MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802339052 · doi:10.7939/r3ff3mb2d

Multitasking and Learning in Virtual Environments

2015· article· en· W2802339052 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Connie Yuen

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Learning in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman multitaskingComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionPsychologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual environments are inherently social spaces where user productivity and collaborative learning can take place. However, the majority of existing studies to date investigate common behaviours such as multi-tasking within traditional face-to-face learning environments. As part of a thesis dissertation, this study investigated the importance of structuring learning environments to maximize learning and minimize virtual distractions. Using an OpenSim virtual environment, the researchers conducted an experimental study during the Fall 2013 and Winter 2014 terms with 91 undergraduate students at the University of Alberta. The study investigated the influence of participants’ prior computer experience, cognitive learning styles and extroversion-introversion on the impact of passive and social distractor tasks during learning and recall of factual information in virtual environments. The results indicated that prior video game use is a significant predictor of lower overall test time and higher overall test score, but the software recognition test, social networking use and virtual world use did not have a significant impact on learning performance. While extroverted individuals tended to complete questions faster under the interactive-type distractor condition, they achieved higher accuracy scores under the passive or no distractor-type conditions. Introverted individuals tended to complete questions faster and more accurately under the no distractor-type condition. In addition, the study found that field independent participants outperformed field-dependent counterparts by an average test score of 0.86 at approximately the same speed.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Alberta LibrarySame topicMobile Learning in EducationFrench-language works237,207