Psychological Perspective of Students Multitasking in Classroom - Research Paper Example

Psychological Perspective Multitasking in room Psychological Perspective of Students’ Multitasking in Classroom Summary Article 1: “Laptop Multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers." It highlights different aspects of the impacts of multitasking in the classroom using computers or laptops. It has also explained that multitasking has become part of the human behavior due to reasons such as competition for survival on the available resources. As a result, modern trends have changed the perception of the multitasking ideology. The multitasking issue has led to various feedbacks in the education sector where students have intensely engaged in using smartphones and laptops. According to Sana, Weston and Cepeda (2013), the study focuses on the rates of comprehension of the lecture material by students who are using their laptops in class. The interruption is views in various perspectives that include primary and secondary distractions. Secondary disruption occurs when students with laptops access their laptops carry out activities that affect the students without the computers due to various reasons. Students may be willing to learn, but distractions and multitasking from fellow colleagues cause chain reactions leading to a change in attention. Primary distraction has been explained in the manner that a student engages in multiple tasks at the same time using either a computer or a laptop. Moreover, it has provided information on theoretical and experimental research on divided attention. The scope of the study includes the processing, encoding, storage and retrieval of first-hand data. Attention is always divided when a secondary task is added; hence, leading to the fragmentation of incoming information. Consequently, the multitasking results into weaker encoding abilities in the individual. The first experiment was carried out on forty undergraduate students to show the effects of laptops use the learning based on a comprehension test. It took place in a controlled environment through a university-style lecture. The students were offered random additional instructions to complete the presented assignment. The tasks were secondary and were aimed at distracting the students attention on the lecture. Results: According to Sana, Weston, and Cepeda, lower comprehension scores were observed in the students that multitasked during the lecture. Importantly, the distractions from in-class multitasking were directly related to the decrements in learning. Experiment 2: it focused on the effect of multitasking on peers. The participants include thirty-nine undergraduate students using their laptops to take notes while others use pencils to take notes. Results: Students who sat behind two multitasking confederates had lower scores on their assignments as compared to those that sat in different places. Article 2: “In-class multitasking and academic performance” The article relates the use of technological devices with the performance of students in learning institutions. According to Junco, it focuses on the frequency at which students multitask in the lecture rooms. The research shows that human information processing is not sufficient to cater for multiple stimuli and performance in simultaneous tasks. Global trends have changed different perceptions leading to a digital generation era that has provided more opportunities that are related to multitasking. Most of the students have embraced the increasing technological advancements especially in the developed countries. Digital inequalities still exist despite the high rate of ICT adoption in the learning institutions. According to Junco, white students are twice as likely to own a mobile device as compared to black and African. As a result, the high numbers have led to a lessened awareness of stimuli and the interference of decision making due to the behavioral impairment among the individuals. Experiment: It tested different variables among the participants that include internet skills and the frequency of multi-tasking in class. The population included 3866 students that were tested at the rate they got involved in multitasking during the observation period. Results: Demographic characteristics were used to describe the frequency of multi-tasking during lectures. Most of the students were found to start secondary tasks during researches and note taking. There are different reasons that led to the changes in tasks such as boredom and breaks during lectures. The secondary tasks were tempting, and some internet sites had links that led the students to other sites. For example, Facebook may have external links that may direct them to sites such as game websites. The results show an increased rate of multitasking after the first attempt. Contrast and comparison Both essays are based on the same sociological aspect. They both support the principles and concepts of the social cognitive theory. The thesis specializes in the study of human behavior depending on various variables such as variables and responses to different stimulus. The participants include students that have common social and age groups that call for the same responses. In addition, both have a common foundation that includes the impacts of multitasking on the human behavior. The foundation of both studies stipulates that the introduction of a secondary task will lead to the distortion of primary data retrieval. They both offer the negative impacts of technological advancements on the performance and activities of students in different learning institutions. Similarly, they have also based their studies on real life situations where multitasking leads to the poor performance of the tasks as compared to undivided attention. Both authors carried out their experiments in a classroom set up that includes analysis of students behaviors in response to technology. Unlike other scholars, their research is based on an identified on college and university students that have been recognized as the digital generation. Just as Sana, Weston, and Cepeda (2013) have based their research on laptops, Junco has also based his research on technological advancement on devices such as smartphones, laptops, and computers. Most students are engaging in adopting these developments to reduce the efforts in resource progress. As a result, the approach has been adopted in various educational sectors to enhance performance but the results have exposed a different prospect. On the contrary, the approaches have varied in various variables such as the main objectives. Juncos study is based on the frequency of multitasking among the students and their rate of technological embracement. Sana, Weston, and Cepeda have based their study on the impacts of laptop use. Additionally, they have also involved their study on peers and colleagues. Conversely, the authors have differed in another variable (frequency) that has been involved in Junco’s research. His study has focused on the external variables such as the number recur rate of the participants in the same activity. Sana, Weston, and Cepeda have based their study on the impacts of laptop use on the user and the peers in the same education environment. The frequency requires a large sample in order to present detailed information on the number of times that the students are engaged in multitasking. However, the sample population differs between the two experiments; hence, authors have different ideologies on the research samples. The frequency requires a large sample in order to present detailed information on the number of times that the students are engaged in multitasking. Conclusion Correspondingly, the two articles have similar approaches and are based on the same principles. They have a similar objective that is to comprehend the impacts of technological advancements among the college and university students. They have used variables such as the use of laptops and computers in their studies. Additionally, they have also been based on the negative impacts that arise from the use of these advancements in the lecture rooms. Sociologically, they have similar results on the adoption of secondary tasks as a form of multitasking. They present a response to human behavior that causes similar responses based on real life situations. Multitasking should be embraced in learning institutions with the aim of saving time and enhancing information gathering. However, the students should prevent both primary and secondary impacts by making sure they are not distracted by other activities in the learning process. The use of technological advancements in classrooms presents a high possibility on poor performance. References Junco, R. (2012). In-class multitasking and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 2236-2243. Sana, F., Weston, T., & Cepeda, N. J. (2013). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 24-31. Read More