Implicit HCI is about computers understanding the intentions and needs of the user and proactively triggering functions or adapting the interface to help users achieve their goals. In ubiquitous learning environments, this could mean that the software and hardware settings make relevant learning material available to students; activate proper learning environments, like collaborative authoring tools and/or chatting spaces; find most suitable peers for collaborative learning; etc., at the right time or place. In this research, we report on an experience in which we added implicit HCI to an existing application that supports ethics education called EthicApp. Successful methodologies supporting ethics education include students discussing real-life or simulated cases where ethical dilemmas are presented. It is important that students actively participate in the discussion in order to develop their key abilities for ethical discernment. EthicApp implements a methodology in which students read about a case that presents an ethical dilemma, report on their personal stance about it, and then discuss their opinions anonymously in a small group, and then with the whole class. We included an automatic mechanism of group formation in order to maximize discussion and active participation among the students. For this, we first compared two strategies of forming groups: one random and another maximizing the differences of individual students’ judgments about the presented case within each group. We found that the second strategy was the most appropriate to encourage participation. As a result, EthicApp was modified in order to implicitly generate groups with diverging ethical judgments.

隐式HCI是关于计算机了解用户的意图和需求，并主动触发功能或调整界面以帮助用户实现其目标。在无所不在的学习环境中，这可能意味着软件和硬件设置使相关的学习材料可供学生使用；激活适当的学习环境，例如协作创作工具和/或聊天空间；寻找最合适的同伴进行协作学习；等在正确的时间或地点。在这项研究中，我们报告了一种经验，在该经验中，我们向支持道德教育的现有应用程序EthicApp添加了隐式HCI。支持道德教育的成功方法包括让学生讨论存在道德困境的现实生活或模拟案例。重要的是，学生要积极参与讨论，以发展其在道德识别方面的关键能力。EthicApp实施一种方法，在该方法中，学生阅读一个存在道德困境的案例，报告其个人立场，然后以小组形式与全班同学匿名讨论其观点。我们加入了自动组队机制，以最大程度地促进学生之间的讨论和积极参与。为此，我们首先比较了两种形成小组的策略：一种是随机的，另一种是最大化每个小组中每个学生对所陈述案件的判断差异。我们发现第二种策略最适合鼓励参与。结果是，