On the Horizon - Centro de ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
On the Horizon
Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1
Marc Prensky,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Marc Prensky, (2001) "Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1", On the Horizon, Vol. 9 Issue: 5,pp. 1-6, doi:
10.1108/10748120110424816
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
Downloaded on: 29 March 2017, At: 12:03 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Downloaded by Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile At 12:03 29 March 2017 (PT)
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 34733 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2001),"On the Horizon broadens its horizons – to publish may be to perish?", On the Horizon, Vol. 9 Iss 5 pp. 2-3 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/10748120110734687
(2011),"Digital natives and digital immigrants: getting to know each other", Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 43 Iss 7 pp.
460-466 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00197851111171890
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by All users group
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.ON
TH E
the
S TRATEGI C
H ORIZON
PL A NN IN G RESO U RC E FOR ED U C ATIO N P ROFES SIO NA L S
September/October 2001
Volume 9, Number 5
Digital Natives, Digital
Immigrants Part 1
Downloaded by Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile At 12:03 29 March 2017 (PT)
Marc Prensky
games2train.com and Corporate Gameware LLC
marc@games2train.com
I
t is amazing to me how, in all the hoo-ha instant messaging are integral parts of their
and debate these days about the decline of
education in the USA, we ignore the most
lives.
It is now clear that, as a result of this
IN THIS ISSUE:
Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants
fundamental of its causes. Our students ubiquitous environment and the sheer volume Park 1
have changed radically. Today’s students are of their interaction with it, today’s students Marc Prensky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
no longer the people our educational system think and process information fundamentally
was designed to teach. differently from their predecessors. These From the Editor
On the Horizon Broadens its Horizons
Today’s students have not just changed differences go far further and deeper than
– To Publish May Be To Perish?
incrementally from those of the past, nor most educators suspect or realize. “Different
Tom P. Abeles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
simply changed their slang, clothes, body kinds of experiences lead to different brain
adornments, or styles, as has happened structures, “ says Dr Bruce D. Berry of Baylor Legacy-based Thinking II: Resisting New
between generations previously. A really big College of Medicine. As we shall see in the next Tools and Competencies
discontinuity has taken place. One might even installment, it is very likely that our students’ Arthur Harkins and George Kubik . . . . 6
call it a “singularity” – an event which changes brains have physically changed – and are A Voice from Pari
things so fundamentally that there is absolutely different from ours – as a result of how they Elena Liotta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
no going back. This so-called “singularity” is grew up. But whether or not this is literally
the arrival and rapid dissemination of digital true, we can say with certainty that their Scanning the Environment
NextEd Offers Multiple Services for
technology in the last decades of the twentieth thinking patterns have changed. I will get to
Hitting Asian Marketplace
century. how they have changed in a minute. George Lorenzo . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Today’s students – K-12 through college – What should we call these “new” students
represent the first generations to grow up of today? Some refer to them as the N-(for Book Reviews
with this new technology. They have spent Net)-gen or D-(for digital)-gen. But the most Is it or isn’t it?
their entire lives surrounded by and using useful designation I have found for them is Tom Abeles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
computers, videogames, digital music players, Digital Natives. Our students today are all
video cams, cell phones, and all the other toys “native speakers” of the digital language of
and tools of the digital age. Today’s average computers, video games and the Internet.
college grads have spent fewer than 5,000 So what does that make the rest of us?
hours of their lives reading, but over 10,000 Those of us who were not born into the
hours playing video games (not to mention digital world but have, at some later point in
20,000 hou rs watching TV ). Computer our lives, become fascinated by and adopted
games, e-mail, the Internet, cell phones and many or most aspects of the new technology
continued on page 3are actively seeking alternatives to distribution of Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants
traditional journal articles through a limited number of
publishing houses that control rights and are considered Part 1
to be making exceedingly large profits through their continued from page 1
control of the distribution of what is seen, traditionally,
as public knowledge. In addition to the academics, are, and always will be, compared with them, Digital
scholarly libraries have become concerned, as the Immigrants.
proliferation of journals and the rapidly rising costs The importance of the distinction is this: As Digital
severely pressure increasingly limited budgets. Immigrants learn – like all immigrants, some better
Not only is the academic community faced with than others – to adapt to their environment, they
confronting the issues of preprints, online journals and always retain, to some degree, their “accent”, that is
increasing numbers of traditional publications, but their foot in the past. The “digital immigrant accent”
also the electronic medium adds what has traditionally can be seen in such things as turning to the Internet for
been fugitive literature or knowledge on the fringe. information second rather than first, or in reading the
This includes, in particular, materials from conferences, manual for a program rather than assuming that the
workshops and seminars th at in the past have program itself will teach us to use it. Today’s older folk
la nguished in the archives of small, specialized were “socialized” differently from their kids, and are
Downloaded by Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile At 12:03 29 March 2017 (PT)
associations and scholarly societies. Often relegated to now in the process of learning a new language. And a
obscure collections or recast for traditional venues, language learned later in life, scientists tell us, goes into
they now are becoming available through the Internet a different part of the brain.
in a variety of formats.
The rise of semantic search engines makes these A language learned later in life,
visible to the larger community of researchers and
students, yet one cannot ascertain whether these are scientists tell us, goes into a different
critical or serve only to increase the information part of the brain
overload. We are facing a world where the cost per bit
of information is getting cheaper, while the cost of a
useful bit may be exceedingly costly. In such a world, There are hundreds of examples of the digital immigrant
where fiscal resources are limited, how does The accent. They include printing out your e-mail (or having
Academy cope? your secretary print it out for you – an even “thicker”
Addit ionally, campu ses, ma ny of which have accent); needing to print out a document written on the
embraced the delivery of knowledge through a variety computer in order to edit it (rather than just editing on
of IT products and processes, including the Internet, the screen); and bringing people physically into your
are faced with shifting library u sage, including office to see an interesting Web site (rather than just
decreased use of both the physical space and print sending them the URL). I’m sure that you can think of
resources. There is increasing concern that end users one or two examples of your own without much effort.
will seek no further than electronic sources and that My own favorite example is the “Did you get my e-mail?”
the traditional social functions of a campus library phone call. Those of us who are Digital Immigrants can,
may yield to lessons learned from the larger booksellers and should, laugh at ourselves and our “accent.”
with their coffee-houses. But this is not just a joke. It’s very serious, because
Thus, OTH itself becomes a probe into the venerable the single biggest problem facing education today is
publishing institution and a sensor as to what might lie that our Digital Immigrant instructors, who speak an
ahead in the arena of academic publishing. What, outdated language (that of the pre-digital age), are
indeed, are the implications for The Academy? What is struggling to teach a population that speaks an entirely
the function of print in The Academy? What do new language.
traditional publishing and the growing number of This is obvious to the Digital Natives – school often
scholarly electronic jou rnals imply? With the feels pretty much as if we’ve brought in a population of
exponential growth of various forms of e-learning heavily accented, unintelligible foreigners to lecture
accessible to both on- and off-campus students, for them. They often can’t understand what the Immigrants
what should the “building fund” be used – clicks or are saying. What does “dial” a number mean, anyway?
bricks? Do we see the future through the eyes of a Lest this perspective appear radical, rather than just
cyber immigrant or a cyber native? descriptive, let me highlight some of the issues. Digital
On the Horizon will be looking in depth at these hard Natives are used to receiving information really fast.
questions and others, as our scanning radar is amplified They like to parallel process and multi-task. They
with the resources of Emerald and our expanded prefer their graphics before their text rather than the
format allows a more critical interpretation. l opposite. They prefer random access (like hypertext).
3
On the Horizon September/October 2001They function best when networked. They thrive on read from their textbooks. I quit.” In the giddy Internet
instant gratification and frequent rewards. They prefer bubble of a only a few months ago – when jobs were
games to “serious” work. (Does any of this sound plentiful, especially in the areas where school offered
familiar?) little help – this was a real possibility. But the dot-com
drop-outs are now returning to school. They will have
to confront once again the Immigrant/Native divide,
Digital N atives are used to receiving and have even more trou ble, g iven their recent
experiences. And that will make it even harder to teach
inform ation really fast.T hey like to
them – and all the Digital Natives already in the system
parallel process and m ulti-task – in the traditional fashion.
So what should happen? Should the Digital Native
But Digital Immigrants t ypically have very little students learn the old ways, or should their Digital
appreciation for these new skills that the Natives have Immigrant educators learn the new? Unfortunately, no
acquired and perfected though years of interaction and matter how much the Immigrants may wish it, it is
practice. These skills are almost totally foreign to the highly unlikely tha t the Digital Na tives will go
Immigrants, who themselves learned – and so choose backwards. In the first place, it may be impossible –
to teach – slowly, step-by-step, one thing at a time, their brains may already be different. It also flies in the
Downloaded by Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile At 12:03 29 March 2017 (PT)
individually, and above all seriously. “My students just face of everything we know about cultural migration.
don’t _____ like they used to,” Digital Immigrant Kids born into any new culture learn the new language
educators grouse. I can’t get them to ____ or to ____. easily, and forcefully resist using the old. Smart adult
They have no appreciation for _____ or _____ . (Fill in immigrants accept that they don’t know about their
the blanks – there are a wide variety of choices.) new world and take advantage of their kids to help
Digital Immigrants don’t believe that their students them learn and integrate. Not-so-smart (or not-so-
can learn successfully while watching TV or listening to flexible) immigrants spend most of their time grousing
music, because they (the Immigrants) can’t. Of course about how good things were in the “old country.”
not – they didn’t practice this skill constantly for all of So, unless we want to just forget about educating
their formative years. Digital Immigrants think that Digital Natives until they grow up and do it themselves,
learning can’t (or shouldn’t) be fun. Why should they? we had better confront this issue. And in so doing we
They didn’t spend their formative years learning with need to reconsider both our methodology and our
Sesame Street. content.
Unfortunately for our Digital Immigrant teachers, First, our methodology. Today’s teachers have to
the people sitting in their classes grew up on the learn to communicate in the language and style of their
“twitch speed” of video games and MTV. They are used students. This doesn’t mean changing the meaning of
to the instantaneity of hypertext, downloaded music, what is important, or of good thinking skills. But it
phones in their pockets, a library on their laptops, does mean going faster, less step-by step, more in parallel,
beamed messages and instant messaging. They’ve been with more random access, a mong other things.
networked most or all of their lives. They have little Educators might ask, “But how do we teach logic in
patience for lectures, step-by-step logic, and “tell-test” this fashion?” While it’s not immediately clear, we do
instruction. need to figure it out.
Digital Immigrant teachers assume that learners are
the same as they have always been, and that the same
methods that worked for the teachers when they were N ot-so-sm art im m igrants spend m ost
students will work for their students now. But that of their tim e grousing about how good
assumption is no longer valid. Today’s learners are
different. “Www.hungry.com,” said a kindergarten things w ere in the “old country”
student recently at lunch-time. “Every time I go to
school I have to power down,” complains a high-school
student. Is it that Digital Natives can’t pay attention, or Second, our content. It seems to me that after the digital
that they choose not to? Often from the Natives’ point “singularity” there are now two kinds of content:
of view their Digital Immigrant instructors make their “Legacy” content (to borrow the computer term for old
education not worth paying attention to compared systems) and “Future” content.
with everything else they experience – and then they “Legacy” content includes reading, writing, arithmetic,
blame them for not paying attention! logical thinking, understanding the writings and ideas
And, more and more, they won’t take it. “I went to a of the past, etc. – all of our “traditional” curriculum. It
highly ranked college where all the professors came is of course still important, but it is from a different era.
from MIT,” says a former student. “But all they did was Some of it (such as logical thinking) will continue to be
4
On the Horizon September/October 2001important, but some (perhaps like Euclidean geometry) him is to use the CAD software, which the learner must
will become less so, as did Latin and Greek. employ to build tools, fix weapons, and defeat booby-
“Future” content is to a large extent, not surprisingly, traps. There is one hour of game time, plus 30 “tasks,”
digital and technological. But, while it includes software, which can take from 15 minutes to several hours,
hardware, robotics, nanotechnology, genomics, etc., it depending on one’s experience level.
also includes the ethics, politics, sociology, languages Monkey Wrench has been phenomenally successful in
and other things that go with them. This “Future” getting young people interested in learning the software.
content is extremely interesting to today’s students. But It is widely used by engineering students around the
how many Digital Immigrants are prepared to teach it? world, with over 1 million copies of the game in print
Someone once suggested to me that kids should only in several languages. But, while the game was easy for
be allowed to use computers in school that they have my Digital Native staff to invent, creating the content
built themselves. It’s a brilliant idea that is very doable turned out to be more difficult for the professors, who
from the point of view of the students’ capabilities. But were used to teaching courses that started with “Lesson
who could teach it? 1 – the Interface.” We asked them instead to create a
series of graded tasks, into which the skills to be
“Legacy” content includes reading, learned were embedded. The professors had made five-
writing, arithm etic , logical thinking, to-ten-minute movies to illustrate key concepts; we
Downloaded by Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile At 12:03 29 March 2017 (PT)
asked them to cut them to under 30 seconds. The
understanding the w ritings and ideas professors insisted that the learners do all the tasks in
of the past order; we asked them to allow random access. They
wanted a slow, academic pace; we wanted speed and
As educators, we need to be thinking about how to urgency (we hired a Hollywood scriptwriter to provide
teach both Legacy and Future content in the language this.) They wanted written instructions; we wanted
of the Digital Natives. The first involves a major computer movies. They wanted the tradit ional
translation and change of methodology; the second pedagogical language of “learning objectives,” “mastery”,
involves all that plus new content and thinking. It’s not etc. (e.g. “in this exercise you will learn …”); our goal
actually clear to me which is harder – “learning new was to completely eliminate any language that even
stuff ” or “learning new ways to do old stuff.” I suspect smacked of education.
that it’s the latter.
So we have to invent, but not necessarily from Their creation was so m uch better
scratch. Adapting materials to the language of Digital
than w hat people were currently
Natives has already been done successfully. My own
preference for teaching Digital Natives is to invent using that they had assum ed that the
computer games to do the job, even for the most
entire engineering w orld w ould quickly
serious content. After all, it’s an idiom with which most
of them are totally familiar. adopt it
Not long ago a group of professors showed up at my
company with new computer-aided design (CAD) In the end the professors and their staff came through
software they had developed for mechanical engineers. brilliantly but because of the large mind-shift required
Their creation was so much better than what people it took them twice as long as we had expected. As they
were currently using that they had assumed that the saw the approach working, though, the new “Digital
entire engineering world would quickly adopt it. But Native” methodology became their model for more
instead they encountered a lot of resistance, due in and more teaching – both in and out of games – and
large part to the product’s extremely steep learning their development speed increased dramatically.
curve – the software contained hundreds of new Similar rethinking needs to be applied to all subjects
buttons, options and approaches to master. at all levels. Although most attempts at “edutainment”
Their marketers, however, had a brilliant idea. to date have essentially failed from both the education
Observing that the users of CAD software were almost and the entertainment perspective, we can – and will, I
exclusively male engineers between 20 and 30, they predict – do much better.
said, “Why not make the learning into a video game!” In math, for example, the debate must no longer be
So we invented and created for them a computer game about whether to use calculators and computers – they
in the “first person shooter” style of the consumer are a part of the Digital Natives’ world – but rather
games Doom and Quake, called The Monkey Wrench how to use them to instill the things that are useful to
Conspiracy. Its player becomes an inter-galactic secret have internalized, from key skills and concepts to the
agent who has to save a space station from an attack by multiplication tables. We should be focusing on “future
the evil Dr Monkey Wrench. The only way to defeat math” – approximation, statistics, binary thinking.
5
On the Horizon September/October 2001In geography – which is all but ignored these days –
there is no reason why a generation that can memorize Legacy-based
over 100 Pokémon characters with all t heir
characteristics, history and evolution can’t learn the
names, populations, capitals and relationships of all the
Thinking II: Resisting
101 nations in the world. It just depends on how it is
presented.
New Tools and
We need to invent Digital Native methodologies for
all subjects, at all levels, using our students to guide us.
Competencies
The pro cess has already begun – I know college Arthur Harkins
professors inventing games for teaching subjects University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
ranging from math to engineering to the Spanish harki001@um n.edu
Inquisition. We need to find ways of publicizing and
spreading their successes. George Kubik
A frequent objection I hear from Digital Immigrant University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
educators is “this approach is great for facts, but it kubi0021@um n.edu
wouldn’t work for ‘my subject.’” Nonsense. This is just
Introduction
Downloaded by Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile At 12:03 29 March 2017 (PT)
rationalization and lack of imagination. In my talks I
now include “thought experiments”, where I invite This is the sixth article in our series projecting a shift
professors and teachers to suggest a subject or topic, from learning to perform to performing to learn. This
and I attempt – on the spot – to invent a game or other article summarizes and comments upon the last of
Digital Native metho d for learning it. Classical three story-writing exercises undertaken by 166
philosophy? Create a game in which the philosophers Minnesota public school administrators in late January
debate and the learners have to pick out what each 2001.
would say. The Holocaust? Create a simulation where
I
students role-play the meeting at Wannsee, or one
n all of our a rticles we have argued t hat
where they can experience the true horror of the
performance-based learning (PBL) can effectively
camps, as opposed to the films like Schindler’s List. It’s
create learning in the context of tasks supported by
just dumb (and lazy) of educators – not to mention
distributed competence (DC) software. We have
ineffective – to presume that (despite their traditions)
submitted that PBL is a process that encourages
the Digital Immigrant way is the only way to teach, and
learning based on authentic performances supported
that the Digital Natives’ “language” is not as capable as
by DC software, and that such learning should lead to
their own of encompassing any and every idea.
performance u pgrades and innovations in task
So if Digital Immigrant educators really want to
conception and accomplishment. Such upgrades and
reach Digital Natives – i.e. all their students – they will
innovations are not guaranteed; they are potentials in
have to change. It’s high time for them to stop their
the futures of human performers and their networked
grousing and, as the Nike motto of the Digital Native
DC software.
generation says, “Just do it!” They will succeed in the
How did the public school administrators in our
long run – and their successes will come that much
workshop sample respond to the prospects of PBL in
sooner if their administrators support them.
both the school and the work venues? Were they
hopeful that PBL-driven schools might produce better
Next issue
prospects for the workforce? Could these prospects be
The scientific evidence behind the Digital Natives’
produced earlier, and demonstrate superior ability to
thinking changes, and the evidence that Digital Native-
perform tasks and compete successfully against new
style learning works!
and incumbent workers?
NOTE
PBL can effectively create learning in
Marc Prensky is the author of Digital Game-Based
Learning (McGraw-Hill, 2001) and Founder and CEO the context of tasks supported by D C
of Games2Train.com The Monkey Wrench Conspiracy
software
CD can be purchased for $10 at www.games2train.com/
site/html/tutor.htmll We will examine the results of the StoryTech that
dealt with these issues, and then comment on the
REFERENCE
qualities of PBL that distinguish it from contemporary
Prensky, M. (2001), Digital Game-Based Learning, educational practices, even as the workforce demonstrates
McGraw-Hill. its increasing reliance on PBL.
6
On the Horizon September/October 2001This article has been cited by:
1. Tianchong Wang. 2017. Overcoming barriers to ‘flip’: building teacher’s capacity for the adoption of flipped classroom in Hong
Kong secondary schools. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning 12:1. . [CrossRef]
2. Duvince Zhalimar Dumpit, Cheryl Joy Fernandez. 2017. Analysis of the use of social media in Higher Education Institutions
(HEIs) using the Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 14:1. .
[CrossRef]
3. Parisa Mehran, Mehrasa Alizadeh, Ichiro Koguchi, Haruo Takemura. 2017. Are Japanese digital natives ready for learning
english online? a preliminary case study at Osaka University. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
14:1. . [CrossRef]
4. Fatema Kawaf, Stephen Tagg. 2017. The construction of online shopping experience: A repertory grid approach. Computers in
Human Behavior 72, 222-232. [CrossRef]
5. Milena Foerster, Martin Röösli. 2017. A latent class analysis on adolescents media use and associations with health related quality
of life. Computers in Human Behavior 71, 266-274. [CrossRef]
6. Cory Robinson. 2017. Disclosure of personal data in ecommerce: A cross-national comparison of Estonia and the United States.
Telematics and Informatics 34:2, 569-582. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile At 12:03 29 March 2017 (PT)
7. Emel Kursunluoglu Yarimoglu. 2017. Demographic differences on service quality and perceived value in private online shopping
clubs. Journal of Strategic Marketing 25:3, 240-257. [CrossRef]
8. Young Ju Joo, Sunyoung Park, Eui Kyoung Shin. 2017. Students' expectation, satisfaction, and continuance intention to use
digital textbooks. Computers in Human Behavior 69, 83-90. [CrossRef]
9. Judit García-Martín, Jesús-Nicasio García-Sánchez. 2017. Pre-service teachers' perceptions of the competence dimensions of
digital literacy and of psychological and educational measures. Computers & Education 107, 54-67. [CrossRef]
10. Mark Anthony Camilleri, Adriana Caterina Camilleri. 2017. Digital Learning Resources and Ubiquitous Technologies in
Education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning 22:1, 65-82. [CrossRef]
11. Louise Starkey, Allan Sylvester, David Johnstone. 2017. Negotiating Digital Divides: Perspectives From the New Zealand
Schooling System. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 16, 1-12. [CrossRef]
12. Henry D. Delcore, Philip Neufeld. 2017. Student Technology Rollouts in Higher Education: Lessons From DISCOVERe.
Journal of Research on Technology in Education 4, 1-12. [CrossRef]
13. Sandra Chang-Kredl, Stephanie Kozak. 2017. Children using Facebook : teachers’ discursive constructions of childhood.
Learning, Media and Technology 4, 1-5. [CrossRef]
14. Martin Gillie, Ranim Dahli, Fiona C Saunders, Andrew Gibson. 2017. Use of rich-media resources by engineering
undergraduates. European Journal of Engineering Education 2007, 1-15. [CrossRef]
15. Paul Bazelais, Tenzin Doleck, David John Lemay. 2017. Investigating the predictive power of TAM: A case study of CEGEP
students’ intentions to use online learning technologies. Education and Information Technologies 56. . [CrossRef]
16. Angela Jones, Rebecca Bennett. 2017. Reaching beyond an online/offline divide: invoking the rhizome in higher education course
design. Technology, Pedagogy and Education 26:2, 193-210. [CrossRef]
17. Pedro Silva. 2017. Scaffolding assignments: Analysis of AssignMentor as a tool to support first year students’ academic writing
skills. E-Learning and Digital Media 13, 204275301769565. [CrossRef]
18. Karel PICKA. 2017. DIGITĂLNĂ HRY VE VĂUCE ZÂ POHLEDU UÄITELĹŽ. Journal of Technology and Information
. [CrossRef]
19. Suzanna J. OpreeMedia Literacy 1-9. [CrossRef]
20. Rory McGloin, Kara T. McGillicuddy, John L. Christensen. 2017. The impact of goal achievement orientation on student
technology usage in the classroom. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 59. . [CrossRef]
21. Jennifer Owens, Flavius Lilly. 2017. The influence of academic discipline, race, and gender on web-use skills among graduate-
level students. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 56. . [CrossRef]
22. Niall McCrae, Sheryl Gettings, Edward Purssell. 2017. Social Media and Depressive Symptoms in Childhood and Adolescence:
A Systematic Review. Adolescent Research Review . [CrossRef]
23. Arkaitz Lareki, Juan Ignacio Martínez de Morentin, Jon Altuna, Nere Amenabar. 2017. Teenagers' perception of risk behaviors
regarding digital technologies. Computers in Human Behavior 68, 395-402. [CrossRef]24. Josie Ahlquist. 2017. Digital Student Leadership Development. New Directions for Student Leadership 2017:153, 47-62.
[CrossRef]
25. Bernd W. Wirtz, Jan C. Weyerer, Marc-Julian Thomas, Anke Möller. 2017. E-Government Implementation: Theoretical
Aspects and Empirical Evidence. Public Organization Review 17:1, 101-120. [CrossRef]
26. Ron Blonder, Shelley Rap. 2017. I like Facebook: Exploring Israeli high school chemistry teachers’ TPACK and self-efficacy
beliefs. Education and Information Technologies 22:2, 697-724. [CrossRef]
27. Hasan Karal, Mehmet Kokoc, Ozlem Cakir. 2017. Impact of the educational use of Facebook group on the high school students’
proper usage of language. Education and Information Technologies 22:2, 677-695. [CrossRef]
28. Marilla Svinicki. 2017. Digital Natives: What Are They Learning, If Anything?. The National Teaching & Learning Forum
26:3, 11-12. [CrossRef]
29. Dawn Surgenor, Lynsey Hollywood, Sinéad Furey, Fiona Lavelle, Laura McGowan, Michelle Spence, Monique Raats, Amanda
McCloat, Elaine Mooney, Martin Caraher, Moira Dean. 2017. The impact of video technology on learning: A cooking skills
experiment. Appetite . [CrossRef]
30. Douglas G. Carrie, Parizad Mulla, Andrew Patterson, Michelle Kilkolly-Proffit, Richard Brookes, Herbert Sima, Tom Agee.
2017. Adding value to first-year undergraduate marketing education: team-based learning as a strategic response to changing
Downloaded by Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile At 12:03 29 March 2017 (PT)
modern educational environments. Journal of Strategic Marketing 25:2, 138-151. [CrossRef]
31. Jorge Arenas-Gaitán, Francisco Javier Rondán-Cataluña, Patricio E. Ramírez-Correa. 2017. Modelling the success of learning
management systems: application of latent class segmentation using FIMIX-PLS. Interactive Learning Environments 1-13.
[CrossRef]
32. Christian Moro, Michelle McLean. 2017. Supporting Students’ Transition to University and Problem-Based Learning. Medical
Science Educator . [CrossRef]
33. Rita Bencivenga. 2017. TThe ‘digital curious’: first steps towards a new typology for mapping adults’ relationships with others
when using ICT. European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults 7:2, 1-22. [CrossRef]
34. Anton BorstA Shared Horizon 49-61. [CrossRef]
35. Bor Gregorcic, Eugenia Etkina, Gorazd Planinsic. 2017. A New Way of Using the Interactive Whiteboard in a High School
Physics Classroom: A Case Study. Research in Science Education . [CrossRef]
36. Yoonhyuk Jung, Suzanne D. Pawlowski, Hee-Woong Kim. 2017. Exploring associations between young adults’ facebook use
and psychological well-being: A goal hierarchy approach. International Journal of Information Management 37:1, 1391-1404.
[CrossRef]
37. Tomasz Drabowicz. 2017. Social theory of internet use: Corroboration or rejection among the digital natives? Correspondence
analysis of adolescents in two societies. Computers & Education 105, 57-67. [CrossRef]
38. Elisabeth Hahn, Martin Reuter, Frank M. Spinath, Christian Montag. 2017. Internet addiction and its facets: The role of
genetics and the relation to self-directedness. Addictive Behaviors 65, 137-146. [CrossRef]
39. Linda C. McSwiggan, Maureen Campbell. 2017. Can podcasts for assessment guidance and feedback promote self-efficacy among
undergraduate nursing students? A qualitative study. Nurse Education Today 49, 115-121. [CrossRef]
40. Katariina Salmela-Aro, Katja Upadyaya, Kai Hakkarainen, Kirsti Lonka, Kimmo Alho. 2017. The Dark Side of Internet Use:
Two Longitudinal Studies of Excessive Internet Use, Depressive Symptoms, School Burnout and Engagement Among Finnish
Early and Late Adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 46:2, 343-357. [CrossRef]
41. Christopher Vincent, Mary Barnett, Louisa Killpack, Amita Sehgal, Penni Swinden. 2017. Advancing Telecommunication
Technology and its Impact on Psychotherapy in Private Practice. British Journal of Psychotherapy 33:1, 63-76. [CrossRef]
42. Kaveh Madani, Tyler W. Pierce, Ali Mirchi. 2017. Serious games on environmental management. Sustainable Cities and Society
29, 1-11. [CrossRef]
43. Angela Owens, Tracey Moroney. 2017. Shifting the load: Improving bioscience performance in undergraduate nurses through
student focused learning. Collegian 24:1, 37-43. [CrossRef]
44. Maria Grazia Violante, Enrico Vezzetti. 2017. Design and implementation of 3D Web-based interactive medical devices for
educational purposes. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) 11:1, 31-44. [CrossRef]
45. Valerie N. Williams, Jose Medina, Andria Medina, Shari Clifton. 2017. Bridging the Millennial Generation Expectation Gap:
Perspectives and Strategies for Physician and Interprofessional Faculty. The American Journal of the Medical Sciences 353:2,
109-115. [CrossRef]46. James E. Richard, Fruen Purnell. 2017. Rethinking Catalogue and Online B2B Buyer Channel Preferences in the Education
Supplies Market. Journal of Interactive Marketing 37, 1-15. [CrossRef]
47. Tania Ouariachi, María Dolores Olvera-Lobo, José Gutiérrez-Pérez. 2017. Analyzing Climate Change Communication Through
Online Games. Science Communication 39:1, 10-44. [CrossRef]
48. Lorraine Lim. 2017. Going global and local control: Reflections on research directions on media policy in East Asia. Global
Media and China 2, 205943641769300. [CrossRef]
49. Wilma K. Schroeder. 2017. Leveraging Social Media in #FamilyNursing Practice. Journal of Family Nursing 23:1, 55-72.
[CrossRef]
50. Olga Belletich, Maider Pérez de Villarreal. 2017. Knowledge of the Natural and Social Environment in ICT Consumer Children.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 237, 164-168. [CrossRef]
51. Raz Godelnik. 2017. Millennials and the sharing economy: Lessons from a ‘buy nothing new, share everything month’ project.
Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions . [CrossRef]
52. Liezel Cilliers. 2017. Evaluation of information ethical issues among undergraduate students: An exploratory study. SA Journal
of Information Management 19:1. . [CrossRef]
53. Natalia Padilla-Zea, Nuria Medina Medina, Francisco L. Gutiérrez Vela, Patricia Paderewski, César A. Collazos. 2017. PLAGER-
Downloaded by Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile At 12:03 29 March 2017 (PT)
VG: platform for managing educational multiplayer video games. Multimedia Tools and Applications . [CrossRef]
54. Marcus Sundgren. 2017. Blurring time and place in higher education with bring your own device applications: a literature review.
Education and Information Technologies . [CrossRef]
55. Caroline Kuhn. 2017. Are Students Ready to (re)-Design their Personal Learning Environment? The Case of the E-
Dynamic.Space. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research 6:1, 11-19. [CrossRef]
56. Francesca Comunello, Mireia Fernández Ardèvol, Simone Mulargia, Francesca Belotti. 2017. Women, youth and everything else:
age-based and gendered stereotypes in relation to digital technology among elderly Italian mobile phone users. Media, Culture
& Society 016344371667436. [CrossRef]
57. Gareth Hall, Antonia Ivaldi. 2017. A qualitative approach to understanding the role of lecture capture in student learning
experiences. Technology, Pedagogy and Education 1-12. [CrossRef]
58. Elza Venter. 2017. Bridging the communication gap between Generation Y and the Baby Boomer generation. International
Journal of Adolescence and Youth 1-11. [CrossRef]
59. Lauren M. Singer, Patricia A. Alexander. 2017. Reading Across Mediums: Effects of Reading Digital and Print Texts on
Comprehension and Calibration. The Journal of Experimental Education 85:1, 155-172. [CrossRef]
60. Rachel Moll, Wendy Nielsen. 2017. Development and validation of a social media and science learning survey. International
Journal of Science Education, Part B 7:1, 14-30. [CrossRef]
61. Laura L. Zizka. 2017. From Campfire to Classroom: An Application of Talking Circles and Storytelling in Hospitality
Management Education. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education 29:1, 44-50. [CrossRef]
62. Leonard Reinecke, Stefan Aufenanger, Manfred E. Beutel, Michael Dreier, Oliver Quiring, Birgit Stark, Klaus Wölfling, Kai W.
Müller. 2017. Digital Stress over the Life Span: The Effects of Communication Load and Internet Multitasking on Perceived
Stress and Psychological Health Impairments in a German Probability Sample. Media Psychology 20:1, 90-115. [CrossRef]
63. Loredana Ivan, Mireia Fernández-Ardèvol. 2017. Older people and the use of ICTs to communicate with children and
grandchildren. Transnational Social Review 7:1, 41-55. [CrossRef]
64. Miren Fernández-de-Álava, Carla Quesada-Pallarès, Marina García-Carmona. 2017. Use of ICTs at work: an intergenerational
analysis in Spain / Uso de las TIC en el puesto de trabajo: un análisis intergeneracional en España. Cultura y Educación 29:1,
120-150. [CrossRef]
65. Pamela Sullivan, Holly McCartney. 2017. Integrating 3D printing into an early childhood teacher preparation course: Reflections
on practice. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 38:1, 39-51. [CrossRef]
66. Miriam Judge, Declan Tuite. 2017. Leaders or led? A qualitative analysis of how young people explore express and experiment
via new media in an Irish higher education context. Learning, Media and Technology 42:1, 28-53. [CrossRef]
67. Ting-Sheng Weng, Meng-Hui Hsu, Der-Ching Yang. 2017. A Study Investigating the Use of 3D Computer Animations of
Trigonometric Functions to Enhance Spatial Perception Ability. International Journal of Information and Education Technology
7:1, 23-26. [CrossRef]
68. Elena Aurel RaileanDigital Screens and Issues of Multiliteracies’ Learning 43-57. [CrossRef]69. Maria Do Carmo López Méndez, Angélica González Arrieta, Marián Queiruga Dios, Ascensión Hernández Encinas, Araceli
Queiruga-DiosMinecraft as a Tool in the Teaching-Learning Process of the Fundamental Elements of Circulation in
Architecture 728-735. [CrossRef]
70. Daniela PscheidaSoziale Medien und der Umbau der gesellschaftlichen Wissenskultur 273-293. [CrossRef]
71. Katrin BeckerDesigning Game-Based Pedagogy 217-242. [CrossRef]
72. Megan Yih Chyn A. Kek, Henk HuijserAgile PBL and the Next Generation of Learners 31-48. [CrossRef]
73. Verina Cristie, Matthias BergerGame Engines for Urban Exploration: Bridging Science Narrative for Broader Participants 87-107.
[CrossRef]
74. Barbara Garrick, Donna Pendergast, David GeelanPersonalised Education, Pedagogy, and Equity in the Higher Education Sector
61-81. [CrossRef]
75. Janna Jackson KellingerUpping Your Game: Transforming Teaching 1-23. [CrossRef]
76. Christopher PeterkaWhy we Might Wish to Be Governed by Algorithms: Insights into a Technophile Digital Mindset 33-47.
[CrossRef]
77. Giselda Antonelli, Roberta Di Risio, Giovanna Di FeliceNew Media Education: The Contribution of Social Sciences to Training
Teachers 417-426. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile At 12:03 29 March 2017 (PT)
78. Zakaria Salameh. 2017. The Impact of Systematic Multimedia Instruction on Enhancing Students‟ Achievement in the Course
of Language Evaluation. International Journal of Information and Education Technology 7:4, 269-274. [CrossRef]
79. Gabriela Balladares, Francesc Miralles, Chris KennettThe Role of Perceived Risk in Online Information Search and Pre-purchase
Alternative Evaluation of Products with Significant Experiential Attributes 283-289. [CrossRef]
80. Samuel Kai Wah Chu, Rebecca B. Reynolds, Nicole J. Tavares, Michele Notari, Celina Wing Yi LeeTeachers’ Professional
Development 109-129. [CrossRef]
81. Kevin LarkinStudent Engagement and Rapport in the Context of Blended Learning in Mathematics Education Courses:
Challenges and Implications 25-44. [CrossRef]
82. J. Edward Bates, Hasan Almekdash, Maggie J. Gilchrest-DunnamThe Flipped Classroom: A Brief, Brief History 3-10.
[CrossRef]
83. Laura Lugli, Matteo Ragni, Laura Piccardi, Raffaella Nori. 2017. Hypermedia navigation: Differences between spatial cognitive
styles. Computers in Human Behavior 66, 191-200. [CrossRef]
84. Shawna Malvini Redden, Amy K. Way. 2017. ‘Adults don’t understand’: exploring how teens use dialectical frameworks to
navigate webs of tensions in online life. Journal of Applied Communication Research 45:1, 21-41. [CrossRef]
85. Javad Gholami, Maryam Zeinolabedini. 2017. Peer-to-peer prescriptions in medical sciences: Iranian field specialists' attitudes
toward convenience editing. English for Specific Purposes 45, 86-97. [CrossRef]
86. Arianne Rourke, Joanna MendelssohnFacilitating a Community of Practice (CoP) in the Arts: Connecting Online University
Learning to ‘Real-World’ Experience 475-499. [CrossRef]
87. Thomas Cochrane, Vickel NarayanPrinciples of Modeling CoPs for Pedagogical Change: Lessons Learnt from Practice 2006
to 2014 619-643. [CrossRef]
88. Charlie SmithThe Influence of Digital Media on the Design of Libraries 45-48. [CrossRef]
89. Patricia Stock, Sascha StowasserHuman-Oriented Productivity Management as a Key Criterion for Success in the Digitalised
Working World 15-30. [CrossRef]
90. Maura A. Smale, Mariana RegaladoSituating College Students and Technology 1-21. [CrossRef]
91. Sarah-Kristin Thiel, Peter FröhlichGamification as Motivation to Engage in Location-Based Public Participation? 399-421.
[CrossRef]
92. Norm Friesen 273. [CrossRef]
93. Clare Kosnik, Lydia Menna, Shawn M. BullockChanging Our Practice and Identity Go Hand-in-Hand: A Self-Study of Our
Efforts to Infuse Digital Technology into Our Literacy Courses 47-60. [CrossRef]
94. Helen BoultonIntroducing Digital Technologies into Secondary Schools to Develop Literacy and Engage Disaffected Learners:
A Case Study from the UK 31-44. [CrossRef]
95. Charles Crook, Natasa LackovicImages of Educational Practice: How School Websites Represent Digital Learning 75-90.
[CrossRef]
96. Xiaofan He, David WrayDigital Literacies in a Chinese Secondary School 233-249. [CrossRef]97. Gregory PowellBlogging as a Form of Web 2.0 Technologies for Reflective Practice 271-291. [CrossRef]
98. José Lagarto, Carla Ganito, Hermínia MarquesThe Digital Textbook: New Learning Paradigms in Primary Education—A
Portuguese Pilot Project 495-508. [CrossRef]
99. Mohamed Ismail, Hamid Parsaei, Konstantinos KakosimosIncorporating Human Factors in Course Design: Utility of Wearable
Technologies 159-170. [CrossRef]
100. María Sol Calabor, Araceli Mora, Soledad Moya. 2017. Adquisición de competencias a través de juegos serios en el área contable:
un análisis empírico. Revista de Contabilidad . [CrossRef]
101. Racquel WarnerThe Future of E-assessments in the UAE: Students’ Perspectives 339-358. [CrossRef]
102. Mariana Falco. 2017. Reconsiderando las prácticas educativas: TICs en el proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje / RETHINKING
EDUCATIONAL PRACTICES: ICTs IN THE TEACHING-LEARNING PROCESS. Tendencias Pedagógicas 29:2017,
59-76. [CrossRef]
103. Line Schmeltz. 2017. Getting CSR communication fit: A study of strategically fitting cause, consumers and company in corporate
CSR communication. Public Relations Inquiry 6:1, 47-72. [CrossRef]
104. W. Nielsen, G. Hoban, C. J. T. Hyland. 2017. Pharmacology students’ perceptions of creating multimodal digital explanations.
Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. . [CrossRef]
Downloaded by Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile At 12:03 29 March 2017 (PT)
105. Susan Edwards, Michael Henderson, Donna Gronn, Anne Scott, Moska Mirkhil. 2017. Digital disconnect or digital difference?
A socio-ecological perspective on young children’s technology use in the home and the early childhood centre. Technology,
Pedagogy and Education 26:1, 1-17. [CrossRef]
106. Marvin T. Chan, Jonathan T. Chan, Christine Chan, Craig Gelowitz. 2017. An Artificial Intelligence-Based Vehicular System
Simulator. International Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence 9:1, 55-68. [CrossRef]
107. J.K. Green, A.D. Huntington. 2017. Online professional development for digitally differentiated nurses: An action research
perspective. Nurse Education in Practice 22, 55-62. [CrossRef]
108. Tiziana Baisini, Roberto Carnevali. 2017. La terza dimensione in psicoterapia come espressione dell'universo affettivo/emozionale
in uno spazio bidimensionale. GRUPPI :3, 23-37. [CrossRef]
109. Chih Wei Chao, Lei Chang, An-Chi Cheng, Ting-Ting WuExploration on the Effectiveness of Learning, Interest, and Attitude
of the Integration of Review System of History Based on Mobile Game and Forgetting Curve 34-42. [CrossRef]
110. Hui Yong TayA Prototype Twenty-First Century Class: A School-Wide Initiative to Engage the Digital Native 375-388.
[CrossRef]
111. Pamela Pui-Wan LeungLearning to Engage the Digital Generation in Teacher Education 39-54. [CrossRef]
112. Evangelos Fanoulis, Anasol Peña-RiosEU u-Government: A Solution for More Citizen Participation in EU Policy-Making
241-262. [CrossRef]
113. Michael FlavinIntroduction 1-18. [CrossRef]
114. Michael Flavin‘Why Can’t I Just Google It?’ What Disruptive Innovation Means for Higher Education 53-86. [CrossRef]
115. Michael FlavinWhatever Happened to the Digital Natives? Disruptive Innovation in the Higher Education Community of
Practice 87-109. [CrossRef]
116. Tania Ouariachi, Mª Dolores Olvera-Lobo, José Gutiérrez-Pérez. 2017. Gaming Climate Change: Assessing Online Climate
Change Games Targeting Youth Produced in Spanish. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 237, 1053. [CrossRef]
117. Terry Haydn, Kees RibbensSocial Media, New Technologies and History Education 735-753. [CrossRef]
118. Catherine GomesTransient Migrants: A Profile of Transnational Adaptability 23-55. [CrossRef]
119. Andrea Ibieta, J. Enrique Hinostroza, Christian Labbé, Magdalena Claro. 2017. The role of the Internet in teachers’ professional
practice: activities and factors associated with teacher use of ICT inside and outside the classroom. Technology, Pedagogy and
Education 1. [CrossRef]
120. Glenn Hardaker, Aishah Ahmad Sabki, Javed Iqbal. 2017. Perceptions of inequalities in access and usage of ICT in Islamic faith
schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education 1. [CrossRef]
121. Christine SteinerImmer mehr, immer länger, immer höher? 1-24. [CrossRef]
122. Terry B. NorthcutBeginning with the Context: The Mind–Body Conundrum 9-25. [CrossRef]
123. Marisa Ragonese, Christin P. Bowman, Deborah L. TolmanSex Education, Youth, and Advocacy: Sexual Literacy, Critical
Media, and Intergenerational Sex Education(s) 301-325. [CrossRef]124. Anabela Mesquita, Fernando Moreira, Paula PeresThe Future of Higher Education – Students’ Views About Challenges
Promoted by Technologies 361-370. [CrossRef]
125. Gavin Fox, Pedro Longart. 2016. Electronic word-of-mouth: successful communication strategies for restaurants. Tourism and
hospitality management 22:2, 211-223. [CrossRef]
126. Levent Uzun. 2016. The educational and technical courses in the ELT program in Turkey: Do they contribute to ICT skills?.
Cogent Education 3:1. . [CrossRef]
127. Alberto SÁNCHEZ ROJO. 2016. El aburrimiento como competencia: educación para un mundo sobrestimulado. Teoría de la
Educación. Revista Interuniversitaria 28:2, 93. [CrossRef]
128. Floyd Morris Anthea Henderson ICTs and Empowerment of Children with Disabilities: A Jamaican Case Study 25-39.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
129. Anke Berns, José-Luis Isla-Montes, Manuel Palomo-Duarte, Juan-Manuel Dodero. 2016. Motivation, students’ needs and
learning outcomes: a hybrid game-based app for enhanced language learning. SpringerPlus 5:1. . [CrossRef]
130. Gurnam Kaur Sidhu, Sarjit Kaur, Chan Yuen Fook. 2016. Postgraduate students’ level of dependence on supervisors in coping
with academic matters and using digital tools. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 28:3, 370-388. [CrossRef]
131. Elke Greifeneder. 2016. The effects of distraction on task completion scores in a natural environment test setting. Journal of the
Downloaded by Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile At 12:03 29 March 2017 (PT)
Association for Information Science and Technology 67:12, 2858-2870. [CrossRef]
132. Charles Crook, Brett Bligh. 2016. Technology and the dis-placing of learning in educational futures. Learning, Culture and
Social Interaction 11, 162-175. [CrossRef]
133. Thomas Küpper. 2016. Age mimicry. A perspective on the young-old. Journal of Aging Studies 39, 121-128. [CrossRef]
134. Elizabeth M. King, Ellyn M. Dickmann, Barbara Z. Johnson. 2016. Kamstrupp’s wow-effect: re-examined and expanded.
Cultural Studies of Science Education 11:4, 899-908. [CrossRef]
135. Ruth Stock-Homburg, Heide Klug, Carmen Lukoschek. 2016. Die Zukunftsfähigkeit erfordert größeren Handlungsbedarf.
Innovative Verwaltung 38:12, 14-17. [CrossRef]
136. Marika Gon, Harald Pechlaner, Francesco Marangon. 2016. Destination management organizations (DMOs) and Digital Natives:
the neglected “informal expertise” in web 2.0 implementation and social media presence. Insights from the Italian Friuli Venezia
Giulia DMO. Information Technology & Tourism 16:4, 435-455. [CrossRef]
137. S. Halim, Felecia, D. Wulandari, F. L. SusantiGroup decision using analytical hierarchical process: Surabaya's universities library
in digital natives perspective 331-334. [CrossRef]
138. Gillian Fergie, Kate Hunt, Shona Hilton. 2016. Social media as a space for support: Young adults' perspectives on producing
and consuming user-generated content about diabetes and mental health. Social Science & Medicine 170, 46-54. [CrossRef]
139. Maria Economidou-Kogetsidis. 2016. Variation in evaluations of the (im)politeness of emails from L2 learners and perceptions
of the personality of their senders. Journal of Pragmatics 106, 1-19. [CrossRef]
140. Jean-Philippe Després, Pamela Burnard, Francis Dubé, Sophie Stévance. 2016. Expert improvisers in Western classical music
learning pathways. Thinking Skills and Creativity 22, 167-179. [CrossRef]
141. Nasser M. Sabah. 2016. Exploring students' awareness and perceptions: Influencing factors and individual differences driving m-
learning adoption. Computers in Human Behavior 65, 522-533. [CrossRef]
142. Raziye Nevzat, Yilmaz Amca, Cem Tanova, Hasan Amca. 2016. Role of social media community in strengthening trust and
loyalty for a university. Computers in Human Behavior 65, 550-559. [CrossRef]
143. Vanessa Bouché, Stephanie Shady. 2016. A Pimp's Game: A Rational Choice Approach to Understanding the Decisions of Sex
Traffickers. Women & Criminal Justice 1-18. [CrossRef]
144. Mariusz MarczakStudents’ perspective on Web 2.0-enhanced telecollaboration as added value in translator education 245-252.
[CrossRef]
145. Margot J. van der Goot, Esther Rozendaal, Suzanna J. Opree, Paul E. Ketelaar, Edith G. Smit. 2016. Media generations and
their advertising attitudes and avoidance: a six-country comparison. International Journal of Advertising 45, 1-20. [CrossRef]
146. Elza Venter. 2016. Onderrig van Generasie Y. Suid-Afrikaanse Tydskrif vir Natuurwetenskap en Tegnologie 35:1. . [CrossRef]
147. Saeed Taki. 2016. Metacognitive online reading strategy use: Readers' perceptions in L1 and L2. Journal of Research in Reading
39:4, 409-427. [CrossRef]
148. Fayiz Aldhafeeri, Trevor Male. 2016. Investigating the learning challenges presented by digital technologies to the College of
Education in Kuwait University. Education and Information Technologies 21:6, 1509-1519. [CrossRef]149. J. Enrique Hinostroza, Andrea I. Ibieta, Magdalena Claro, Christian Labbé. 2016. Characterisation of teachers’ use of computers
and Internet inside and outside the classroom: The need to focus on the quality. Education and Information Technologies 21:6,
1595-1610. [CrossRef]
150. Leora Trub, Baptiste Barbot. 2016. The paradox of phone attachment: Development and validation of the Young Adult
Attachment to Phone Scale (YAPS). Computers in Human Behavior 64, 663-672. [CrossRef]
151. Anjala S. Krishen, Orie Berezan, Shaurya Agarwal, Pushkin Kachroo. 2016. The generation of virtual needs: Recipes for
satisfaction in social media networking. Journal of Business Research 69:11, 5248-5254. [CrossRef]
152. Jaclyn McKewan, Scott S. Richmond. 2016. Needs and Results in Virtual Reference Transactions: A Longitudinal Study. The
Reference Librarian 1-11. [CrossRef]
153. Jason W. Lee, Jennifer J. Kane, Elizabeth A. Gregg, Terence Cavanaugh. 2016. Think globally, engage pedagogically: Procuring
and supervising international field experiences. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education 19, 115-120. [CrossRef]
154. Tehmina Khan, Michael Kend, Susan Robertson. 2016. Use of social media by university accounting students and its impact
on learning outcomes. Accounting Education 25:6, 534-567. [CrossRef]
155. Katariina Salmela-Aro, Joona Muotka, Kimmo Alho, Kai Hakkarainen, Kirsti Lonka. 2016. School burnout and engagement
profiles among digital natives in Finland: a person-oriented approach. European Journal of Developmental Psychology 13:6,
Downloaded by Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile At 12:03 29 March 2017 (PT)
704-718. [CrossRef]
156. Alev Koçak Alan, Ebru Tümer Kabadayı. 2016. The Effect of Personal Factors on Social Media Usage of Young Consumers.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 235, 595-602. [CrossRef]
157. Jako Olivier. 2016. Blended learning in a first-year language class: Evaluating the acceptance of an interactive learning
environment. Literator 37:2. . [CrossRef]
158. Hyun K. Kim, Sung H. Han. 2016. Defining and classifying IT interaction disability. Behaviour & Information Technology
1-13. [CrossRef]
159. Trevor Moodley, Shelley Aronstam. 2016. Authentic learning for teaching reading: Foundation phase pre-service student
teachers’ learning experiences of creating and using digital stories in real classrooms. Reading & Writing 7:1. . [CrossRef]
160. Michel Galaup, Catherine Pons Lelardeux, Pierre Lagarrigue. 2016. Un learning game au carrefour des institutions partenaires :
Mecagenius®. RDST :13, 51-69. [CrossRef]
161. Valerie Wee. 2016. Spreading the Glee : Targeting a youth audience in the multimedia, digital age. The Information Society
32:5, 306-317. [CrossRef]
162. Selim Gunuc. 2016. Peer Influence in Internet and Digital Game Addicted Adolescents: Is Internet / Digital Game Addiction
Contagious?. International Journal of High Risk Behaviors and Addiction Inpress:Inpress. . [CrossRef]
163. Daniela Haluza, Marlene Naszay, Andreas Stockinger, David Jungwirth. 2016. Digital Natives Versus Digital Immigrants:
Influence of Online Health Information Seeking on the Doctor–Patient Relationship. Health Communication 1-8. [CrossRef]
164. Wallace Chipidza, Gina Green, Cindy Riemenschneider. 2016. Choosing Technology Majors: What You Don’t Know Can
Influence You. Journal of Computer Information Systems 1-14. [CrossRef]
165. KosteniusCatrine Catrine Kostenius Catrine Kostenius is an Associate Professor at the Department of Health Sciences, Luleå
University of Technology, Sweden. Her research focus on health promotion and health education. Kostenius’ expertise is on
giving voice to children and youth and making something of their contributions to enhance health literacy. Special areas of
interest are the connection between health and learning, e-health, student participation and improvements in school and in the
health care sector. She has collaborated with a number of municipalities at the school arena in research and development projects
for well over ten years. Kostenius is currently leading the Swedish team of researchers in an international EU funded research
project with the aim of developing e-health services for child and adolescent psychiatry care. BergmarkUlrika Ulrika Bergmark
Ulrika Bergmark is an Associate Professor at the Department of Arts, Communication and Education, Luleå University of
Technology, Sweden. Her expertise includes ethics in school, student voice and participation, civic engagement, strengths-based
approaches, school improvement, and school-university collaboration. She is teaching at the teacher education program, the
master’s program in education, and programs for in-service training for teachers as well as supervises PhD students. She has
a long-standing collaboration with schools in the region of the university and has lead school improvement projects for more
than ten years. Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden . 2016. The power of appreciation: promoting schoolchildren’s
health literacy. Health Education 116:6, 611-626. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
166. RissanenHilkka Hilkka Rissanen Hilkka Rissanen, MA, is a PhD Student in Organizational Communication and PR at the
Department of Communication in the University of Jyväskylä. Luoma-AhoVilma Vilma Luoma-Aho Vilma Luoma-Aho, PhD,
is a Professor of Organizational Communication and PR at the Department of Communication in the University of Jyväskylä.You can also read
