Even in a crowded lecture hall your professors know when you are using your smartphone during class.
Some instructors ignore this, some punish this, but most of them do not like it.
Although students might think that class rules limiting or banning the use of mobile phones are cruel, in truth they come from a good place: most faculty believe that your phones will hurt your grades by stealing your attention. A basic idea from cognitive psychology is that you have to pay attention to something if you want to commit it to memory or be able to use the idea effectively.
A study done by Bjornsen and Archer (2015) further supports this argument. These professors spent two semesters in their psychology classes surveying a total of 218 college students about their in-class cell phone use. At the end of each class the students answered a questionnaire about the number of times that they looked at their phones for: social networking (texting, email, social network apps like Facebook and Instagram); getting information (Googling, checking the online syllabus, checking a website related to class); organizing their lives (personal calendar); or playing a game. The students were assured that their answers would not influence how the professor graded their work, so the assumption is that these self-reports were honest.
The authors compared the amount of each type of mobile phone use to test scores in these classes. They found that both social media use and gaming during class were associated with lower test scores, with playing games being much worse than using social media. Because social media use was more common than playing games, Bjornsen and Archer looked at these data in a more detailed way. They divided the students who used social media during class into high (5x per class), medium (2.4x per class), and low (1x per class) then looked at average test scores for each group. Across five exams the high in-class social media users scored an average of 74% and the low social media users scored an average of a 76%. These scores are close but they could be the difference between getting a C or a C+ in a class.
However, one of these effects changed when Bjornsen and Archer controlled for overall GPAs (grade point averages). As you might guess the students with the worst GPAs were more likely to play games in class, so the relationship between game playing and low test scores was likely influenced by this third variable: it disappeared once GPA was factored in. On the other hand, even when overall GPA was included as a factor, the relationship between in-class social media use and lower exam scores remained significant.
This implies that even students who have higher GPAs still score lower on exams when they use social media during those classes! From past research on college students we know that more than 90% admit to using cellphones during class and that 77% do not believe that this would cause problems with their learning. Bjornsen and Archer's results suggest that students, especially students who do well in school, may not be aware that their tests scores might be a bit higher if they reduced or stopped using social media during class time.
Before you worry that this study will drive professors to ban cell phones, the authors suggest that this is not sensible given that today's university students are used to having their smartphones as constant companions. They cite past research about this population: college students spend 5-9 hours a day on their phones which includes: 95 minutes of texting; 95 minutes on social networking apps; 49 minutes emailing; 34 minutes surfing the Web. Based on this Bjornsen and Archer suggest some integration of phones into the classroom. For example, I will ask students to put away their phones if they are not participating or are distracting other in the class, but I don't mind if student take pictures of notes and images that I project onto the screen at the front of the room (even though there is good research behind the idea that taking notes through handwriting increases your memory and understanding of those notes).
Ultimately university students are adults who should weigh the benefits and costs of using their phones in class. For some, being connected to friends and family will be more important that scoring a few points higher on exams. For others, every point matters because their grades are crucial for getting into programs like Nursing, keeping scholarships, or having good GPAs for graduate school applications. If you aren't sure which group you fall into...ask Siri?
Further Reading:
The Bjornsen and Archer (2015) article can be accessed through your local college library.
There's an app for that! In 2014 college students Mitch Gardner and Rob Richardson created Pocket Points, an app that rewards students for not checking their phones during class. Find out if your university uses this system - if so you can get discounts at stores and restaurants. As if scoring 2% higher on average exam scores was not enough!
Cell or mobile phone addiction is addressed by Web MD. Find out the symptoms and suggestions for managing your smartphone time.
Showing posts with label Social Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Media. Show all posts
Sunday, October 18, 2015
Phoning it in on exams
Labels:
Bjornsen,
Cell Phone,
College,
Exam Scores,
Facebook,
Games,
GPA,
Grades,
Information Processing,
Instagram,
Learning,
Mobile Phone,
Psychology,
Smartphone,
Social Media,
Teaching,
Texting,
University
Sunday, February 8, 2015
A Post for Valentine's Day
Maybe you love Valentine's Day or maybe you loathe it, either way it is hard to miss that it's happening this week with all the red and white, heart-shaped gift items in the stores. In honor of this day of Public Displays of Affection, I bring you this week's meme:
Do you agree with this meme?
When I saw this I thought of two recent studies that my friend Dr. Benjamin Le is publishing with his colleagues. The first study asked 200 participants, who were currently in romantic relationships, about the level of satisfaction and commitment in their relationships. Those same people gave the researchers access to their personal Facebook profiles; assistants then looked at each profile to see if the participants had a) set their relationship statuses to "in a relationship" and b) if their profile pictures were selfies or "relfies" (relationship selfies) with their romantic partners. The assistants used what they found to guess the level of satisfaction and commitment of each participant's romantic relationship.
It turned out that they were particularly likely to guess that a relationship was great when a person's status was set to "in a relationship" AND that person's profile pic was a relfie. The guesses by the assistants were also very similar to the actual self-reports from the participants themselves.
In the second study, the researchers got creative and made up fake Facebook profiles for imaginary people. Some of the profiles had the relationship status set to "in a relationship" and others didn't; some of the profiles had selfies as profile pictures while others had relfies. The researchers also varied the character of the status updates: some gave a lot of personal details about the relationship and gushed about the romantic partner; others were positive about the partner but did not give a lot of relationship details; and other statuses were not about the romantic partner at all.
One hundred new participants (who did not realize that what they were seeing was not real) got to look at these fake profiles and were asked to rate the imaginary people from these profiles on the quality of their relationship satisfaction and commitment. The participants also were asked how much they liked each of the imaginary people who owned these profiles.
Similar to what was found in the first study, the participants were most likely to think the imaginary person was in a great relationship if his or her Facebook profile included"in a relationship" AND that person's profile pic was a relfie. In addition, when status updates included personal details about the relationship and ooey-gooey gushing about the romantic partner - the relationship was especially likely to be judged as a good one.
However, those mushy status updates came at a price: the imaginary people who posted those types of statuses were the LEAST LIKED by the participants. TMI much?
So, is the meme correct? Yes and no according to these findings. If you display your romantic relationship on Facebook because you have an awesome relationship you can bet that your message will be read loud and clear by your Facebook friends: they are likely to interpret your status, relfies, and posts to mean that your relationship is solid. However, the more lovey-dovey your status updates are...your friends may start to like you a bit less.
You win some, you lose some. Happy Valentine's Day!
Further Reading:
You can read Dr. Le's description of his studies and other research related to relfies on the Science of Relationships website. This is great site run by psychologists (two of my friends!) that provides good research on relationships in a fun to read format.
Do you agree with this meme?
When I saw this I thought of two recent studies that my friend Dr. Benjamin Le is publishing with his colleagues. The first study asked 200 participants, who were currently in romantic relationships, about the level of satisfaction and commitment in their relationships. Those same people gave the researchers access to their personal Facebook profiles; assistants then looked at each profile to see if the participants had a) set their relationship statuses to "in a relationship" and b) if their profile pictures were selfies or "relfies" (relationship selfies) with their romantic partners. The assistants used what they found to guess the level of satisfaction and commitment of each participant's romantic relationship.
It turned out that they were particularly likely to guess that a relationship was great when a person's status was set to "in a relationship" AND that person's profile pic was a relfie. The guesses by the assistants were also very similar to the actual self-reports from the participants themselves.
In the second study, the researchers got creative and made up fake Facebook profiles for imaginary people. Some of the profiles had the relationship status set to "in a relationship" and others didn't; some of the profiles had selfies as profile pictures while others had relfies. The researchers also varied the character of the status updates: some gave a lot of personal details about the relationship and gushed about the romantic partner; others were positive about the partner but did not give a lot of relationship details; and other statuses were not about the romantic partner at all.
One hundred new participants (who did not realize that what they were seeing was not real) got to look at these fake profiles and were asked to rate the imaginary people from these profiles on the quality of their relationship satisfaction and commitment. The participants also were asked how much they liked each of the imaginary people who owned these profiles.
Similar to what was found in the first study, the participants were most likely to think the imaginary person was in a great relationship if his or her Facebook profile included"in a relationship" AND that person's profile pic was a relfie. In addition, when status updates included personal details about the relationship and ooey-gooey gushing about the romantic partner - the relationship was especially likely to be judged as a good one.
However, those mushy status updates came at a price: the imaginary people who posted those types of statuses were the LEAST LIKED by the participants. TMI much?
So, is the meme correct? Yes and no according to these findings. If you display your romantic relationship on Facebook because you have an awesome relationship you can bet that your message will be read loud and clear by your Facebook friends: they are likely to interpret your status, relfies, and posts to mean that your relationship is solid. However, the more lovey-dovey your status updates are...your friends may start to like you a bit less.
You win some, you lose some. Happy Valentine's Day!
Further Reading:
You can read Dr. Le's description of his studies and other research related to relfies on the Science of Relationships website. This is great site run by psychologists (two of my friends!) that provides good research on relationships in a fun to read format.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




