing high-quality procedural texts is challenging, and static examples often fail to consider individual input or skill levels. Providing tailored examples and feedback can prevent redundant instructions and improve learning.

Key findings
  • Participants receiving adaptive feedback improved their recipe writing quality and completeness significantly more than those without adaptive feedback.
  • Learners who received personalized examples reported significantly higher perceived usefulness, behavioral intention to use, attitudes toward use, and perceived learning gains.
  • Users receiving adaptive feedback spent more time revising and made significantly more revisions across tasks, whereas reflective prompts did not significantly improve performance.

Summary drafted with AI from the full paper and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.

Who is the user?
Who age?