Value Perception of Information Sources in the Context of Learning

Abstract Information sources require consumers to use them in order to evaluate their quality, meaning that they are experience goods. The value perceived before acquisition and use may be different from the value obtained by actual use. Understanding the value perception gap is likely to inform more efficient selection of information sources. The current research studies the value gap in a learning situation. We examine information value perceptions before and after experiencing information in an experiment with 113 software engineers engaged in a problem-based learning task while using and evaluating three types of information sources: supportive, reflective and reciprocal. The results indicate that before using an information source, the subjective value for supportive information is lower than for reflective information. In addition, 55% of the participants preferred to obtain information when presented with a choice. After using an information source no correlation was observed between perceived value of information before and after the use of information source (value gap); participants assigned a higher user experience (UX) value to reflective and reciprocal information than to supportive information; positive correlation between UX value and revealed information value; positive correlation between learning achievement and revealed information value; Reciprocal information is associated with higher learning achievement than reflective and supportive; use of information led to higher learning achievement than avoidance of information. Reciprocal information supports high achievement in software engineering informal learning. Reflective information is valued higher than supportive information sources. If supportive information is essential, learning environments designers should invest heavily in interface design combining reciprocal and reflective elements, such as forums and "try it yourself", respectively

[1]  Aatto J. Repo,et al.  The dual approach to the value of information: An appraisal of use and exchange values , 1986, Inf. Process. Manag..

[2]  David Clarke,et al.  Scaffolding and metacognition , 2006 .

[3]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  User experience - a research agenda , 2006, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[4]  Ina Blau,et al.  Scaffolding game-based learning: Impact on learning achievements, perceived learning, and game experiences , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[5]  James C. Spohrer,et al.  Learner-centered education , 1996, CACM.

[6]  M. Degroot,et al.  Measuring utility by a single-response sequential method. , 1964, Behavioral science.

[7]  Michael Hausenblas,et al.  Analyzing Social Behavior of Software Developers Across Different Communication Channels (S) , 2013, SEKE.

[8]  Jack Shih-Chieh Hsu,et al.  CUSTOMER WILLINGNESS TO PAY FOR ONLINE MUSIC: THE ROLE OF FREE MENTALITY , 2013 .

[9]  P. Nelson Information and Consumer Behavior , 1970, Journal of Political Economy.

[10]  Yunfei Chen,et al.  Evaluating the visual quality of web pages using a computational aesthetic approach , 2011, WSDM '11.

[11]  Jean-François Rouet,et al.  Learning with new technologies: Help seeking and information searching revisited , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[12]  Martin Reisslein,et al.  Optimizing Worked‐Example Instruction in Electrical Engineering: The Role of Fading and Feedback during Problem‐Solving Practice , 2009 .

[13]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  The design of guided learner-adaptable scaffolding in interactive learning environments , 1996, CHI.

[14]  Hal R. Varian,et al.  Information rules - a strategic guide to the network economy , 1999 .

[15]  I. Grief,et al.  Computer Supported Cooperative Work: A Book of Readings , 1988 .

[16]  Toru Iiyoshi,et al.  Opening Up Education: The Collective Advancement of Education through Open Technology, Open Content, and Open Knowledge , 2008 .

[17]  Peggy A. Ertmer,et al.  The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning Essential Readings in Problem-Based Learning : Exploring and Extending the Legacy of Howard S , 2017 .

[18]  Michael Burmester,et al.  AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität , 2003, MuC.

[19]  Wolfgang G. Stock,et al.  Information Markets: A Strategic Guideline for the I-Commerce , 2011 .

[20]  Catherine McLoughlin,et al.  Learner Support in Distance and Networked Learning Environments: Ten Dimensions for Successful Design , 2002 .

[21]  Aleksandra Klasnja-Milicevic,et al.  Social tagging strategy for enhancing e-learning experience , 2018, Comput. Educ..

[22]  Dan Ariely,et al.  Controlling the Information Flow: Effects on Consumers' Decision Making and Preferences , 2000 .

[23]  Marshall W. van Alstyne,et al.  Valuing Information & Instrumental Goods , 1998, ICIS.

[24]  Hussein Suleman,et al.  A mobile scaffolding application to support novice learners of computer programming , 2013, ICTD '13.

[25]  Nir Grinberg Identifying Modes of User Engagement with Online News and Their Relationship to Information Gain in Text , 2018, WWW.

[26]  D. Livingstone Adults' Informal Learning: Definitions, Findings, Gaps, and Future Research. NALL Working Paper #21. , 2001 .

[27]  John R. Savery,et al.  Overview of Problem-Based Learning: Definitions and Distinctions. , 2006 .

[28]  D. Norman The psychology of everyday things", Basic Books Inc , 1988 .

[29]  K. McConnell,et al.  A Review of Wta/Wtp Studies , 2000 .

[30]  Daphne R. Raban,et al.  User-Centered Evaluation of Information: A Research Challenge , 2007, Internet Res..