## 4 Results
### Stress Scales Data Analysis  
As shown in Table 3 and Figure 5, the results indicate that the mean scores of the STAI, STAI-C, and STAI-P scales decreased to varying degrees, with these changes being statistically significant. This suggests that the overall reduction in stress levels is not attributable to random fluctuations. The findings demonstrate that the encouragement prompt system alleviates children's stress with parental involvement while also improving parents' awareness of their children's stress and slightly reducing parents' own stress levels.  
As shown in Figure 6, combined with physiological RMSSD data, we preliminarily infer that learning-related stress manifests not only on a physiological level but also on a psychological level. Although the system showed limited effects on reducing physiological stress, it had a more pronounced impact on alleviating psychological stress. In Stage 2, the standard deviations of most scale scores slightly decreased, which may indicate a consistent intervention effect. Additionally, the intervention might have reduced individual differences and score fluctuations caused by randomness, leading to more stable responses to stress across participants. Combined with individual data analysis, we observed that the intervention was particularly effective for high-stress groups, as evidenced by larger reductions in post-test scale scores, contributing to the decrease in standard deviation. However, changes were not significant for some individuals, suggesting variability in the intervention's effectiveness across different participants.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l l l} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}{*}{**Stress Scale**}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Mean Score (M \(\pm\) SD)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Distribution**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**t**} & \multirow{2}{*}{_p_} \\  & & **(Stage 1** & & & **Stage 2**) & & & \\ \hline STAI & S & 35.06 \(\pm\) 8.63 & 33.67 \(\pm\) 8.05 & 35.06 \(\pm\) 8.63 & 33.67 \(\pm\) 8.05 & 1.4675 & 0.151 \\ STAI & T & 40.5 \(\pm\) 10.31 & 38.75 \(\pm\) 11.15 & 40.5 \(\pm\) 10.31 & 38.75 \(\pm\) 11.15 & 2.9389 & 0.006 ** \\ STAI & TOTAL & 75.56 \(\pm\) 17.31 & 72.42 \(\pm\) 16.75 & 75.56 \(\pm\) 17.31 & 72.42 \(\pm\) 16.75 & 2.6926 & 0.010 ** \\ \hline STAI-C & S & 33.53 \(\pm\) 7.06 & 31.64 \(\pm\) 6.8 & 33.53 \(\pm\) 7.06 & 31.64 \(\pm\) 6.8 & 2.4425 & 0.020 * \\ STAI-C & T & 34.17 \(\pm\) 8.91 & 32.81 \(\pm\) 8.32 & 34.17 \(\pm\) 8.91 & 32.81 \(\pm\) 8.32 & 2.5596 & 0.015 * \\ STAI-C & TOTAL & 67.69 \(\pm\) 12.48 & 64.44 \(\pm\) 12.02 & 67.69 \(\pm\) 12.48 & 64.44 \(\pm\) 12.02 & 2.9183 & 0.006 ** \\ \hline STAI-P & & 37.08 \(\pm\) 9.41 & 34.58 \(\pm\) 9.87 & 37.08 \(\pm\) 9.41 & 34.58 \(\pm\) 9.87 & 2.6599 & 0.012 * \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Statistical metrics on participants’ scores of stress scales, where \(p\)-values are reported. A total of 36 children filled in STAI-C forms, and 36 parents filled in STAI and STAI-P forms.  
Figure 5 presents the changes in the three stress scales across the two stages. The mean and median values for each category showed varying degrees of decline in Stage 2. For instance, the mean STAI-C S score decreased from 33.53 to 31.64, the mean STAI-C T score decreased from 34.17 to 32.81, and the mean total STAI-C score decreased from 67.69 to 64.44. All changes were subjected to t-tests, with statistically significant differences observed in all measures except for STAI-S. This indicates that the encouragement prompt system further contributed to reducing children's stress in learning contexts. Moreover, the system also had a positive effect on alleviating parents' stress. Some parents reported that the encouragement prompt system effectively helped reduce their feelings of helplessness when addressing their children's stress.  
Figure 5: Box plot illustrates stress scales at Stage 1 (before) and Stage 2 (after).  
Figure 6: Box plot illustrates the HRV distribution, central tendency, and dispersion.