MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156157465 · doi:10.5430/wje.v11n1p20

University Students’ Attitudes toward the Formal Integration of Facebook in their Education: Investigation Guided by Rogers' Attributes of Innovation

2021· article· en· W3156157465 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Reham Almohtadi, Intisar Turki Aldarabah

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPerceptionFormal educationTechnology integrationDescriptive statisticsHigher educationMathematics educationSocial psychologyPedagogyTeaching methodMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the study was to examine students’ attitudes toward the formal integration of Facebook in their education at Al- Hussein Bin Talal University and to examine the relationship between their attitudes and their perceptions of Facebook’s attributes. The investigation was guided by Rogers' (2003) attributes of innovation. A descriptive method was adopted in which a questionnaire was used to collect data from 99 undergraduate university students from the college of education. The results show that the students have positive and high attitudes toward the formal integration of Facebook in their teaching. In addition, the students have positive perceptions of Facebook in terms of its relative advantage, ease of use, compatibility, trialability, and observability. Furthermore, Regression analysis showed that 46% of the variance of the students’ attitudes toward the formal integration of Facebook in their education can be accounted for by its linear relationship with the five independent variables: relative advantage, ease of use, compatibility, trialability, and observability. Based on the results, set of recommendations were provided.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of EducationSame topicImpact of Technology on AdolescentsFrench-language works237,207