You are here:

Can Students Identify Different Psychological Implications in Multimedia, Hypertext, and Interactive Educational Tools?
PROCEEDINGS

, , CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF THE SACRED HEART - MILANO, Italy

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Lugano, Switzerland ISBN 978-1-880094-53-2 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

Opinions about the psychological correlates of computer-supported instructional tools were analyzed by means of a questionnaire including items about the motivational and emotional aspects of learning, the behavior to be held during the learning process, the mental abilities and the style of thinking required, the cognitive benefits and outcomes. Items were presented three times; each time they made reference to a different kind (multimedia, hypertext, and interactive) of tools. The questionnaire was filled out by 87 undergraduates attending different faculties. Results showed that students - even though they ranked psychological correlates of computer-supported tools in a relative different order according to the fact that such correlates concerned multimedia, hypertext, or interactive tools - tended to attribute similar effects to the distinct kinds of computer-supported tools. Implications for instruction are discussed.

Citation

Antonietti, A. & Balduzzi, E. (2004). Can Students Identify Different Psychological Implications in Multimedia, Hypertext, and Interactive Educational Tools?. In L. Cantoni & C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2004--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 3490-3497). Lugano, Switzerland: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 5, 2024 from .

© 2004 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Antonietti A. (2002). The representation of psychological correlates of learning through instructional multimedia tools. Tenth Workshop of Special Interest Group 6-European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI), Instructional design for multimedia learning, Erfurt (Germany).
  2. Antonietti, A., & Giorgetti, M. (2004). Students’ conceptions about learning from multimedia. In H. Niegemann, R. Brünken, & D. Leutner (Eds.), Instructional design for multimedia learning. Münster-New York: Waxmann.
  3. Antonietti, A., Rasi, C., Imperio, E., & Sacco, M. (2000). The representation of virtual reality in education. Education and Information Technologies, 5, 317-327.
  4. Baylor, A.L. (2001). Permutations of control: cognitive considerations for agent-based learning environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12, 403-425.
  5. Carrell, L.J., & Menzel K.E. (2001). Variations in learning, motivation, and perceived immediacy between live and distance education classrooms. Communication Education, 50, 230-240.
  6. Crosier, J.K., Cobb, S.V., & Wilson, J.R. (2000). Experimental comparison of virtual reality with traditional teaching methods for teaching radioactivity. Educational and Information Technologies, 5, 329-343.
  7. Francis, L.J. (1993). Measuring attitudes toward computers among undergraduates college students: The affective domain. Computer Education, 20, 251-255.
  8. Gal-Ezer, J., & Lupo, D. (2002). Integrating Internet tools into traditional CS distance education: students’ attitudes. Computer Education, 38, 319-329.
  9. Gardner, D.G., Dukes, R.L., & Discenza, R. (1993). Computer use, self-confidence, and attitudes: A causal analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 9, 427-440.
  10. Ocker, R.J., & Yaverbaum, G.J. (2001). Collaborative learning environments: exploring student attituds and satisfaction in face-to-face and asynchronous computer conferencing settings. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12, 427-448.
  11. Perry, T., & Perry, L.A. (1998). University students' attitudes toward multimedia presentations. British Journal of Educational Technology, 29, 375-377.
  12. Richardson, J. (2001). An evaluation of Virtual Learning Environments and their learners: do individual differences affect perception of virtual learning environments? Interactive Educational Multimedia, 3, 38-52.
  13. Richardson, M., Baird, J.-A., Ridgway, J., Ripley, M., Shorrocks-Taylor, D., Swan, M. (2002). Challenging minds? Students’ perceptions of computer-based World Class Tests of problem solving. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 633-649.
  14. Smith, B., Caputi, F., & Rawstorne, P. (2000). Differentiating computer experience and attitudes toward computers: An empirical investigation. Computer in Human Behavior, 16, 59-81.
  15. Spicer, J.I., & Stratford, J. (2001). Student perceptions of a virtual field trip to replace a real field trip. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 345-354.
  16. Tait, K. (1998). Replacing lectures with multimedia CBL: Students attitudes and reactions. Instructional Science, 26, 409-438.
  17. Yazon, J.M.O., Mayer-Smith, J.A., & Redfield, R.J. (2002). Does the medium change the message? The impact of a web-based genetics course on university students’ perspectives on learning and teaching. Computer Education, 38, 267-285.
  18. Yu, F.Y., & Yu, H.J.J. (2002). Incorporating e-mail into the learning process: its impact on student academic achievement and attitudes. Computer Education, 38, 117-126.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts