TABLE 1.

Descriptions and characteristics of studies investigating the relationship between INS and learning outcomes.

Studies	Sample size	Interaction style	Interaction mode	Interaction content	Assessment of learning outcomes	Effect size (r)
Dikker et al., 2017	12	FTF&NFTF	HTF&LTF	Conceptual knowledge	IQ	0.595
Pan et al., 2018	12	FTF	HTF	Song learning	post	0.636
Pan et al., 2018	12	FTF	LTF	Song learning	post	−0.200
Zheng et al., 2018	60	FTF&NFTF	HTF&LTF	Mathematical knowledge	post vs. pre	0.510
Cohen et al., 2018	18	/	/	Conceptual knowledge	post vs. pre	0.494
Liu et al., 2019	17	FTF	LTF	Mathematical knowledge	IQ	0.610
Liu et al., 2019	17	NFTF	LTF	Mathematical knowledge	IQ	−0.080
Liu et al., 2019	17	FTF	LTF	Mathematical knowledge	post	0.730
Liu et al., 2019	17	NFTF	LTF	Mathematical knowledge	post	−0.004
Nozawa et al., 2019	32	FTF	LTF	Conceptual knowledge	IQ	0.330
Bevilacqua et al., 2019	12	FTF&NFTF	LTF	Conceptual knowledge	IQ	0.382
Bevilacqua et al., 2019	12	FTF&NFTF	LTF	Conceptual knowledge	post	0.130
Davidesco et al., 2019	31	FTF	LTF	Conceptual knowledge	post	0.520
Zhu et al., 2019	16	/	/	/	IQ	0.622
Pan et al., 2020	24	FTF	HTF	Conceptual knowledge	post vs. pre	0.655
Pan et al., 2020	24	FTF	LTF	Conceptual knowledge	post vs. pre	−0.210
Nguyen et al., 2021	20	/	/	Conceptual knowledge	post vs. pre	0.673
Sun et al., 2020	34	/	/	/	/	0.650
Sun et al., 2020	34	/	/	/	/	0.580
Zheng et al., 2020	60	FTF&NFTF	HTF&LTF	Mathematical knowledge	IQ	0.310
Pan et al., 2021	16	FTF	HTF	Mathematical knowledge	post vs. pre	0.510
Meshulam et al., 2021	24	/	/	Conceptual knowledge	post vs. pre	0.270
Zhu et al., 2021	24	FTF	HTF	Conceptual knowledge	post vs. pre	0.570

FTF, face-to-face; NFTF, non-face-to-face; HTF, High turn-taking frequency; LTF, low turn-taking frequency; Post, post-testing scores; Post vs. Pre, comparison between post-testing and pre-testing scores; IQ, interaction quality evaluation scores.

“/” indicates the coding is not applicable for the sample.

Interaction style and mode for offline scanning studies were not coded.

In addition, the study of Sun et al. (2020) was only conducted in the overall effect size analysis because the experiment setting is different from others and the moderators are not applicable, but the effect size (r) reflects the relationship between INS and teacher-learner interaction outcome.