Work and Study Habits in the Interconnected Age: What It Means for Businesses of the Future

In the context of continuous connectivity, big data, and information over-load the purpose of this study was to investigate the work and study habits of contemporary students. This project was an exploration of how students order their environments and manage their work and how this affects their academic performance. The main finding is that most students work in distracting surroundings and engage in many activities while studying. However, the more activities they engaged in, the worse their academic performance. The finding is consistent with research showing that using two (or more) cognitive processes simultaneously has a negative impact on both the effectiveness and the efficiency of carrying out tasks. Moreover, many students are not aware of the negative effects of distraction, or fool themselves that they can actually multitask because we also found that the most distracted students were the least good at predicting their own results. There was also a big difference between men who trusted to their personalities and luck for results and women, who took a more strategic approach and were more likely to achieve the results they predicted.

[1]  L. Matthews.  Cognitive science perspectives on personality and emotion , 1997 .

[2]  K. Seers.  Qualitative data analysis , 2011, Evidence Based Nursing.

[3]  Erin Gemmill,et al.  Technology Use Among College Students: Implications for Student Affairs Professionals , 2006 .

[4]  P. Chandler,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction , 1991 .

[5]  Dennis E. Clayson,et al.  An Introduction to Multitasking and Texting , 2013 .

[6]  G. A. Miller.  THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[7]  Mladen Bubonjić,et al.  Odrastanje u digitalnom dobu - Wim Veen, Ben Vrakking: Homo zappiens: Growing up in a digital age, Network continuum education, London, 2006 , 2013 .

[8]  I. B. Myers.  The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: Manual (1962). , 1962 .

[9]  B. Bloom.  Taxonomy of educational objectives , 1956 .

[10]  Rachel T. A. Croson,et al.  Gender Differences in Preferences , 2009 .

[11]  A. Furnham,et al.  Music is as distracting as noise: the differential distraction of background music and noise on the cognitive test performance of introverts and extraverts , 2002, Ergonomics.

[12]  M. Prensky.  Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1 , 2001 .

[13]  A. Paivio.  Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach , 1986 .

[14]  M. Prensky.  Listen to the Natives. , 2006 .

[15]  Baiyin Yang,et al.  Predicting Academic Performance in Management Education: An Empirical Investigation of MBA Success , 2001 .

[16]  A. Baddeley.  Recent developments in working memory , 1998, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[17]  Brad M. Barber,et al.  Boys Will Be Boys: Gender, Overconfidence, and Common Stock Investment , 1998 .

[18]  Shelia R. Cotten,et al.  No A 4 U: The relationship between multitasking and academic performance , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[19]  E. Cohn,et al.  Determinants of Undergraduate GPAs: SAT Scores, High-School GPA and High-School Rank. , 2004 .

[20]  S. Cassidy.  Self-regulated learning in higher education: identifying key component processes , 2011 .

[21]  M. Wittrock.  Generative Processes of Comprehension , 1989 .

[22]  Shelia R. Cotten,et al.  Perceived academic effects of instant messaging use , 2011, Comput. Educ..

[23]  E. Rose.  The phenomenology of on‐screen reading: University students' lived experience of digitised text , 2011 .

[24]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Cognitive control in media multitaskers , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[25]  Contents , 2013, Physiology & Behavior.

[26]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-monitoring activities , 1983 .

[27]  T. Judd,et al.  First year students' experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? , 2008 .

[28]  M. Prensky.  Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants , 2001 .

[29]  Mark Grinblatt,et al.  What Makes Investors Trade? , 2000 .

[30]  Mark Grinblatt,et al.  Sensation Seeking, Overconfidence, and Trading Activity , 2006 .

[31]  Liz Beastall,et al.  Enchanting a disenchanted child: revolutionising the means of education using Information and Communication Technology and e‐learning , 2006 .

[32]  Teresa Lesiuk,et al.  The effect of music listening on work performance , 2005 .

[33]  Richard E. Clark,et al.  Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching , 2006 .

[34]  Thomas F. Hawk,et al.  Using Learning Style Instruments to Enhance Student Learning , 2007 .

[35]  Paul A. Kirschner,et al.  Facebook® and academic performance , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[36]  M. Schmitter-Edgecombe,et al.  Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks following severe closed-head injury. , 2006, Neuropsychology.

[37]  N. Cowan.  The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[38]  Ernest T. Pascarella,et al.  How college affects students : findings and insights from twenty years of research , 1992 .

[39]  R. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning: The Promise of Multimedia Learning , 2001 .

[40]  Julie D. Golomb,et al.  A taxonomy of external and internal attention. , 2011, Annual review of psychology.

[41]  Jennie Winter,et al.  Effective e-learning? Multi-tasking, distractions and boundary management by graduate students in an online environment , 2010 .

[42]  D. Tapscott.  Growing Up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation , 1984 .

[43]  Frank A. Drews,et al.  Passenger and Cell-Phone Conversations in Simulated Driving , 2004 .

[44]  A. Qayyum,et al.  Digital Learners in Higher Education: Generation is Not the Issue , 2011 .

[45]  Fiona Cotton,et al.  An investigation of the predictive validity of IELTS amongst a group of international students studying at the University of Tasmania , 1998 .

[46]  Larry D. Rosen,et al.  An Empirical Examination of the Educational Impact of Text Message-Induced Task Switching in the Classroom: Educational Implications and Strategies to Enhance Learning , 2011 .

[47]  Martin Ebner,et al.  Has the Net Generation Arrived at the University? – oder Studierende von Heute, Digital Natives? , 2008 .

[48]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning , 2001, Visible Learning Guide to Student Achievement.

[49]  N. Cowan,et al.  The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: how frequent are attention shifts to one's name in an irrelevant auditory channel? , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[50]  Tip Robertson,et al.  The impact of media multitasking on learning , 2012 .

[51]  Karin Archer,et al.  Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with technology on real-time classroom learning , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[52]  Frances H. Rauscher.  Music and Spatial Task Performance: A Causal Relationship. , 1994 .

[53]  George D. Kuh,et al.  Being (Dis)Engaged in Educationally Purposeful Activities: The Influences of Student and Institutional Characteristics , 2002 .

[54]  R. Marois,et al.  Capacity limits of information processing in the brain , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.