Journals / Contemporary Educational Technology / 2018 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1

Predictors of Cyberloafing among Preservice Information Technology Teachers

Pages
22–41
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Findings revealed that malessurpassed females in terms of three cyberloafing types (i.e., shopping, accessing online content, and gaming).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The current mixed-method study investigated the extent of involvement in cyberloafing within classroom settings among preservice information technology teachers.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Then, a recent five-factor cyberloafing scale was administered to 1856 participants in these universities to collect the quantitative data.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Findings revealed that malessurpassed females in terms of three cyberloafing types (i.e., shopping, accessing online content, and gaming).
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The current mixed-method study investigated the extent of involvement in cyberloafing within classroom settings among preservice information technology teachers. Thirteen state universities were picked randomly from hierarchical clusters, which were determined according to the national university rankings. Then, a recent five-factor cyberloafing scale was administered to 1856 participants in these universities to collect the quantitative data. An open-ended survey was also administered to two volunteers from each university (n: 26) to address their rationale for cyberloafing. Parametric analyses on cyberloafing scores were conducted through considering background variables including gender, university, grade level, grade point average, socioeconomic status, ownership of mobile devices and online social networking habits. The qualitative data were processed through descriptive content analysis, which was confirmed by an independent scholar. Findings revealed that malessurpassed females in terms of three cyberloafing types (i.e., shopping, accessing online content, and gaming). Significant differences were observed in terms of university and grade level. The relationship between the grade point average and cyberloafing was negative and statistically significant. Socioeconomic status, ownership of mobile devices and social network use predicted cyberloafing behavior. Finally, qualitative data from openended questions revealed student- and instructor-related rationales for cyberloafing.

🔖

Cite This Article

DURSUN, Ö. Ö., DÖNMEZ, O., AKBULUT, Y. (2022). Predictors of Cyberloafing among Preservice Information Technology Teachers. Contemporary Educational Technology, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1, 22–41. https://ajindex.com/articles/476627

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Zoghbi Manrique de Lara, P. (2012). Reconsidering the boundaries of the cyberloafing activity: the case of a university. Behaviour & Information Technology, 31(5), 469-479. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2010.549511
  2. Yoruk-Acikel, B., Turhan, U., & Akbulut, Y. (2017). Effect of multitasking on simulator sickness and performance in 3D aerodrome control training. Simulation & Gaming. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878117750417
  3. Wigfield, A. & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68-81. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
  4. Weatherbee, T.G. (2010). Counterproductive use of technology at work: Information & communications technologies and cyberdeviancy. Human Resource Management Review, 20(1), 35-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.03.012
  5. Vitak, J., Crouse, J., & LaRose, R. (2011). Personal Internet use at work: Understanding cyberslacking. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1751-1759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.03.002
  6. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178. Retrieved on 27 November 2017 from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2002388
  7. Vallerand, R.J., Deshais, P., Cuerrier, J., Pelletier, L.G., & Mongeau, C. (1992). Ajzen and Fishbein’s theory of reasoned action as applied to moral behavior: A confirmatory analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(1), 98-109. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.1.98
  8. Ugrin, J.C., Pearson, J.M., & Odom, M.D. (2008). Cyber-slacking: self-control, prior behavior and the impact of deterrence measures. Review of Business Information Systems, 12(1), 75- 88. https://doi.org/10.19030/rbis.v12i1.4399
  9. TUIK (2016). Information and communication technology (ICT) usage survey on households and individuals. Press Release (18660). Ankara: Turkish Statistical Institute. Retrieved on 17 February 2017 from http://www.turkstat.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=21779
  10. Taylor, S. & Todd, P.A. (1995). Decomposition and crossover effects in the theory of planned behavior: A study of consumer adoption intentions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12(2), 137-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8116(94)00019-k
  11. Tangney, J.P., Baumeister, R.F., & Boone, A.L. (2004). High self‐control predicts good adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Jo