MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161193632 · doi:10.2190/j111-q132-n166-k249

The Impact of Preservice Teachers' Emotions on Computer Use: A Formative Analysis

2007· article· en· W2161193632 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational Computing Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender and Technology in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSadnessAngerCourseworkLaptopHappinessPsychologyAnxietyFormative assessmentField (mathematics)Mathematics educationSocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research on the effect of technology-based preservice education programs has been assessed by examining changes in computer ability and attitudes. Systematic exploration looking at the effect of these programs on computer use has been noticeably absent. In addition, the role of emotions and use of computers has been largely ignored with one exception, computer anxiety. The purpose of the following study was to examine the impact of four basic emotions (anger, anxiety, happiness, sadness) on use of computers by preservice teachers in their coursework (university use) and in their practice teaching (field use). Happiness was reported often while learning new software—anxiety, anger, and sadness were experienced sometimes. All four emotion constructs were significantly correlated with all four university use constructs at the beginning of the laptop program. Increased positive emotions (happiness) were significantly correlated with increased use of computers at the university by the end of the program. Finally, increases in positive emotions and decreases in negative emotions were significantly related to teacher and student-based use of computers in the field.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.525
Teacher spread0.412 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it