Bibliographic record
Abstract
User engagement (UE) is a quality of user experience characterized by the depth of an actor's cognitive, temporal, and/or emotional investment in an interaction with a digital system. Currently more art than science, UE has gained theoretical and methodological traction over the past decade, yet there is still a need to establish empirical links between UE and desired outcomes (e.g., learning, behavior change), and to understand the myriad user, system, contextual, and so on, factors that predict successful digital engagement. This paper focuses on the relationship between UE and media format as a potential antecedent, and the outcome of learning, operationalized as short‐term knowledge retention. Participants interacted with two human‐interest stories in one of four media formats: video, audio, narrative text, or transcript‐style text; short‐term knowledge retention was measured using post‐task multiple choice and short‐answer questions. It was anticipated that format would have a strong effect on UE, and that more engaged users would recall more information about the stories. However, these hypotheses were not fully supported, and the nature of the relationship between UE and learning was more nuanced than expected. This research has implications for the design of information systems and, more fundamentally, the impetus to make digital environments engaging.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".