Jean-Louis Leysens
ABSTRACT
The growing prevalence of continuous media use among university students in lecture environments has potential for detrimental effects. In this study the focus is placed upon the implications of digital media multitasking in a university lecture context for academic performance and learning. Previous studies reveal that students frequently engage with digital media whilst in a university lecture. Moreover, research has shown that multitasking imposes a cognitive cost, detrimental to learning and task execution. We propose, accordingly, that the constant distractions created by digital media interrupt the thought and communication processes of students and, subsequently, obstruct their ability to learn. To test this proposition we conduct a survey-based empirical investigation of digital media use and academic performance among undergraduate university students. A clear negative correlation was shown between frequency of media use and academic performance. This result confirms the hypothesis that there exists a negative correlation between digital media use during lectures and academic performance. The confirmation of this negative relationship suggests that media use poses a significant distraction to students.
- F. Bannister and D. Remenyi. Multitasking: The Uncertain Impact of Technology on Knowledge Workers and Managers. The Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation, 12(1):1--12, 2009.Google Scholar
- F. Bardhi, A. J. Rohm, and F. Sultan. Tuning in and tuning out: media multitasking among young consumers. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 9(4):316--332, jul 2010.Google ScholarCross Ref
- N. Baron. Adjusting the volume: Technology and multitasking in discourse control. MIT Press, Cambridge, feb 2008.Google Scholar
- R. Benbunan-Fich, R. F. Adler, and T. Mavlanova. Measuring multitasking behavior with activity-based metrics. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 18(2):1--22, jun 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Bolter. Theory and practice in new media studies. MIT Press, Cambridge, 2003.Google Scholar
- R. N. Bolton, A. Parasuraman, A. Hoefnagels, N. Migchels, S. Kabadayi, T. Gruber, Y. Komarova Loureiro, and D. Solnet. Understanding Generation Y and their use of social media: a review and research agenda. Journal of Service Management, 24(3):245--267, jun 2013.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. E. Broadbent. Perception and communication. Pergamon Press, Madison, 1958.Google ScholarCross Ref
- L. Burak. Multitasking in the University Classroom Multitasking in the University Classroom. International Journal for the scholarship of teaching and learning, 6(2):8, 2012.Google Scholar
- N. Carr. The Shallows: How the internet is changing the way we think, read and remember. Atlantic Books Ltd, sep 2010.Google Scholar
- E. Dahlstrom, C. Brooks, S. Grajek, and J. Reeves. Ecar study of students and information technology, 2015. Technical report, ECAR, 2015.Google Scholar
- P. David, J.-H. Kim, J. S. Brickman, W. Ran, and C. M. Curtis. Mobile phone distraction while studying. New Media & Society, 17(10):1661--1679, apr 2014.Google ScholarCross Ref
- F. D. Davis. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3):319, sep 1989. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. E. Ericson. The Relationship Between Student Use of Socially Interactive Technology and Engagement and Involvement in the Undergraduate Experience. PhD thesis, Boston College, 2011.Google Scholar
- C. B. Fried. In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computers & Education, 50(3):906--914, apr 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. S. Gazzaniga, R. B. Ivry, and G. R. Mangun. Cognitive Neuroscience: The Biology of the Mind. Norton, 2009.Google Scholar
- E. B. Goldstein. Sensation and Perception. Cengage Learning, Wadsworth, 2009.Google Scholar
- E. Isaacs, A. Walendowski, S. Whittaker, D. J. Schiano, and C. Kamm. The character, functions, and styles of instant messaging in the workplace. pages 11--20. ACM, 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Jeong and M. Fishbein. Predictors of multitasking with media: Media factors and audience factors. Media Psychology, 10(3):364--384, 2007.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S.-H. Jeong and Y. Hwang. Does Multitasking Increase or Decrease Persuasion? Effects of Multitasking on Comprehension and Counterarguing. Journal of Communication, 62(4):571--587, aug 2012.Google ScholarCross Ref
- K. Johnston, M.-M. Chen, and M. Hauman. Use, Perception and Attitude of University Students Towards Facebook and Twitter. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 16(3):200--210, 2013.Google Scholar
- C. Jones and A. Hosein. Profiling university students' use of technology: where is the NET generation divide? The International Journal of Technology Knowledge and Society, 6(3):43--58, 2010.Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. Judd and G. Kennedy. Measurement and evidence of computer-based task switching and multitasking by 'Net Generation' students. Computers and Education, 56(3):625--631, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Junco. In-class multitasking and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6):2236--2243, nov 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Junco. Too much face and not enough books: The relationship between multiple indices of Facebook use and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1):187--198, jan 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Junco. Comparing actual and self-reported measures of Facebook use. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3):626--631, may 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Junco and S. Cotten. A decade of distraction? How multitasking affects student outcomes. In A Decade in Internet Time Symposium on the Dynamics of the Internet and Society., Oxford, 2011. Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. Junco and S. R. Cotten. Perceived academic effects of instant messaging use. Computers & Education, 56(2):370--378, feb 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Kahneman. Attention and Effort. The American Journal of Psychology, 88(2):339, 1973.Google Scholar
- C. Konig, M. Buhner, and G. Murling. Working memory, fluid intelligence, and attention are predictors of multitasking performance, but polychronicity and extraversion are not. Human performance, 18(3):243--266, 2005.Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. Kreutzer. Internet and online media usage on mobile phones among low-income urban youth in cape town. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 5(5):1--21, 2009.Google Scholar
- A. Lang. Using the limited capacity model of motivated mediated message processing to design effective cancer communication messages. Journal of Communication, 56(SUPPL.):57--80, 2006.Google Scholar
- R. LaRose, C. A. Lin, and M. S. Eastin. Unregulated Internet usage: Addiction, habit, or deficient self-regulation? Media Psychology, 5(3):225--253, 2003.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Lüders. Conceptualizing personal media. New Media & Society, 10(5):683--702, 2008.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. Marois and J. Ivanoff. Capacity limits of information processing in the brain. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 9(6), 2005.Google Scholar
- M. McLuhan. Understanding media: The extensions of man. MIT Press, Cambridge, 1966.Google Scholar
- E. Miller and J. Cohen. An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual review of neuroscience, 24:167--202, 2001.Google Scholar
- M. A. Moreno, L. Jelenchick, R. Koff, J. Eikoff, C. Diermyer, and D. A. Christakis. Computers in Human Behavior Internet use and multitasking among older adolescents: An experience sampling approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(4):1097--1102, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. Müller and P. Rabbitt. Reflexive and voluntary orienting of visual attention: time course of activation and resistance to interruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15(2):315, 1989.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. North, K. Johnston, and J. Ophoff. The Use of Mobile Phones by South African University Students. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 11:115--138, 2014.Google ScholarCross Ref
- E. Ophir, C. Nass, and A. D. Wagner. Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(37):15583--15587, sep 2009.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Oulasvirta and P. Saariluoma. Long-term working memory and interrupting messages in humanâĂŞcomputer interaction. Behaviour & Information Technology, 23(1):53--64, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. Sana, T. Weston, and N. J. Cepeda. Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Computers & Education, 62:24--31, mar 2013.Google ScholarCross Ref
- B. Sparrow, J. Liu, and D. M. Wegner. Google Effects on Memory: Cognitive Consequences of Having Information at Our Fingertips. Science, 333(6043):776--778, aug 2011.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. Thompson. The digital natives as learners: Technology use patterns and approaches to learning. Computers & Education, 65:12--33, jul 2013. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. N. Tombu, C. L. Asplund, P. E. Dux, D. Godwin, J. W. Martin, and R. Marois. A Unified attentional bottleneck in the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(33):13426--31, aug 2011.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. K. Tsotsos, S. M. Culhane, W. Y. Kei Wai, Y. Lai, N. Davis, and F. Nuflo. Modeling visual attention via selective tuning. Artificial Intelligence, 78(1-2):507--545, oct 1995. Google ScholarDigital Library
- W. van der Schuur, S. E. Baumgartner, S. R. Sumter, and P. M. Valkenburg. The consequences of media multitasking for youth: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 53:204--215, 2015. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Wallis. The Impacts of Media Multitasking on Children's Learning & Development. Technical report, New York, 2010.Google Scholar
- L. J. Wardley and C. F. Mang. Student observations: Introducing iPads into university classrooms. Education and Information Technologies, pages 1--18, jun 2015. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. D. Wickens. Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 3(2):159--177, 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- E. Wood, L. Zivcakova, P. Gentile, K. Archer, D. De Pasquale, and A. Nosko. Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with technology on real-time classroom learning. Computers & Education, 58(1):365--374, jan 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- W. Zhang and L. Zhang. Explicating multitasking with computers: Gratifications and situations. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5):1883--1891, sep 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
Recommendations
In-class distractions
While laptops and other Internet accessible technologies facilitate student learning in the classroom, they also increase opportunities for interruptions from off-task social networking sites such as Facebook (FB). A small number of correlational ...
The eventful genesis of educational media
This paper is a reflection on the history and future of educational media. Over the last century various new media technologies were introduced in education. Most of these failed to meet the high expectations. The paper reviews the rise and fall of ...
What's going on? Age, distraction, and multitasking during online survey taking
Participants in an online survey revealed what other activities they engaged in while taking it.Younger people were more likely than older people to multitask.The relationship between age, multitasking, and sense of distraction was curvilinear.Most ...
Comments