A deluge of empirical research became available on MOOCs in 2013-2015 and this research is available in disparate sources. This paper addresses a number of gaps in the scholarly understanding of MOOCs and presents a comprehensive picture of the literature by examining the geographic distribution, publication outlets, citations, data collection and analysis methods, and research strands of empirical research focusing on MOOCs during this time period. Results demonstrate that (a) more than 80% of this literature is published by individuals whose home institutions are in North America and Europe, (b) a select few papers are widely cited while nearly half of the papers are cited zero times, and (c) researchers have favored a quantitative if not positivist approach to the conduct of MOOC research, preferring the collection of data via surveys and automated methods. While some interpretive research was conducted on MOOCs in this time period, it was often basic and it was the minority of studies that were informed by methods traditionally associated with qualitative research (e.g., interviews, observations, and focus groups). Analysis shows that there is limited research reported on instructor-related topics, and that even though researchers have attempted to identify and classify learners into various groupings, very little research examines the experiences of learner subpopulations.

Retro-cues (i.e., cues presented between the offset of a memory array and the onset of a probe) have consistently been found to enhance performance in working memory tasks, sometimes ameliorating the deleterious effects of increased memory load. However, the mechanism by which retro-cues exert their influence remains a matter of debate. To inform this debate, we applied a hierarchical diffusion model to data from 4 change detection experiments using single item, location-specific probes (i.e., a local recognition task) with either visual or verbal memory stimuli. Results showed that retro-cues enhanced the quality of information entering the decision process-especially for visual stimuli-and decreased the time spent on nondecisional processes. Further, cues interacted with memory load primarily on nondecision time, decreasing or abolishing load effects. To explain these findings, we propose an account whereby retro-cues act primarily to reduce the time taken to access the relevant representation in memory upon probe presentation, and in addition protect cued representations from visual interference. (PsycINFO Database Record

The complexity of digital and online education is becoming increasingly evident in the context of research into networked learning/participation. Interdisciplinary research is often proposed as a way to address complex scientific problems and enable researchers to bring novel perspectives into a field other than their own. The degree to which research on Massive Open Online Courses suggest that empirical research on xMOOCs may be more interdisciplinary than research on cMOOCs. Greater interdisciplinarity in xMOOC research could reflect the burgeoning interest in the field, the general familiarity with the xMOOC pedagogical model, and the hype experienced by xMOOCs. Greater interdisciplinarity in the field may also provide researchers with rich opportunities to improve our understanding and practice of digital and online learning. (Pellmar & Eisenberg, 2000). KeywordsNevertheless, in their assessment of proposals submitted for funding under the MOOC research initiative (henceforth MRI), Gašević, Kovanović, Joksimović, and Siemens (2014) show that more than 50% of the authors in all phases of the MRI grants were from the field of education, even though a common perception in the field is that the MOOC phenomenon is "driven by computer scientists" (p. 166). Research into emerging forms of digital learning is likely to suffer if driven by education researchers alone or computer scientists alone. As Gašević and colleagues note, disparate involvement in MOOC research "could be a worrying sign of the fragmentation in the research community", and as such there is a need to "[increase] efforts towards enhancing interdisciplinarity" (p. 134).We have recently completed a systematic review of the empirical MOOC literature published between (Veletsianos & Shepherdson, 2015, and as a result of that study, we can use bibliometric data to investigate the extent to which interdisciplinarity is present in the published literature on MOOCs. Thus, in this paper, we combine our data with data from Gašević et al. (2014), and data used in a past systematic review of the literature (Liyanagunawardena, Adams, & Williams, 2013), to examine interdisciplinarity in the MOOC literature, and whether and how this has changed over time.To examine these issues, we review relevant literature and explain why this study is significant; describe the methods used to conduct this investigation; present the results; and conclude by discussing the implications and limitations of the findings. Who Studies Moocs? Interdisciplinarity in MOOC Research and its Changes over Time Veletsianos and ShepherdsonThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 3 Literature ReviewInterdisciplinary research is "any study or group of studies undertaken by scholars from two or more distinct scientific disciplines" (Aboelela et al., 2007, p. 341). The value of interdisciplinary research and collaboration rests in both the complexity of the problems societies are faced with (Pellmar & Eisenberg, 2000), and in the novel perspec...

Previous research indicates that long-term memory (LTM) may contribute to performance in working memory (WM) tasks. Across 3 experiments, we investigated the extent to which active maintenance in WM can be replaced by relying on information stored in episodic LTM, thereby freeing capacity for additional information in WM. First, participants encoded word pairs into LTM, and then completed a WM task, also involving word pairs. Crucially, the pairs presented in each WM trial comprised varying numbers of new pairs and the previously learned LTM pairs. Experiment 1 showed that recall performance in the WM task was unaffected when memory set size increased through the addition of LTM pairs, but that it deteriorated when set size increased through adding new pairs. In Experiment 2, we investigated the robustness of this effect, orthogonally manipulating the number of new and LTM pairs used in the WM task. When WM load was low, performance declined with the addition of LTM pairs but remained superior to performance with the matched set size comprising only new pairs. By contrast, when WM load was higher, adding LTM pairs did not affect performance. In Experiment 3, we found that the benefit of LTM representations arises from retrieving these during the WM test, leading them to suffer from typical interference effects. We conclude that individuals can outsource workload to LTM to optimize performance, and that the WM system negotiates the exchange of information between WM and LTM depending on the current memory load.

Electroencephalographic (EEG) activity was recorded while participants waited to make spontaneous key-press movements (Experiment 1) or waited for tones in a pitch judgment task (Experiment 2). In one condition of each experiment, participants also had to report the position of a spot traveling on a clock at the crucial time point (i.e., when they decided to move or when the tone was presented), mimicking a procedure used to assess the time of conscious awareness of an event of interest. In a second condition, there was no clock or temporal judgment. Average EEG activity preceding key presses was substantially different when participants had to monitor the clock than when they did not. Smaller clock-related differences in average EEG activity were also present preceding tone onsets. The effects of clock monitoring on EEG activity could be responsible for previous reports that movement-related brain activity begins before participants have consciously decided to move (e.g., Libet, Gleason, Wright, & Pearl, 1983).