Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mind wandering, control failures, and social media distractions in online learning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

10
103
1
6

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 139 publications
(127 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
10
103
1
6
Order By: Relevance
“…These studies found that WMC significantly predicted mind-wandering rate, but the WMC-TUT association was modest at best, even at the level of latent variables. Also, it has been shown that topic interest uniquely predicts TUT rate during learning, but, in some cases (e.g., Hollis & Was, 2016;Lindquist & McLean, 2011;Unsworth & McMillan, 2013), it was assessed only after (or combined both before and after) the reading or lecture was completed, making the measure an ambiguous mix learning from, on-line lectures. This measure was particularly of interest because, in the current study, none of the subjects were allowed to do any media multitasking during the experiment (e.g., students had no access to their smartphones or tablets).…”
Section: Five Primary Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…These studies found that WMC significantly predicted mind-wandering rate, but the WMC-TUT association was modest at best, even at the level of latent variables. Also, it has been shown that topic interest uniquely predicts TUT rate during learning, but, in some cases (e.g., Hollis & Was, 2016;Lindquist & McLean, 2011;Unsworth & McMillan, 2013), it was assessed only after (or combined both before and after) the reading or lecture was completed, making the measure an ambiguous mix learning from, on-line lectures. This measure was particularly of interest because, in the current study, none of the subjects were allowed to do any media multitasking during the experiment (e.g., students had no access to their smartphones or tablets).…”
Section: Five Primary Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In laboratory and classroom studies, TUT rates tend to predict learning outcomes as strongly as, or more strongly than, cognitive ability, motivation, or interest measures do (Hollis & Was, 2016;Lindquist & McLean, 2011;McVay & Kane, 2012b;Unsworth & McMillan, 2013;Wammes et al, 2016b). Thus, we rigorously tested the hypothesis (H3) that TUT rate would be an independent predictor of posttest scores and situational interest, not only by including ability, habit, and belief measures in our regression models, but also by including pretest score as a predictor of posttest scores and prior math interest as a predictor of situational interest.…”
Section: Five Primary Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations