Preference for Anonymous Classroom Participation

Electronic response systems (ERS) are a means to foster class participation by students who are reluctant to participate in class. In this study, we identify individual characteristics that relate to students’ preference for anonymous classroom participation, and we also examine the extent to which preference for anonymity is related to their reactions to ERS. We find that extraversion is negatively related and both performance-avoid orientation and power distance orientation are positively related to preference for anonymity. Preference for anonymity is in turn positively related to both the attitude toward ERS and the perceived usefulness of ERS. These results are of importance to instructors interested in identifying instructional approaches that promote the participation of diverse students by providing opportunities for anonymous participation in the classroom.

[1]  Mel Cohen.  Making Class Participation a Reality , 1991 .

[2]  Daniel B. King,et al.  Gender Differences in the Use and Effectiveness of Personal Response Devices , 2008 .

[3]  Jon P. Howell,et al.  Does Cultural Socialization Predict Multiple Bases and Foci of Commitment? , 2000 .

[4]  Luis L. Martins,et al.  A Model of Business School Students' Acceptance of a Web-Based Course , 2004 .

[5]  Soon Ang,et al.  Rating leniency and halo in multisource feedback ratings: testing cultural assumptions of power distance and individualism-collectivism. , 2011, The Journal of applied psychology.

[6]  K. Rocca,et al.  Student Participation in the College Classroom: An Extended Multidisciplinary Literature Review , 2010 .

[7]  Maria L. Kraimer,et al.  No Place Like Home? An Identity Strain Perspective on Repatriate Turnover , 2012 .

[8]  Carol S. Dweck,et al.  Motivational processes affecting learning. , 1986 .

[9]  Ho Kwong Kwan,et al.  Effects of mentoring functions on receivers' organizational citizenship behavior in a Chinese context: A two-study investigation , 2011 .

[10]  Timothy R. Hinkin,et al.  A Brief Tutorial on the Development of Measures for Use in Survey Questionnaires , 1998 .

[11]  Bradley L. Kirkman,et al.  Individual Power Distance Orientation and Follower Reactions to Transformational Leaders: A Cross-Level, Cross-Cultural Examination , 2009 .

[12]  Dianne M. Finkelstein,et al.  A Beginner's Guide to Structural Equation Modeling , 2005, Technometrics.

[13]  Marie Schmidt,et al.  Learning to Teach in Higher Education , 1992 .

[14]  P. Christopher Earley,et al.  Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of justice and , 1997 .

[15]  D. Bligh.  Learning to teach in higher education , 1993 .

[16]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models , 2008, Behavior research methods.

[17]  A. Edmondson,et al.  Implicit Voice Theories: Taken-for-Granted Rules of Self-Censorship at Work , 2011 .

[18]  A. Mohr,et al.  Cultural Determinants of Learning Style Preferences , 2010 .

[19]  S. Karau,et al.  The Big Five personality traits, learning styles, and academic achievement , 2011 .

[20]  W. Briggs,et al.  A Measure of College Student Course Engagement , 2005 .

[21]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .

[22]  J. Webster,et al.  Teaching Effectiveness in Technology-Mediated Distance Learning , 1997 .

[23]  A. Tellegen,et al.  PERSONALITY PROCESSES AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES An Alternative "Description of Personality": The Big-Five Factor Structure , 2022 .

[24]  Marie Kavanagh,et al.  Click Go the Students, Click-Click-Click: The Efficacy of a Student Response System for Engaging Students to Improve Feedback and Performance , 2009 .

[25]  A. M. Francesco,et al.  Collectivism in Action , 2004 .

[26]  A. Elliot,et al.  A HIERARCHICAL MODEL OF APPROACH AND AVOIDANCE ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION , 1997 .

[27]  J. Poulis,et al.  Physics lecturing with audience paced feedback , 1998 .

[28]  Jared M. Hansen,et al.  Clicking to Learn or Learning to Click: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation , 2008 .

[29]  Marc W. Patry,et al.  Clickers in Large Classes: From Student Perceptions towards an Understanding of Best Practices. , 2009 .

[30]  D. Day,et al.  Collective Enactment of Leadership Roles and Team Effectiveness: A Field Study , 2006 .

[31]  Quintin Cutts,et al.  Electronically enhanced classroom interaction , 2002 .

[32]  P. Lachenbruch.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[33]  David A. Banks,et al.  Audience Response Systems in Higher Education: Applications and Cases. , 2006 .

[34]  Beryl Hesketh,et al.  Power Distance, Individualism/Collectivism, and Job-Related Attitudes in a Culturally Diverse Work Group , 1994 .

[35]  Paul Ginns,et al.  Anonymity and in class learning: The case for electronic response systems , 2006 .

[36]  D. Vandewalle.  Development and Validation of a Work Domain Goal Orientation Instrument , 1997 .

[37]  Rick D. Hackett,et al.  Individual-Level Cultural Values as Moderators of Perceived Organizational Support–Employee Outcome Relationships in China: Comparing the Effects of Power Distance and Traditionality , 2007 .

[38]  Alvin Hwang,et al.  The Influence of Individualism–Collectivism and Power Distance on Use of Feedback Channels and Consequences for Learning , 2010 .

[39]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[40]  G. Hofstede,et al.  Culture′s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values , 1980 .

[41]  Jones Matt,et al.  Audience Response Systems in Higher Education , 1970 .

[42]  Adrian Furnham,et al.  Personality and learning style: A study of three instruments , 1992 .

[43]  R. Bhagat.  Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations , 2002 .

[44]  H. Klein,et al.  MOTIVATION TO LEARN AND COURSE OUTCOMES: THE IMPACT OF DELIVERY MODE, LEARNING GOAL ORIENTATION, AND PERCEIVED BARRIERS AND ENABLERS , 2006 .

[45]  Heike Bruch,et al.  Affective mechanisms linking dysfunctional behavior to performance in work teams: a moderated mediation study. , 2008, The Journal of applied psychology.

[46]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[47]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[48]  Susan W. Palocsay,et al.  Neural Network Modeling in Cross-Cultural Research: A Comparison with Multiple Regression , 2004 .

[49]  Matthew S. Fritz,et al.  Mediation analysis. , 2019, Annual review of psychology.

[50]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  THE BIG FIVE PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A META-ANALYSIS , 1991 .

[51]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[52]  Mark Freeman,et al.  Promoting interactive in-class learning environments: A comparison of an electronic response system with a traditional alternative , 2005 .