View Item 

Show simple item record

The interrupted learner: How distractions during live and video lectures influence learning outcomes

dc.contributor.authorZureick, Andrew H.
dc.contributor.authorBurk‐rafel, Jesse
dc.contributor.authorPurkiss, Joel A.
dc.contributor.authorHortsch, Michael
dc.date.accessioned2018-07-13T15:48:31Z
dc.date.available2019-09-04T20:15:39Zen
dc.date.issued2018-07
dc.identifier.citationZureick, Andrew H.; Burk‐rafel, Jesse ; Purkiss, Joel A.; Hortsch, Michael (2018). "The interrupted learner: How distractions during live and video lectures influence learning outcomes." Anatomical Sciences Education 11(4): 366-376.
dc.identifier.issn1935-9772
dc.identifier.issn1935-9780
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/144697
dc.publisherCambridge University Press
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.subject.otherselfâ directed learning
dc.subject.othereâ learning
dc.subject.otherhistology education
dc.subject.othermedical education
dc.subject.otherundergraduate education
dc.subject.otherstudy behaviors
dc.subject.otherinterruptions
dc.subject.othertechnology
dc.subject.otherlecture attendance
dc.subject.otherlecture videos
dc.titleThe interrupted learner: How distractions during live and video lectures influence learning outcomes
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelMedicine (General)
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/144697/1/ase1754_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/144697/2/ase1754.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/ase.1754
dc.identifier.sourceAnatomical Sciences Education
dc.identifier.citedreferencePiolat A, Olive T, Kellogg RT. 2005. Cognitive effort during note taking. Appl Cognit Psychol 19: 291 â 312.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLovell K, Plantegenest G. 2009. Student utilization of digital versions of classroom lectures. Med Sci Educ 19: 20 â 25.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMayer RE. 2009. Multimedia Learning. 2nd Ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 320 p.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcKinney D, Dyck JL, Luber ES. 2009. iTunes university and the classroom: Can podcasts replace professors? Comput Educ 52: 617 â 623.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcNulty JA, Hoyt A, Gruener G, Chandrasekhar A, Espiritu B, Price R, Jr, Naheedy R. 2009. An analysis of lecture video utilization in undergraduate medical education: Associations with performance in the courses. BMC Med Educ 9: 6.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMueller PA, Oppenheimer DM. 2014. The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychol Sci 25: 1159 â 1168.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNavehâ Benjamin M, Guez J, Sorek S. 2007. The effects of divided attention on encoding processes in memory: Mapping the locus of interference. Can J Exp Psychol 61: 1 â 12.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNCVS. 2017. National Center for Voice and Speech. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah. URL: http://www.ncvs.org/ncvs/tutorials/voiceprod/tutorial/quality.html [accessed 27 October 2017].
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNewble DI, Entwistle NJ. 1986. Learning styles and approaches: Implications for medical education. Med Educ 20: 162 â 175.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePaegle RD, Wilkinson EJ, Donnelly MB. 1980. Videotaped vs traditional lectures for medicalâ students. Med Educ 14: 387 â 393.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePastore R. 2012. The effects of timeâ compressed instruction and redundancy on learning and learners’ perceptions of cognitive load. Comput Educ 58: 641 â 651.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceProber CG, Heath C. 2012. Lecture halls without lecturesâ a proposal for medical education. N Engl J Med 366: 1657 â 1659.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceProber CG, Khan S. 2013. Medical education reimagined. A call to action. Acad Med 88: 1407 â 1410.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceQualtrics. 2017. Welcome to the experience management platformâ ¢. Provo, UT: Qualtrics. URL: http://www.qualtrics.com/ [accessed 27 October 2017].
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRamlogan S, Raman V, Sweet J. 2014. A comparison of two forms of teaching instruction: Video vs. live lecture for education in clinical periodontology. Eur J Dent Educ 18: 31 â 38.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRitzhaupt AD, Barron A. 2008. Effects of timeâ compressed narration and representational adjunct images on cuedâ recall, content recognition, and learner satisfaction. J Educ Comp Res 39: 161 â 184.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRitzhaupt AD, Gomes ND, Barron AE. 2008. The effects of timeâ compressed audio and verbal redundancy on learner performance and satisfaction. Comp Hum Behav 24: 2434 â 2445.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRitzhaupt AD, Pastore R, Davis R. 2015. Effects of captions and timeâ compressed video on learner performance and satisfaction. Comp Hum Behav 45: 222 â 227.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSelvig D, Holaday LW, Purkiss J, Hortsch M. 2015. Correlating students’ educational background, study habits, and resource usage with learning success in medical histology. Anat Sci Educ 8: 1 â 11.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceShaw GP, Molnar D. 2011. Nonâ native English language speakers benefit most from the use of lecture capture in medical school. Biochem Mol Biol Edu 39: 416 â 420.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceShin S, Lee JK, Ha M. 2017. Influence of career motivation on science learning in Korean highâ school students. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Educ 13: 1517 â 1538.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSolomon DJ, Ferenchick GS, Lairdâ Fick HS, Kavanaugh K. 2004. A randomized trial comparing digital and live lecture formats. BMC Med Educ 4: 27.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTraphagan T, Kucsera JV, Kishi K. 2010. Impact of class lecture webcasting on attendance and learning. Educ Tech Res Dev 58: 19 â 37.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUMMS. 2017. University of Michigan Medical School. Michigan Histology and Virtual Microscopy Learning Resources. University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI. URL: http://histology.sites.uofmhosting.net [accessed 27 October 2017].
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVaccani JP, Javidnia H, Humphreyâ Murto S. 2016. The effectiveness of webcast compared to live lectures as a teaching tool in medical school. Med Teach 38: 59 â 63.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWard PJ. 2011. First year medical students’ approaches to study and their outcomes in a gross anatomy course. Clin Anat 24: 120 â 127.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWilliams A, Birch E, Hancock P. 2012. The impact of online lecture recordings on student performance. Australas J Educ Tech 28: 199 â 213.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBacro TR, Gebregziabher M, Fitzharris TP. 2010. Evaluation of a lecture recording system in a medical curriculum. Anat Sci Educ 3: 300 â 308.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBeale EG, Tarwater PM, Lee VH. 2014. A retrospective look at replacing faceâ toâ face embryology instruction with online lectures in a human anatomy course. Anat Sci Educ 7: 234 â 241.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBhatti I, Jones K, Richardson L, Foreman D, Lund J, Tierney G. 2011. Eâ learning vs lecture: Which is the best approach to surgical teaching?. Colorect Dis 13: 459 â 462.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBierer SB, Dannefer EF. 2016. The learning environment counts: Longitudinal qualitative analysis of study strategies adopted by firstâ year medical students in a competencyâ based educational program. Acad Med 91: S44 â S52.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCardall S, Krupat E, Ulrich M. 2008. Live lecture versus videoâ recorded lecture: Are students voting with their feet? Acad Med 83: 1174 â 1178.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCook DA, Levinson AJ, Garside S, Dupras DM, Erwin PJ, Montori VM. 2008. Internetâ based learning in the health professions: A metaâ analysis. JAMA 300: 1181 â 1196.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCopley J. 2007. Audio and video podcasts of lectures for campusâ based students: Production and evaluation of student use. Innov Educ Teach Int 44: 387 â 399.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDavis J, Crabb S, Rogers E, Zamora J, Khan K. 2008. Computerâ based teaching is as good as face to face lectureâ based teaching of evidence based medicine: A randomized controlled trial. Med Teach 30: 302 â 307.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEdwards MB, Gronlund SD. 1998. Task interruption and its effects on memory. Memory 6: 665 â 687.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEisen DB, Schupp CW, Isseroff RR, Ibrahimi OA, Ledo L, Armstrong AW. 2015. Does class attendance matter? Results from a secondâ year medical school dermatology cohort study. Int J Dermatol 54: 807 â 816.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGordon J, Hazlett C, Ten Cate O, Mann K, Kilminster S, Prince K, O’Driscoll E, Snell L, Newble D. 2000. Strategic planning in medical education: Enhancing the learning environment for students in clinical settings. Med Educ 34: 841 â 850.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGupta A, Saks NS. 2013. Exploring medical student decisions regarding attending live lectures and using recorded lectures. Med Teach 35: 767 â 771.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGysbers V, Johnston J, Hancock D, Denyer G. 2011. Why do students still bother coming to lectures, when everything is available online? Int J Innov Sci Math Educ 19: 20 â 36.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHamilton PW, van Diest PJ, Williams R, Gallagher AG. 2009. Do we see what we think we see? The complexities of morphological assessment. J Pathol 218: 285 â 291.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHelle L, Nivala M, Kronqvist P, Ericsson KA, Lehtinen E. 2010. Do prior knowledge, personality and visual perceptual ability predict student performance in microscopic pathology? Med Educ 44: 621 â 629.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHoladay L, Selvig D, Purkiss J, Hortsch M. 2013. Preference of interactive electronic versus traditional learning resources by University of Michigan medical students during the first year histology component. Med Sci Educ 23: 607 â 619.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHortsch M, Mangrulkar RS. 2015. When students struggle with gross anatomy and histology: A strategy for monitoring, reviewing, and promoting student academic success in an integrated preclinical medical curriculum. Anat Sci Educ 8: 478 â 483.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHusmann PR, Barger JB, Schutte AF. 2016. Study skills in anatomy and physiology: Is there a difference? Anat Sci Educ 9: 18 â 27.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJohnson S, Purkiss J, Holaday L, Selvig D, Hortsch M. 2015. Learning histology â Dental and medical students’ study strategies. Eur J Dent Educ 19: 65 â 73.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJudd T. 2014. Making sense of multitasking: The role of Facebook. Comput Educ 70: 194 â 202.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJudd T, Kennedy G. 2011. Measurement and evidence of computerâ based task switching and multitasking by ’Net Generation’ students. Comput Educ 56: 625 â 631.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJunco R. 2012. The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation in Facebook activities, and student engagement. Comput Educ 58: 162 â 171.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKirschner PA, Karpinski AC. 2010. Facebook ® and academic performance. Comput Hum Behav 26: 1237 â 1245.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKobayashi K. 2006. Combined effects of noteâ taking/â reviewing on learning and the enhancement through interventions: A metaâ analytic review. Educ Psychol 26: 459 â 477.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKraushaar JM, Novak DC. 2010. Examining the affects of student multitasking with laptops during the lecture. J Inform Syst Educ 21: 241 â 251.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLee J, Lin L, Robertson T. 2012. The impact of media multitasking on learning. Learn Media Tech 37: 94 â 104.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
ase1754_am.pdf
Size:
665.7KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open
Name:
ase1754.pdf
Size:
345.5KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.