This chapter addresses the issue of tablets acceptance for studying. An experiment was carried out to test the effects of specific studying tasks experienced by students with no previous experiences with tablets on the perceived usability and usefulness of tablets. Students had to perform a high-compatible task (i.e. navigation/reading task) and a low-compatible task (i.e. writing task) for tablets. Subjective measures of usability, usefulness and use intention were designed to be more specific to the type of task than the classical measures used in the Technology Acceptance Model approach (Davis, 1989). Participants rated their answers before and after performing the tasks with a tablet. The results showed that the perceived usability and usefulness of tablets increased after the high-compatible task while their decreased with the low-compatible task. The findings stressed the need to consider the real user experience and to use more task-oriented measures to investigate the acceptance of mobile devices for studying.
In this study, we investigated the determinants of employees' intention to telework in a coworking space, with the assumption that employees' experience with the negative aspects of teleworking from home would impact their intention to telework in a coworking space in the future. A sample of 268 French teleworkers answered an online questionnaire measuring their experience of several negative aspects of teleworking from home (e.g., perceived social isolation), and their opinion toward teleworking in a coworking space (perceived usefulness, perceived feasibility, attitude and behavioral intention). Results indicate that perceived social isolation and perceived lack of working comfort when working from home directly impacted how useful participants perceived teleworking in a coworking space to be, and indirectly their intention to telework in a coworking space in the future. Budget, management agreement and job compatibility were, however, identified as factors mitigating participants' intention to telework in a coworking space, even if perceived as potentially beneficial.
The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of young students' prior attitude on source consideration when watching videos on controversial topics. 271 seventh graders watched a series of videos in which two interviewees (one expert in the eld, one layperson) expressed divergent positions on a socioscienti c issue ("Will organic farming be able to feed the entire world population by 2050?"). After watching the videos, students were asked to recall the identity and arguments of the interviewees and indicate how far they had perceived them to be credible and convincing. If no effect of students' prior attitude was found on source recall, students were prompt to judge the interviewee who provided arguments that were congruent with their prior attitude as more credible and convincing that the interviewee that provided incongruent arguments. These results suggest that young students' beliefs contribute to their assessment of the credibility of an information source when watching videos.
In this study, we investigated the impact of prompting on young students' source consideration when watching videos with conflicting information. 262 French 7th graders were confronted to a series of videos in which two speakers (varying in credibility) took opposite stances on the topic of organic farming. Students were either confronted with no prompts (control group), an indirect form of prompting (watching an instructional video on the benefits of sourcing before processing the material), a direct form of prompting (filling out source credibility rating scales during the processing of the material) or a combination of both. While the impact of the instructional video on students’ source consideration proved marginal, students who had to fill the source credibility rating scales during the processing of the material better remembered the identity of the speakers (notably in delayed posttest), were more inclined to consider the expert interviewee as the most convincing and to mention interviewees’ expertise to justify their judgement. The implications of these results are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.