future internet

Review
Scientific Development of Educational Artificial
Intelligence in Web of Science
Antonio-José Moreno-Guerrero 1 , Jesús López-Belmonte 1, * , José-Antonio Marín-Marín 1
and Rebeca Soler-Costa 2
1 Department of Didactics and School Organization, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain;
[email protected] (A.-J.M.-G.); [email protected] (J.-A.M.-M.)
2 Department of Educational Sciences, University of Zaragoza, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]




Received: 9 July 2020; Accepted: 21 July 2020; Published: 24 July 2020


Abstract: The social and technological changes that society is undergoing in this century are having a
global influence on important aspects such as the economy, health and education. An example of
this is the inclusion of artificial intelligence in the teaching–learning processes. The objective of this
study was to analyze the importance and the projection that artificial intelligence has acquired in
the scientific literature in the Web of Science categories related to the field of education. For this,
scientific mapping of the reported documents was carried out. Different bibliometric indicators were
analyzed and a word analysis was carried out. We worked with an analysis unit of 379 publications.
The results show that scientific production is irregular from its beginnings in 1956 to the present.
The language of greatest development is English. The most significant publication area is Education
Educational Research, with conference papers as document types. The underlying organization is
the Open University UK. It can be concluded that there is an evolution in artificial intelligence (AI)
research in the educational field, focusing in the last years on the performance and influence of AI in
the educational processes.

Keywords: artificial intelligence; bibliometric analysis; documentary analysis; scientific mapping;

web of science

1. Introduction
The social and technological changes that the society of this century is experiencing are influencing
globally important aspects such as the economy, health or education [1]. There is no doubt that the
development of this society is promoted, in large part, by technological advances and their practical
implications in society. In this sense, the challenges that education systems are currently facing require
constant adaptations and reforms to offer a balanced and adjusted response that responds to the real
needs of citizens [2]. For these reasons, the relationship between education and technology is becoming
stronger and more intense, with a growing market that reaches up to 8 trillion dollars by 2020 [3].
Different technologies can offer tools and instruments that collaborate and facilitate the adaptation of
teaching–learning processes to the real needs of students [4]. Among these technologies we can find
virtual and augmented reality; cloud computing; and digital media, such as images, video or audio [5].
One of them is artificial intelligence (AI). This can be defined as the combination of algorithms
determined with the intention of generating machines that have the same capabilities as people [6].
Taking into account what has been indicated by various authors, we can find four types of artificial
intelligence, among which are (a) recreational machines, which are purely reactive, without the capacity
to form memories or to use their experiences to make decisions [7]; (b) limited memory, which can look
at the past, allowing the analysis of data developed with anteriority [8]; (c) theory of mind, in which

Future Internet 2020, 12, 124; doi:10.3390/fi12080124 www.mdpi.com/journal/futureinternet

Future Internet 2020, 12, 124 2 of 17

machines are able to form not only representations of physical reality, but also of the reality of people [9];
and (d) self-awareness, this last stage of AI allows machines to be conscious and; therefore, able to
predict the emotions of others [10]. In addition, the relationship between the 5G network and artificial
intelligence must be borne in mind. On the one hand, the 5G network makes it possible to have a large
amount of data stored in the cloud. On the other hand, AI makes it possible to establish a more stable
network connection for citizens and companies [11].
Faced with this technological panorama, artificial intelligence (AI) applied to education opens
up in a powerful way [12]. Although its beginnings can be established around the 1970s [13],
the most current definition [14] (p. 2) conceives it as “computing systems that are able to engage in
human-line processes such as learning, adapting, synthesizing, self-correction and the use of data for
complex processing tasks”. From this perspective, AI applied to education can be understood as an
interdisciplinary research area involving the methods and results of the learning sciences, such as
Education, Neuroscience, Psychology, Linguistics, Sociology and Anthropology. This interdisciplinary
action aims to develop inclusive, adaptable, personal, flexible and effective learning environments that
complement and optimize traditional education and training [15].
The most recent literature in the educational field [16–21] clearly identifies the key issue of the
training process in which AI offers a more important contribution. In this review, evaluation is the training
process par excellence where the impact of AI is promoting more changes. Among the implementations
that it enables, AI are intelligent tutoring systems [22]; games and simulations that capture and interpret
incremental movements on the fly [23]; exploration of texts on students’ writing or natural language
for possible semantic analysis [24,25]; recording and analysis of the flow of clicks that predict student
success [26]; and peer reviews via computer [27]. From this perspective, AI provides added value to
training platforms, allowing the creation of a personalized teaching–learning environment through the
recognition and comparison of patterns, decision-making and the most opportune choice at all times,
the execution and sequential control of tasks and activities, as well as planning and problem solving
according to the data collected from the interaction with the student on the platform [28]. From this new
training paradigm, the role of the teacher continues to be essential [16] for the preparation of the classes and
the maintenance of the course content. These will be adjusted or modified based on the data collected on
the platform due to its interaction with the content and the students. It will also allow the teacher to more
closely and realistically monitor the student’s progress by having all the data updated in real-time. As can
be seen, human thought and action are still needed in the educational practice of ontologies that define
the world of systematized knowledge and give meaning to its means of representation. This remains the
role of the teachers and the work of the students.
In relation to the educational stages where AI is most impacting education, studies show that training
in higher education is, by far, where it is being implemented the most [4,29–32], for example, in areas as
representative as medicine [33,34], engineering, mathematics, economics [35], languages [36] and online
supervised machine learning courses [37]. As can be seen, the penetration of AI in more humanistic
areas, such as the arts or letters, is scarce because this technology is still weak in mental abilities such as
creativity, innovation, critical thinking, problem solving, socialization, leadership, empathy, collaboration
and communication [38]. For these authors, arts and humanities majors may experience increased
enrollment and become more popular with students, as these areas are less susceptible to the “invasion of
AI”. In contrast to this idea, we find the areas of science and engineering are where their enrollments can
be drastically reduced, as these works are replaced by robots supported by AI.
As can be seen, the implications of AI for education have their benefits and pose a series of short-
and long-term challenges. Among the benefits is the support and help to the teachers to adapt the classes
according to the profile of the students, and the interests of the students can be stimulated by exposing
them to various contents and tasks according to the answers they are providing. In addition, AI can
help teachers with homework by proposing more personalized activities based on the correct response
rate and the mistakes they are making. On the other hand, the same intelligent system can alert the
teacher to a question or proposed tasks that are wrongly answered by a large number of students [18].
Future Internet 2020, 12, 124 3 of 17

This allows the teacher to rectify and modulate the contents and the proposed tasks. Another benefit
of implementing AI in the training of students is that they can benefit from supplementary tutoring
by virtual assistants supported by AI [39]. Another potential benefit of AI is the ability to provide
feedback to teachers and students on the success of the course by tracking and monitoring student
progress and thus notifying teachers of any problems with student performance [40]. In this sense,
learning based on trial and error is not as discouraging as in other learning models, since AI itself
learns frequently through the trial and error method and; therefore, is considered a system optimal for
learning as it provides students with a fairly judgment-free learning environment. Moreover, AI tutors
themselves can suggest solutions for improving student performance [41].
On the other hand, [12] poses a series of challenges in incorporating AI into education. The first
has to do with the costs of implementing AI in the educational system. The initial outlay for software
acquisition and cloud support is very costly, in addition to ongoing employee training and training of
the AI system itself. The second is related to the clash of cultures in organizations. Any change can be
understood as suspicious given that there are several technological options and it is difficult to decide
which are the possible options and the most appropriate route of application. Computer machines
are nothing more than cognitive prostheses that allow collaborative relationships to be established
between humans and their calculation tools. Another challenge that AI poses has to do with the
ethical component of using large amounts of data from people. The use made of them, such as their
handling, remains in the air while the viability of this technology is discussed within traditional
pedagogies [42,43].

2. Justification and Objectives

In this research, the concept of AI is analyzed from a bibliometric perspective of the documents
indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) database. In this case, the novelty of this study focuses on
presenting a documentary analysis to the scientific community using an innovative technique such as
scientific mapping. Likewise, a dynamic and structural evolution of the selected construct is carried
out. To carry out a relevant analytical process, other reported studies from the impact databases that
have used this same analytical technique have been taken as a model [44,45].
The basis of this study focuses on analyzing the importance and projection that AI has acquired in
the WoS scientific literature. As far as our knowledge reaches, no study has been found on the topic
addressed that has carried out a scientific mapping of the term in question. Therefore, it was decided
to carry out this work of an exploratory nature in order to offer new results in this field of knowledge,
reduce the gap produced in the literature on this art and provide the results presented here as a starting
point for other researchers interested in AI. Therefore, this research focuses on the following objectives:
• To know the performance of scientific production indexed in WoS on “AI”;
• To concrete the scientific evolution on “AI” in WoS;
• To discover the most decisive issues about “AI” in WoS;
• To determine the most incident authors on “AI” in Wos.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Design

To achieve the defined objectives, bibliometrics was used as the most appropriate research
methodology for this type of study. Bibliometry has great potential to search, record, analyze and
predict scientific literature on a given question [46]. In order to effectively deploy this methodology and
its different actions, the considerations of the experts in this field of study were taken into account [47].
At a higher level of methodological concretion, this research focused on an analysis of co-words [48]
and of certain bibliometric indicators, such as the h, g, hg and q2 indices, proposed by different experts
to complement this type of studies [49,50]. The research deployment allowed for generating maps
with nodes to specify the performance and locate the terminology subdomains concerning AI [51].
[48] and of certain bibliometric indicators, such as the h, g, hg and q2 indices, proposed by different
experts to complement this type of studies [49,50]. The research deployment allowed for generating
maps with nodes to specify the performance and locate the terminology subdomains concerning AI
[51]. Additionally, the implementation of these analytical actions allowed a thematic development of
theFuture
concept
Internetin WoS
2020, [52].
12, 124 4 of 17

3.2. Procedure and Data Analysis

Additionally, the implementation of these analytical actions allowed a thematic development of the
The research
concept was planned in different processes in order to carry out an adequate study, thus
in WoS [52].
reducing the possibility of finding biases derived from poor performance. The moments in which
3.2. Procedure and Data Analysis
this study was structured are the following:
The research was planned in different processes in order to carry out an adequate study, thus reducing
1. theTo choose of
possibility the database
finding biasesfor documentary
derived from poor analysis (WoS);
performance. The moments in which this study was
2. structured
To select keywords (AI);
are the following:
3. To construct the search equation (“AI” [TITTLE] in the categories of “Education Educational
1. To choose the database for documentary analysis (WoS);
2.
Research”, “Education Scientific Disciplines”, “Education Special” and “Psychology
To select keywords (AI);
3. Educational”);
To construct the search equation (“AI” [TITTLE] in the categories of “Education Educational
4. ToResearch”,
perform “Education
the searchScientific
action Disciplines”,
in the title,“Education
abstract Special”
and keywords metadata
and “Psychology of the documents
Educational”);
4. registered
To performin WoS.
the search action in the title, abstract and keywords metadata of the documents
registered in WoS.
All of these performances produced a total of 411 publications. To refine the search process,
Allcriteria
different of thesewere
performances produced
established. a total of 411
The following publications.
were taken intoTo refine the
account as search process,
exclusion criteria: The
different criteria were established. The following were taken into account as exclusion
documents published in the year 2020 (for not having finished the year); repeated or poorly indexed criteria:
The documents
documents in WoS.published
Inclusionin the year 2020
criteria (for not
that were having finished
delimited: Year ofthe year); repeated
publication or poorly except
(all production
indexed documents in WoS. Inclusion criteria that were delimited: Year of publication (all production
2020); language (x ≥ 5); publication area (x ≥ 15); type of documents (x ≥ 15); organizations (x ≥ 4);
except 2020); language (x ≥ 5); publication area (x ≥ 15); type of documents (x ≥ 15); organizations
authors (x ≥ 3); sources of origin (x ≥ 9); countries (x ≥ 20); the four most cited documents (x ≥ 17).
(x ≥ 4); authors (x ≥ 3); sources of origin (x ≥ 9); countries (x ≥ 20); the four most cited documents
These
(x ≥ criteria
17). Theseproduced a final analysis
criteria produced unit of
a final analysis 379ofpublications
unit to analyze.
379 publications to analyze.
The
Theentire
entireprocedure
procedure waswasreflected
reflected in in
thethe following
following flow flow diagram
diagram based
based on on the protocols
the protocols of the of the
PRISMA-P
PRISMA-P(Preferred
(Preferred Reporting Itemsfor
Reporting Items for Systematic
Systematic Reviews
Reviews and and Meta-Analyses)
Meta-Analyses) matrixmatrix
(Figure(Figure
1). 1).

Figure 1. Flowchart according to the PRISMA Declaration.

Figure 1. Flowchart according to the PRISMA Declaration.
The analysis of the documents recovered from WoS was carried out using three tools [53].
Firstly, Analyze Results and Creation Citation Report were used to report and analyze the data
Future Internet 2020, 12, 124 5 of 17

referring to the year, authorship, country, type of document, institution, language, medium and most
cited documents. Subsequently, the Science Mapping Analysis Tool (SciMAT) was used to study the
structural and dynamic development of publications on AI at the longitudinal level. For the correct
use of this last software, the guidelines of the specialists were followed [54]. With SciMAT, different
actions were carried out to carry out the analysis of co-words [55,56]:

• Recognition: In this process, the keywords of the reported WoS documents were analyzed (n = 728).
Then, the design of the co-occurrence node maps was made. Next, a standardized network of
co-words was generated and the most significant keywords were found (n = 698). Finally, the most
common topics and terms were defined with a clustering algorithm.
• Reproduction: In this process, different thematic networks and strategic diagrams were prepared,
articulated in four areas (upper right = motor and relevant themes; upper left = rooted and
isolated themes; lower left = disappearing or projected themes; lower right = themes of poor
development and transversal). All this was derived from the principles of centrality and density.
• Determination: The reported results allowed for knowing the year in which the first works on
AI (1956) were published. Based on the collected literature, an analytical range was established
that covers from 1956 to 2019. This range was articulated from different time periods to study
the literature. This allowed us to analyze the projection of the nodes in different time sections.
Specifically, 3 periods were established (P1 = 1956–2006; P2 = 2007–2016; P3 = 2017–2019).
These intervals were configured taking into account a similar volume of documents as the main
criterion. However, for the analysis of authorship, only one period was configured that covers
all the studied temporality of the term in question (PX = 1956–2019). To determine the strength
of association between the intervals, the number of keywords in common between the different
configured periods was taken into account.
• Performance: This last process involved the application of certain production indicators along
with their corresponding inclusion criteria (Table 1).

Table 1. Production indicators and inclusion criteria [44].

Configuration Values
Analysis unit Keywords authors, keywords WoS
Keywords: P1 = (1), P2 = (2), P3 = (2)
Frequency threshold
Authors: PX = (2)
Network type Co-occurrence
Keywords: P1 = (1), P2 = (1), P3 = (1)
Co-occurrence union value threshold
Authors: PX = (2)
Normalization measure Equivalence index
Clustering algorithm Maximum size: 9; Minimum size: 3
Evolutionary measure Jaccard index
Overlapping measure Inclusion Rate

4. Results

4.1. Scientific Performance and Production

Scientific production on AI in the educational field reports a total of 379 documents in the WoS
database. Its beginnings date back to 1956. From that year until today the production has been irregular.
From 1956 to 2017 the volume of production was very low. Only in the years 2018 and 2019 did this
subject of study arouse the interest of the scientific community (Figure 2).
Future Internet 2020, 12, 124 6 of 17
Future Internet 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 18

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
1956
1960
1968
1970
1973
1975
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
2015
2017
2019
AI

Figure 2. Evolution
Figure 2. of scientific
Evolution of scientific production.
production.

The language used by the scientific community to show the results on the use of AI in the
The language used by the scientific community to show the results on the use of AI in the
educational field is English. The rest of the languages are far apart (Table 2).
educational field is English. The rest of the languages are far apart (Table 2).
Table 2. Language of AI publications.
Table 2. Language of AI publications.
Languages
Languages nn
English
English 359
359
Russian
Russian 14
14
Spanish 6
Spanish 6

The
Thepublication
publicationarea where
area studies
where in thisinfield
studies thisoffield
research are collected
of research are iscollected
Education is Educational
Education
Educational
Research. Research.
It is It isalthough
followed, followed,atalthough at a considerable
a considerable distance,
distance, by byofthe
the area area of Education
Education Scientific
Scientific Disciplines
Disciplines (Table 3). (Table 3).

Table 3.
Table 3. AI publication areas.

Areas
Areas nn
Education Educational Research
Education Educational Research 288
288
Education Scientific Disciplines
Education Scientific Disciplines 96
96
Computer
Computer Science Interdisciplinary
Science Interdisciplinary Applications
Applications 60
60
Psychology
PsychologyEducational
Educational 31
31
Engineering Electrical
Engineering ElectricalElectronic
Electronic 27
27
Computer Science AI 19
Computer Science AI 19

The
The document
document types
types preferred
preferred by by the
the scientific community
community to to show
show their
their findings
findings are
are the
the
proceedings
proceedingspaper,
paper,although
althoughititisisclosely
closelyfollowed
followedbybythe
the research
research articles
articles (Table
(Table 4).
4).
The
Thereference
referenceinstitution
institution for
for studies
studies on AI in the educational
educational field
field isisthe
theOpen
OpenUniversity
UniversityUK.
UK.
The
Therest
restofofthe
theinstitutions
institutions are
are not
not far
far away,
away, and
and there
there are a large number
number of of institutions
institutions that
thatare
are
interestedininthis
interested thisline
lineof
ofresearch
research(Table
(Table5).5).
Future Internet 2020, 12, 124 7 of 17

Table 4. AI document types.

Document Types n
Proceedings Paper 144
Article 120
Book Review 80
Editorial Material 31
Book Chapter 17

Table 5. AI organizations.

Organizations n
Open University UK 10
Indiana University System 6
Indiana University South Bend 4
National Centre of Scientific Research 4
State University System of Florida 4
Universidades Federeal de Santa Cantarina UFSC 4
University of Edinburgh 4
University of Malta 4

The author with the highest production volume is Blandford, A.E. He is followed by a group of
researchers with very close production levels (Table 6).

Table 6. Most prolific AI authors.

Authors n
Blandford, A.E. 4
Bondarovskaya, V.M. 3
Cumming, G. 3
Drigas, A.S. 3
Mamychev, A.Y. 3
Moye, J.N. 3
Oprea, M. 3
Silapachote, P. 3
Srisiphab, A. 3
Wolfer, J. 3

One of the most widely published journals in this field of study is Voprosy Psikhologil. It is
followed by the journal Computers and Education (Table 7).

Table 7. AI Source of origin.

Sources n
Voprosy Psikhologil 14
Computers and Education 10
E-learning and software for Education 9
Proceedings of the International Conference on Virtual Learning 9

The country of reference in studies on AI in education is the United States. It is followed by China,
but at a very considerable distance (Table 8).
The most more cited document on AI in education is Devedzik’s (2004), with a total of 26 citations.
It is closely followed by the work of Parton (2006), with a total of 24. It stands out that the volume of
quotes is truly low in this field of study, which shows that, to date, this line of research has yet to be
exploited (Table 9).
Future Internet 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 18

Table 8. Countries of AI documents.

Future Internet 2020, 12, 124

Countries n 8 of 17
USA 90
China 36
Table 8. Countries of AI documents.
England 31
Romania n23
Countries
USA 90
Table 9.China
Most cited36articles.
England 31
References
Romania 23 Citations
Devedzik, V. Web Intelligence and artificial intelligence in Education. Educational
Table 9. Most cited7,
articles. 26
Technology and Society 2004, 29–39.
Parton, B.S. Sign language recognition and translation: A multidisciplined approach
References Citations
from the field of artificial intelligence. Journal of Deaf Studies and deaf
Devedzik, V. Web Intelligence and artificial intelligence in Education. EducationalEducation 2006, 11, 24
26
94–101. doi:10.1093/deafed/enj003.
Technology and Society 2004, 7, 29–39.
Nagy, J.; Burch,
Parton, B.S. SignT.language
Communities of and
recognition Practice in Academe
translation: (CoP-iA):
A multidisciplined understanding
approach from
Journal of Deaf Studies and deaf Education
academic work practices to enable knowledge building capacities in corporate 24
the field of artificial intelligence. 2006, 11, 94–101,
doi:10.1093/deafed/enj003. 23
universities. Oxford Review of Education 2009, 35, 227–247.
Nagy, J.; Burch, T. Communities of Practice in Academe (CoP-iA): understanding academic
work practices to enable doi:10.1080/03054980902792888.
knowledge building capacities in corporate universities. 23
Wartman, S.A.; Combs,
Oxford Review ofC.D. Medical
Education 2009, Education Must Move From the Information Age
35, 227–247, doi:10.1080/03054980902792888.
to the Age
Wartman, of Combs,
S.A.; ArtificialC.D.Intelligence.
Medical Education Academic Medicine
Must Move 2018,
from the 93, 1107–1109.
Information Age to 17
the Age of Artificial Intelligence. Academic
doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000002044. Medicine 2018, 93, 1107–1109, 17
doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000002044.

4.2. Structural and Thematic Development

4.2. Structural and Thematic Development
TheThetemporal development of keywords in this field of study provides information on the level
temporal development of keywords in this field of study provides information on the level
of coincidence
of coincidence of of
keywords
keywordsbetween
between contiguous temporalperiods.
contiguous temporal periods. It also
It also shows
shows the keywords
the keywords that that
are part of aofspecific
are part a specifictime
timeinterval,
interval,those
those that leaveaaperiod
that leave period andand those
those thatthat
are are
addedadded
to it.to
Asit.can
Asbecan be
seenseen
in Figure
in Figure3, 3,
thethelevel
levelofofcoincidence
coincidence is is relatively
relativelylow.low.Especially
Especially between
between the the second
second and third
and third
period. ThisThis
period. indicates
indicates that
thatthere
thereisisno
no established
established linelineofofstudy
study onon
thisthis subject.
subject. Another
Another noteworthy
noteworthy
aspect
aspect is the
is the number
number ofofkey
keywords
words from
from the
the first
firstperiod.
period.Although
Although it covers a relatively
it covers widewide
a relatively time time
spectrum, from 1956 to 2006, the number of keywords is very low. This
spectrum, from 1956 to 2006, the number of keywords is very low. This shows that the results shows that the results of theof the
first investigations were not shown in research articles, or in the documents
first investigations were not shown in research articles, or in the documents that presented the data that presented the data
there were no keywords that brought together the most relevant aspects of the study.
there were no keywords that brought together the most relevant aspects of the study.

Figure 3. Continuity of keywords between contiguous intervals.

Figure 3. Continuity of keywords between contiguous intervals.
The academic performance compiles the most relevant topics of each of the time intervals. In this
Thesaid
case, academic performance
relevance is shown bycompiles the most
means of various relevant indicators,
bibliometric topics of each
amongof which
the timethe hintervals.
index, In
this the
case, said relevance
g index, the hg index is and
shown byindex,
the q2 meansamongof various
others,bibliometric
stand out. Inindicators, among
the first period which the h
(1956–2006),
index, the
there g index,
is not the that
one theme hg index
stands and the the
out from q2 rest,
index,
dueamong others, stand
to the relatively out. In the
low bibliometric first period
indicators.
(1956–2006), there is not one theme
Only the “artificial-intelligence” theme that
standsstands out into
out, taking fromaccount
the rest,
the gdue
indextoandthetherelatively
hg index. low
In the second
bibliometric period (2007–2016),
indicators. the most relevant themestheme
Only the “artificial-intelligence” are “system”
standsandout,“artificial-intelligence”.
taking into account the g
index and the hg index. In the second period (2007–2016), the most relevantagain.
In the third period (2017–2019), something similar to the first period will happen themes In this
are case,
“system”
and “artificial-intelligence”. In the third period (2017–2019), something similar to the first period will
happen again. In this case, taking into account the hg and q2 indexes, the “artificial-intelligence”
Future Internet 2020, 12, 124 9 of 17

taking into account the hg and q2 indexes, the “artificial-intelligence” theme can be highlighted.
In other words, in all the periods the most relevant thing was the technology applied (Table 10).

Table 10. Thematic performance in AI.

Interval 1956–2006
Denomination Works Index h Index g Index hg Index q2 Citations
Expert-system 1 1 1 1 1 1
Artificial-intelligence 3 1 2 1.41 1.73 4
Intelligence-agent 1 1 1 1 3.87 15
E-learning 1 0 0 0 0 0
Pedagogical-agent 1 1 1 1 5.1 26
Image-processing 1 1 1 1 2.45 6
Basic-science 1 1 1 1 1 1
Intelligent-tutoring-system 1 1 1 1 1.73 3
Interval 2007–2016
Denomination Works Index h Index g Index hg Index q2 Citations
System 5 3 4 3.46 4.24 25
Artificial-intelligence 15 3 4 3.46 3.46 27
E-learning 4 1 1 1 1 1
Probability-distribution 2 2 2 2 5.48 19
Problem-solving 2 1 2 1.41 1.73 4
Interval 2017–2019
Denomination Works Index h Index g Index hg Index q2 Citations
Support 4 2 2 2 2 4
Technology 5 2 2 2 2.83 6
Performance 6 2 2 2 2.83 10
Artificial-intelligence 15 2 3 2.45 3.46 13
Management 2 0 0 0 0 0

The various strategic diagrams, distributed by time bands, show the most relevant issues for the
scientific community in each of these periods (Figure 4). The Callon index is used for this purpose.
This indicator shows the relationship between the thematic networks. Both the strength of the external
relationship (centrality) and the internal relationship (density).
It is possible to indicate that there is no theme, which is repeated as the driving theme, in the
three established time periods. In all of them, the themes vary. In the period 1956–2006, the motor
themes were “expert-system”, related to “psychology”, “therapy”, “ATMS”, “simulation”; “gaming”,
“computers”, “counselling” and “programming”; and “basic-science”, related to “nosological-models”;
“truth-maintenance-systems”, “causality” and “medical-ontologies”. At this time, studies on AI in the
educational field were oriented towards the systems used to apply AI, in addition to the educational
models used with this technology.
In the second period (2007–2016), the driving themes are “system”, related to “mathematics”,
“intervention”, “fuzzy”, “intelligent-tutoring-systems”, “neural-networks”, “robotics”, “diagnosis”
and “children”; and “probability-distribution”, related to “evaluation” and “concept-maps”. In this
time interval, the research is oriented to aspects more related to the educational field, with may be the
systems used for intervention and evaluation of pedagogical actions.
In the third period (2017–2019), only “performance” appears as the main theme, which is
related to “deep-learning”, “science”, “active-learning”; “simulation”, “education”; “assessment”,
“machine-learning” and “higher-education”. In this period the interest lies in the student’s performance,
focusing on the development of active learning. At this time, there is also a lack of unknowns, so it is
not possible to establish a forecast of possible future lines of research in this field of study.
Future Internet 2020, 12, 124 10 of 17
Future Internet 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 18

(a) (b)

(c)
Figure
Figure 4. Strategicdiagram
4. Strategic diagram by
byAIAI
index-h. Note: Note:
index-h. (a) Range
(a)1956–2006; (b) Range 2007–2016;
Range 1956–2006; (b) Range(c) Range
2007–2016;
2017–2019.
(c) Range 2017–2019.
4.3. Thematic
4.3. Thematic Evolution
Evolution of Terms
of Terms
The temporal evolution of the themes indicates the relationship and the strength of association
The temporal evolution of the themes indicates the relationship and the strength of association
between various themes of contiguous temporal periods. To show this relationship, Jaccard’s index
between various themes of contiguous temporal periods. To show this relationship, Jaccard’s index is
is taken into account. The relationship is generated if both themes share a certain number of key
takenwords
into account.
or themes.TheTherelationship is generated
more they share, if both
the stronger thethemes share
link. The a certain are
connections number of key by
represented words
a or
themes.
broken line, if the relationship is by keywords; or a continuous line, if the connection is by themes. line,
The more they share, the stronger the link. The connections are represented by a broken
if theThe
relationship
thickness is
ofbythekeywords; or a the
lines indicates continuous
strength of line,
theifassociation.
the connection is by themes.
The thicker the line,The
the thickness
greater of
the lines indicates the strength of the association. The thicker the line, the greater the relationship.
the relationship.
According
According to the
to the data data shownininFigure
shown Figure 5,
5, there
there isisaaconceptual
conceptual evolution
evolutionof the
of subject of study,
the subject of study,
focused mainly on the subject of “artificial-intelligence”. It can also be seen
focused mainly on the subject of “artificial-intelligence”. It can also be seen that there are verythat there are very few few
connections between the various themes, which marks the scarcity of key
connections between the various themes, which marks the scarcity of key words or coinciding themes words or coinciding
themes between the different lines of research. In other words, there is no relationship between the
between the different lines of research. In other words, there is no relationship between the researches
researches carried out. This is due to the lack of research in this field of study. Probably, according to
carried out. This is due to the lack of research in this field of study. Probably, according to the evolution
the evolution of production in the last two years, research on AI in education will begin to establish
of production in the last
more established and two years,lines
clearer research on AI in
of research. Theeducation will begin
only reading that canto establish more
be obtained established
from the
and clearer linesoffered
production of research.
so far The only
is the readingofthat
evolution can be
interest obtained
in this from
field of the production
study. offered
In the first years so far is
these
the evolution of interest in this field of study. In the first years these focused on technological resources.
In recent years it has focused on performance and the influence of AI on teaching–learning processes.
 Future Internet 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 18
Future Internet 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 18

Future Interneton
focused 2020, 12, 124
technological 11 of 17
resources. In recent years it has focused on performance and the influence
focused on technological resources. In recent years it has focused on performance and the influence
of AI on teaching–learning processes.
of AI on teaching–learning processes.

Figure5.5.Thematic
Figure Thematic evolution
evolution by
by h-index.
h-index.
Figure 5. Thematic evolution by h-index.
4.4.4.4.
Authors with
Authors thethe
with Highest
HighestRelevance
RelevanceIndex
Index
4.4. Authors with the Highest Relevance Index
Considering
Consideringthethe
authors,
authors,Midoro,
Midoro,V. V.stands
stands out
out as a relevant
relevantfigure
figureininthis
thisfield
fieldofof study
study and
and is is
Considering the authors, Midoro, V. stands out as a relevant figure in this field of study and is
considered thethe
considered driving
drivingforce (Figure
force (Figure6).6).
considered the driving force (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Strategic author diagram of the entire production.

Figure6.6.Strategic
Figure Strategicauthor
author diagram
diagram of
ofthe
theentire
entireproduction.
production.
Future Internet 2020, 12, 124 12 of 17

5. Discussion
The technological advances that are currently being generated, with the implications they have
for society, pose a great challenge in the educational field. New educational legislation and regulations
are constantly being created to try to respond to the new socio-labor demands [1,2]. There is no doubt
that educational technologies are a great resource, they are tools and instruments that facilitate the
development of didactic processes. In fact, virtual and augmented reality is, in itself, an inexhaustible
source of digital resources that can help all types of students, from normalized students to those with
specific needs for educational support [3]. It offers the possibility of using the cloud, as well as making
endless digital media available to students [4,5]. Obviously, teachers in the face of this virtual reality
need specific training so that these technological tools are properly introduced, offering students all
their potential.
However, not only does virtual reality makes its way daily in the field of education, but also
the so-called AI applied to education [12–14]. Although it constitutes an area of interdisciplinary
research that allows many possibilities, there is a symbiosis, for example, between linguistics and
neuroscience [26]. In other words, it is an extremely attractive field to be able to interrelate teaching
processes with new technologies from a highly innovative approach. In turn, this allows the creation
of inclusive learning environments, that is, flexible, adaptable, effective and personalized, depending
on the needs of the students [15].
Undoubtedly, as has been observed, the field in which AI provides the greatest advances is
evaluative [16,21,24]. Therefore, the possibilities offered by this technological resource are very beneficial,
since it provides added value compared to the traditional education system, allowing the customization
of teaching environments and their development to be similar [23,25,27]. Thus, the teaching role in this
new paradigm is key, from the initial didactic planning processes to the development of the contents
and their evaluation. However, it is true that these technologies are a support in the educational
process but can never be a substitute for the teaching role. They contribute to student learning and
offer many possibilities that allow a more personalized and personalized educational advancement for
each student. On the other hand, of all the stages offered by the educational system, the field of higher
education is the one that best seems to be adapting to these technologies and where the best results are
obtained [4,29–32,39–41]. Especially, in teacher training it is a highly attractive and useful resource because
it allows to relate content, develop concepts, establish relationships, correct tasks, tutoring processes
supported by virtual assistants, etc. [12,27,42,43]. Like all educational resources, AI requires good training
for its teaching staff, a high initial investment for the acquisition of software and support in the cloud and
ethical issues, as they have been exposed in a developed way in the state of the art.
Thus, in this investigation, a total of 379 documents dating from 1956 to the present day were
analyzed. Although it is observed that the evolution of production has been quite irregular, the language
of greatest development is English. The most significant publication area is Education Educational
Research, with conference papers as document types. The underlying organization is the Open
University UK and the author with the most production is Blandford, A.E. However, the author who
stands out as the most relevant is Midoro, V. The publication source is Voprosy Psikhologil and the
most productive country we found is the USA. To this must be added that the most cited work is that
of Devedzik (2004), with a total of 26 citations.
Note that, in relation to the evolution of keywords, the level of coincidence is substantially low, that is,
between the second and the third period almost no coincidence is observed. This is an indicator of the lack
of a consensual and accepted line of study on this topic. Therefore, this research contributes to making its
analysis and dissemination more attractive in the epistemological community of Education and Education
Sciences, more specifically. On the other hand, the number of keywords from the first period stands out.
The time limit is wide, ranging from 1956 to 2006, with which we are talking about a 50-year period in
which the number of keywords is quite low. For this reason, the results of the first investigations were not
included in scientific research articles or scientific documents, since there were not enough keywords that
Future Internet 2020, 12, 124 13 of 17

brought together the most notable aspects of the study. Thus, we found a significant and relevant fact that
shows, again, the need and relevance of this research in the field of education.
As for the thematic performance, the first period, between 1956 and 2006, is noteworthy, in which,
once again, within those 50 years, no theme is observed that stands out in relation to the rest. This is
due to how low the bibliometric indicators are. The “AI” theme only stands out if we consider
the g index and the hg index. However, the second period, between 2007 and 2016, is the one that
contains the most relevant topics, around the “system” and “artificial-intelligence”. Finally, the third
period, which ranges from 2017 to 2019, shows something similar to what happens in the first period.
Only if we take into account the hg and q2 indexes does the “artificial-intelligence” theme stands out.
This shows that in all the periods the most notable was the applied technology itself. For this reason,
AI allows many advantages in relation to other types of educational technology.
The strategic diagrams show that the first period (1956–2006) has major motor themes, such as,
for example, “expert-system”, related to “psychology”, “therapy”, “ATMS”, “simulation”; “Gaming”,
“computers”, “counseling” and “programming”; and “basic-science”, related to “nosological-models”;
“truth-maintenance-systems”, “causality” and “medical-ontologies”. This period also shows that
studies on AI in education were more focused on the systems used to apply AI, and that AI again offers
a much wider range of possibilities than traditional educational models.
On the other hand, the second period (2007–2016) is an indicator of the emergence
of new thematic engines, such as the “system”, related to “mathematics”, “intervention”,
“fuzzy”, “intelligent-tutoring-systems”, “neural-networks”, “robotics”, “diagnosis” and “children”;
and “probability-distribution”, related to “evaluation” and “concept-maps”. Thus, this second period
makes it possible to detect that the research and studies carried out are directed more towards aspects
of educational change, such as the systems used for intervention and the evaluation of pedagogical
actions. This shows a marked trend that is based on new denominative needs.
Finally, the third period (2017–2019) is characterized by having “performance”, related to
“deep-learning”, “science” and “active-learning”, as its basic theme; “simulation”, “education”;
“assessment”, “machine-learning” and “higher-education”. That is to say, the most significant thing
that we found in this period, and that closes these conclusions, is that the most notable denominative
and thematic interest focuses on student performance, in their interest in the development of active
and participatory learning. Although, there is a lack of unknowns, which means that a diachronic
study cannot be drawn up to advance possible lines of research.
Thus, the conceptual evolution of the theme of this study has been based on the “artificial-intelligence”
theme. The analysis of the data carried out allows us to affirm that the few connections that have been
found between the different topics show a shortage of keywords and a lack of topics related to the different
lines of research. For this reason, we affirm that there is no relationship between the researches that
has been carried out and hence the main incentive and innovative nature of this research. Note that
the evolution of production in the last two years shows that the future of AI in education will allow
establishing more consolidated lines, but as of today it is not.
We can really argue that the production of AI existing so far indicates the evolution of interest in
this scientific field under analysis. The first years have an investigation directed to the technological
resources, the last ones to the performance and influence of the AI in the didactic processes. This shows
a clear evolution on how the integration of AI in the teaching–learning processes is taking place and
what aspects educators should be concerned about. In turn, it sets the tone for future research. It can
be indicated that AI in the educational field is beginning to be based on pedagogical processes. That is
to say, the resources used are not being taken into account. Rather, the teaching and learning process
is being developed. This aspect occurs in other areas with the use of other types of technological
resources. It is not the fact of using a didactic resource, but rather the way and the process that is
followed during its use. For this reason, the methodology applied is also relevant as with the aims of
the task will condition the development of the activity and hence the students’ acquisition.
Future Internet 2020, 12, 124 14 of 17

6. Conclusions
This research focused on analyzing the concept of AI from a bibliometric approach based
on the analysis of documents indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) database. More specifically,
the differentiating aspect of this research resides in the intention of showing the epistemological
community of education a documentary analysis with scientific mapping, which constitutes the use
of an innovative technique. The dynamic and structural evolution allowed us to obtain interesting
results that show how the thematic performance develops in three time periods with their respective
diachronic evolutions. In turn, the nature of this research also allowed for showing a conceptual
evolution of the theme of this study, with a predominance of the “artificial-intelligence” theme.
The importance and projection of AI in the WoS scientific literature were analyzed with interesting
results that allow us to advance in the enunciation of conclusions that did not exist until now due
to lack of research in this thematic line. We were able to identify the performance of the scientific
production of AI in the field of education in WoS. This allowed us to understand the scientific evolution
of AI and discover the most abundant and recurring topics. The mapping allowed us to determine
which authors have the most incidents in AI. In fact, these four research objectives were successfully
developed, even allowing us to announce that the prospective of this research offers researchers new
lines of development around the most relevant topics analyzed. Even the state of the art itself collects
the key aspects that other investigations have assumed and the existing gaps, that is, it contributes to
the creation of a consolidated base to be able to initiate and develop studies.
Therefore, it can be concluded that AI in education has been studied for many years,
more specifically since 1956. However, it is in recent years that this field of study is acquiring
relevance, especially in aspects related to student performance. Above all in the application of active
teaching methods that allow the development of active and participatory learning in the student.
However, like any research, it has limitations. Specifically, we must refer to the purification of
the data presented in WoS, that is, there are repeated documents or even others that do not appear
or are not related to the subject of the study. On the other hand, the delimitation of the intervals is
questionable and can be improved, because, if we consider equity, there is not a similar number of
documents in each of the analyzed intervals. Finally, the use of the parameters was carried out based
on the criteria of the researchers of this study, based on an initial search in order to show results based
on the quantity and relevance of the study. Therefore, the data that we showed in this research should
be analyzed with caution, since, if the parameters of this research are changed, the quantity and the
connections could fluctuate in relation to the thematic lines that we have presented. Therefore, as a
line of future research, we propose the analysis of various pedagogical methods in the application
of AI in higher education. The application of AI in other educational stages can also be analyzed,
determining which pedagogical methods are more appropriate according to the age and educational
stage of the students.

7. Implications Derived from the Study

It is worth noting that the data collected in this research show a series of implications, applicable
to both theory and practice.

7.1. Theoretical Implications

The research carried out contributes to the development of the scientific literature related to AI in
the field of education, since it allows us to know the performance of the scientific production indexed
in WoS regarding the term “AI”. In addition, the type of study presented allows, in turn, to establish a
profile of the type of documents that can be presented, so that future lines of research are more focused.
In addition, this study allows us to discover the most decisive issues on AI in WoS and the authors
that have had the greatest impact, in addition to identifying the main lines of research of scientists in
Future Internet 2020, 12, 124 15 of 17

each of the established periods. Thus, it also contributes to delimiting the next trends that could be
developed in this field of research.

7.2. Practical Implications

The results of this research show how AI is introduced in the field of education. This offers new
technological resources and new ways of approaching teaching–learning processes. On the other hand,
the development of the evaluation processes constitutes the maximum novelty in terms of AI, since it
allows for making decisions and redirecting the didactic processes offering the student active learning.
However, using AI in higher education requires training of its teachers and appropriate educational
action. This educational technology requires an active and innovative teaching–learning method,
with related teaching methodologies. For this, it is necessary to consider how teacher training can be
improved and updated, what didactic methods are more related and what potential AI offers us.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.-A.M.-M., and R.S.-C.; methodology, J.L.-B.; software, A.-J.M.-G.;
validation, A.-J.M.-G.; formal analysis, A.-J.M.-G.; investigation, J.-A.M.-M., R.S.-C., A.-J.M.-G., and J.L.-B.; data
curation, A.-J.M.-G.; writing—original draft preparation, J.-A.M.-M., R.S.C., A.-J.M.-G., and J.L.-B.; writing—review
and editing, J.-A.M.-M., R.S.-C., A.-J.M.-G., and J.L.-B.; visualization, J.-A.M.-M., R.S.-C., A.-J.M.-G., and J.L.-B.;
supervision, J.-A.M.-M., R.S.-C., A.-J.M.-G., and J.L.-B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version
of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by I+D+i OTRI-Universidad de Granada CNT-4315. Metodologías activas
para el aprendizaje mediante recursos tecnológicos para el desarrollo de la sociedad.
Acknowledgments: We acknowledge the researchers of the research group AREA (HUM-672), which belongs to
the Ministry of Education and Science of the Junta de Andalucía and is registered in the Department of Didactics
and School Organization of the Faculty of Education Sciences of the University of Granada.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Goralski, M.A.; Tan, T.K. Artificial intelligence and sustainable development. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2020, 18,
100330. [CrossRef]
2. Knox, J. Artificial intelligence and education in China. Learn. Media Technol. 2020, 1–14. [CrossRef]
3. EdTechXGlobal. EdTechXGlobal Report 2016—Global EdTech Industry Report: A Map for the Future
of Education and Work 2016. Available online: http://ecosystem.edtechxeurope.com/2016-edtech-report
(accessed on 5 May 2020).
4. Xiao, M.; Yi, H. Building an efficient artificial intelligence model for personalized training in colleges and
universities. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2020, 1–9. [CrossRef]
5. Kalyani, D.; Rajasekaran, K. Innovative Teaching and Learning. J. Appl. Adv. Res. 2018, 3, 23–25. [CrossRef]
6. Brunelle, F.; Brunelle, P. Intelligence artificielle et imagerie médicale: Définition, état des lieux et perspectives.
Bull. Acad. Natl. Méd. 2019, 203, 683–687. [CrossRef]
7. Lobera, J.; Rodríguez, C.J.F.; Torres-Albero, C. Privacy, Values and Machines: Predicting Opposition to
Artificial Intelligence. Commun. Stud. 2020, 71, 1–18. [CrossRef]
8. Easton-Garrett, S.; Gephart, S.; Nickels, S. Utilizing artificial intelligence for falls management in memory
care. Geriatr. Nurs. 2020, 41, 194–195. [CrossRef]
9. Cominelli, L.; Mazzei, D.; De Rossi, D.E. SEAI: Social Emotional Artificial Intelligence Based on Damasio’s
Theory of Mind. Front. Robot. AI 2018, 5, 1–20. [CrossRef]
10. Mansour, N.; Rafeh, W.; Afram, G. The Role of Self-Awareness, Augmented Artificial Intelligence and
Enhanced Leadership Competencies in Developing Future Academic Physicians. Middle East J. Fam. Med.
2019, 17, 27–35. [CrossRef]
11. Guan, M.; Wu, Z.; Cui, Y.; Cao, X.; Wang, L.; Ye, J.; Peng, B. Efficiency Evaluations Based on Artificial
Intelligence for 5G Massive MIMO Communication Systems on High-Altitude Platform Stations. IEEE Trans.
Ind. Inform. 2020, 16, 6632–6640. [CrossRef]
12. Fahimirad, M. A Review on Application of Artificial Intelligence in Teaching and Learning in Educational
Contexts. Int. J. Learn. Dev. 2018, 8, 106–118. [CrossRef]
13. Self, J. The Birth of IJAIED. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 2015, 26, 4–12. [CrossRef]
Future Internet 2020, 12, 124 16 of 17

14. Popenici, S.; Kerr, S. Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher
education. Res. Pract. Technol. Enhanc. Learn. 2017, 12, 22. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15. Luckin, R.; Holmes, W.; Griffiths, M.; Forcier, L.B. Intelligence Unleashed: An Argument for AI in Education;
Pearson Education: London, UK, 2016.
16. Cope, B.; Kalantzis, M.; Searsmith, D. Artificial intelligence for education: Knowledge and its assessment in
AI-enabled learning ecologies. Educ. Philos. Theory 2020, 1–17. [CrossRef]
17. López-Núñez, J.A.; López-Belmonte, J.; Moreno-Guerrero, A.J.; Pozo-Sánchez, S. Effectiveness of
Innovate Educational Practices with Flipped Learning and Remote Sensing in Earth and Environmental
Sciences—An Exploratory Case Study. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 897. [CrossRef]
18. Cukurova, M.; Kent, C.; Luckin, R. Artificial intelligence and multimodal data in the service of human
decision-making: A case study in debate tutoring. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2019, 50, 3032–3046. [CrossRef]
19. Picciano, A. Artificial Intelligence and the Academy’s Loss of Purpose. Online Learn. 2019, 23, 270–284.
[CrossRef]
20. Holstein, K.; McLaren, B.M.; Aleven, V. Designing for Complementarity: Teacher and Student Needs for
Orchestration Support in AI-Enhanced Classrooms. Intell. Tutoring Syst. 2019, 157–171.
21. Luo, D. Guide Teaching System Based on Artificial Intelligence. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn. 2018, 13, 90–102.
[CrossRef]
22. VanLehn, K. The Relative Effectiveness of Human Tutoring, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, and Other Tutoring
Systems. Educ. Psychol. 2011, 46, 197–221. [CrossRef]
23. Shute, V.; Ventura, M. Stealth Assessment: Measuring and Supporting Learning in Video Games; MIT Press:
Cambridge, MA, USA, 2013.
24. Rosé, C.P.; Ferschke, O. Technology Support for Discussion Based Learning: From Computer Supported
Collaborative Learning to the Future of Massive Open Online Courses. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 2016, 26,
660–678. [CrossRef]
25. Zhai, C.; Massung, S. Text Data Management and Analysis: A Practical Introduction to Information Retrieval and
Text Mining; Association for Computing Machinery (ACM): New York, NY, USA, 2016.
26. Crossley, S.; Paquette, L.; Dascalu, M.; McNamara, D.S.; Baker, R.S. Combining click-stream data with NLP
tools to better understand MOOC completion. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on
Emerging Databases Technologies, Applications, and Theory—EDB ’16, Jeju Island, Korea, 17–19 October
2016; pp. 6–14.
27. Balfour, S.P. Assessing writing in Moocs: Automated essay scoring and calibrated peer review.
Res. Pract. Assess. 2013, 8, 40–48.
28. Saravanakumar, N.M. Implementation of artificial intelligence in imparting education and evaluating student
performance. J. Artif. Intell. Capsul. Netw. 2019, 1, 1–9. [CrossRef]
29. Chatterjee, S.; Bhattacharjee, K.K. Adoption of artificial intelligence in higher education: A quantitative
analysis using structural equation modelling. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2020, 1–21. [CrossRef]
30. Van Der Niet, A.; Bleakley, A. Where Medical Education Meets Artificial Intelligence: “Does Technology
Care?”. Med. Educ. 2020, 1–7. [CrossRef]
31. Hinojo-Lucena, F.-J.; Díaz, I.A.; Reche, M.P.C.; Romero-Rodríguez, J.-M. Artificial Intelligence in Higher
Education: A Bibliometric Study on its Impact in the Scientific Literature. Educ. Sci. 2019, 9, 51. [CrossRef]
32. Masters, K. Artificial intelligence in medical education. Med. Teach. 2019, 41, 976–980. [CrossRef]
33. Anagnostopoulou, P.; Alexandropoulou, V.; Lorentzou, G.; Lykothanasi, A.; Ntaountaki, P.; Drigas, A.
Artificial Intelligence in Autism Assessment. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn. 2020, 15, 95–107. [CrossRef]
34. Yang, Y.-Y.; Shulruf, B. An expert-led and artificial intelligence system-assisted tutoring course to improve
the confidence of Chinese medical interns in suturing and ligature skills: A prospective pilot study. J. Educ.
Eval. Health Prof. 2019, 16, 7. [CrossRef]
35. Pappas, M.; Drigas, A. Incorporation of Artificial Intelligence Tutoring Techniques in Mathematics. Int. J.
Eng. Pedagog. 2016, 6, 12. [CrossRef]
36. Li, X. The Construction of Intelligent English Teaching Model Based on Artificial Intelligence. Int. J. Emerg.
Technol. Learn. 2017, 12, 35–44. [CrossRef]
37. García, J.D.R.; Moreno-León, J.; Román-González, M.; Robles, G. LearningML: A Tool to Foster Computational
Thinking Skills through Practical Artificial Intelligence Projects. Rev. Educ. Distancia (RED) 2020, 20, 1–37.
[CrossRef]
Future Internet 2020, 12, 124 17 of 17

38. Siau, K.; Ma, Y. Artificial Intelligence Impacts on Higher Education 2018 Lecture. Available online: https:
//www.researchgate.net/publication/325934313_Artificial_Intelligence_Impacts_on_Higher_Education (accessed
on 23 July 2020).
39. Sullins, J.; Craig, S.D.; Hu, X. Exploring the effectiveness of a novel feedback mechanism within an intelligent
tutoring system. Int. J. Learn. Technol. 2015, 10, 220–236. [CrossRef]
40. Wang, Y.-Y.; Wang, Y.-S. Development and validation of an artificial intelligence anxiety scale: An initial
application in predicting motivated learning behavior. Interact. Learn. Environ. 2019, 1–16. [CrossRef]
41. Long, Y.; Aman, Z.; Aleven, V. Motivational Design in an Intelligent Tutoring System that Helps Students
Make Good Task Selection Decisions. Intell. Tutoring Syst. 2015, 9112, 226–236.
42. Kazimzade, G.; Patzer, Y.; Pinkwart, N. Artificial Intelligence in Education Meets Inclusive Educational
Technology—The Technical State-of-the-Art and Possible Directions. Perspect. Rethink. Reforming Educ. 2019,
61–73. [CrossRef]
43. Dremliuga, R.; Koshel, A. Artificial intelligence as a social regulator: Pros and cons. Revis. Dilemas Contemp.
Educ. Política Valores 2018, 3, 55–68. [CrossRef]
44. Belmonte, J.L.; Moreno-Guerrero, A.-J.; López-Núñez, J.-A.; Pozo-Sánchez, S. Analysis of the Productive,
Structural, and Dynamic Development of Augmented Reality in Higher Education Research on the Web of
Science. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 5306. [CrossRef]
45. Rodríguez-García, A.-M.; Belmonte, J.L.; Montoro, M.A.; Guerrero, A.J.M. Productive, Structural and
Dynamic Study of the Concept of Sustainability in the Educational Field. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5613.
[CrossRef]
46. Martínez, M.A.; Cobo, M.-J.; Fernandez, M.H.; Herrera, F. Analyzing the Scientific Evolution of Social Work
Using Science Mapping. Res. Soc. Work. Pract. 2014, 25, 257–277. [CrossRef]
47. Moral-Munoz, J.A.; Herrera-Viedma, E.; Santisteban-Espejo, A.; Cobo, M.-J. Software tools for conducting
bibliometric analysis in science: An up-to-date review. Prof. Inf. 2020, 29, 1–20. [CrossRef]
48. Hirsch, J.E. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2005,
102, 16569–16572. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
49. Cobo, M.J.; Herrera-Viedma, E.; Herrera, F.C.; López-Herrera, A. Science mapping software tools: Review,
analysis, and cooperative study among tools. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2011, 62, 1382–1402. [CrossRef]
50. Guerrero, A.J.M.; Gómez-García, G.; Belmonte, J.L.; Rodríguez-Jiménez, C. Internet Addiction in the Web of
Science Database: A Review of the Literature with Scientific Mapping. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020,
17, 2753. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
51. Belmonte, J.L.; Robles, A.S.; Guerrero, A.J.M.; Parra-González, M.E. Machine Learning and Big Data in the
Impact Literature. A Bibliometric Review with Scientific Mapping in Web of Science. Symmetry 2020, 12, 495.
[CrossRef]
52. López-Robles, J.-R.; Otegi-Olaso, J.; Gómez, I.P.; Cobo, M. 30 years of intelligence models in management
and business: A bibliometric review. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2019, 48, 22–38. [CrossRef]
53. Núñez, J.A.L.; López-Belmonte, J.; Moreno-Guerrero, A.-J.; Navas-Parejo, M.R.; Hinojo-Lucena, F.-J. Education
and Diet in the Scientific Literature: A Study of the Productive, Structural, and Dynamic Development in
Web of Science. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4838. [CrossRef]
54. Montero-Díaz, J.; Cobo, M.-J.; Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M.; Segado-Boj, F.; Herrera-Viedma, E. A science mapping
analysis of ‘Communication’ WoS subject category (1980–2013). Comunicar 2018, 26, 81–91. [CrossRef]
55. Segura-Robles, A.; Moreno-Guerrero, A.-J.; Parra-González, M.-E.; López-Belmonte, J. Review of Research
Trends in Learning and the Internet in Higher Education. Soc. Sci. 2020, 9, 101. [CrossRef]
56. Lopez-Belmonte, J.; Marin-Marin, J.-A.; Soler-Costa, R.; Moreno-Guerrero, A.-J. Arduino Advances in Web of
Science. A Scientific Mapping of Literary Production. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 128674–128682. [CrossRef]

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).