An examination of the relationships among United States college students' media use habits, need for cognition, and grade point average

The current study uses survey methods to understand how US college students' use of various types of social media, such as social networking websites and text messaging on smart phones, as well as consumption of traditional media, such as watching television and reading books for pleasure, is (or is not) related to intellectual cognitive processing and performance in school. The current results, which were based on a number of multiple regression analyses, revealed college students’ use of traditional media appears to be a significant and viable predictor of both college students’ grade point averages (GPAs) and their levels of need for cognition (NFC). On the other hand, college students’ use of socially interactive technologies appears to be wholly unrelated to college students’ GPAs and their levels of NFC. Implications of these findings, both in terms of the relationships among social and traditional media use and success at school as well as relationships among shifts in young people's media use habits and possible related shifts in their levels of cognitive processing, are explored.

[1]  C. Lewis,et al.  Instant Messaging, Literacies, and Social Identities , 2005 .

[2]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  The need for cognition. , 1982 .

[3]  María Sicilia,et al.  EFFECTS OF INTERACTIVITY IN A WEB SITE: The Moderating Effect of Need for Cognition , 2005 .

[4]  Jeffrey Barlow,et al.  Txting: The Gr8 Db8 , 2008 .

[5]  Stuart Hannabuss,et al.  The Big Switch: Rewiring the World, from Edison to Google , 2009 .

[6]  Rolf Schulmeister.  Students, Internet, eLearning and Web 2.0 , 2010 .

[7]  Harrison Rainie.  The Future of the Internet , 2008 .

[8]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  DISPOSITIONAL DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE MOTIVATION : THE LIFE AND TIMES OF INDIVIDUALS VARYING IN NEED FOR COGNITION , 1996 .

[9]  Andy P. Field,et al.  Discovering Statistics Using SPSS , 2000 .

[10]  Gunther Kress,et al.  Literacy in the New Media Age , 2003 .

[11]  James E. Burroughs,et al.  Television's Cultivation of Material Values , 2005 .

[12]  Ziming Liu,et al.  Reading behavior in the digital environment: Changes in reading behavior over the past ten years , 2005, J. Documentation.

[13]  Tim Shortis.  The Language of ICT: Information and Communication Technology , 2016 .

[14]  Gavriel Salomon,et al.  Cognitive Effects With and Of Computer Technology , 1990 .

[15]  C. Kardash,et al.  Effects of preexisiting beliefs, epistemological beliefs, and need for cognition on interpretation of controversial issues. , 1996 .

[16]  David Yun Dai,et al.  The role of need for cognition and reader beliefs in text comprehension and interest development , 2007 .

[17]  Paul J. Feltovich,et al.  Cognitive Flexibility, Constructivism, and Hypertext: Random Access Instruction for Advanced Knowledge Acquisition in Ill-Structured Domains , 2012 .

[18]  Jacob S. Turner.  Investigation of the Relationships among Socially Interactive Technologies, Communication Competence, Social Cognition, and Formal Written Discourse , 2009 .

[19]  Christopher R. Jones,et al.  Net generation or Digital Natives: Is there a distinct new generation entering university? , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[20]  Jean Aitchison,et al.  Language and the Internet , 2002, Lit. Linguistic Comput..

[21]  B. Schlaggar,et al.  Book Review Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain By Maryanne Wolf. 308 pp., illustrated. New York, Harper, 2007. $25.95. 978-0-06-018639-5 , 2008 .

[22]  Wilson Lowrey,et al.  Online News Media and Advanced Learning: A Test of Cognitive Flexibility Theory , 2009 .

[23]  Gunther Kress,et al.  Gains and losses: New forms of texts, knowledge, and learning ! , 2005 .

[24]  Shelly P. Harrell,et al.  Minority-Status Stresses and the College Adjustment of Ethnic Minority Freshmen , 1993 .

[25]  John Domingue,et al.  The Future of the Internet , 1999, Academia Letters.

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

[27]  C. Wood,et al.  Exploring the relationship between children's knowledge of text message abbreviations and school literacy outcomes. , 2009, The British journal of developmental psychology.

[28]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  DISPOSITIONAL DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE MOTIVATION : THE LIFE AND TIMES OF INDIVIDUALS VARYING IN NEED FOR COGNITION , 1996 .

[29]  Mei Tian,et al.  Internet Self-Efficacy, the Need for Cognition, and Sensation Seeking as Predictors of Problematic Use of the Internet , 2011, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[30]  Lon Ferguson,et al.  Technology affordances: the 'real story' in research with K-12 and undergraduate learners , 2006, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[31]  Mark C. Long,et al.  Why Are Men Falling Behind? Gender Gaps in College Performance and Persistence , 2010 .

[32]  C. F. Kao,et al.  The efficient assessment of need for cognition. , 1984, Journal of personality assessment.

[33]  Brian P. Bailey,et al.  On the need for attention-aware systems: Measuring effects of interruption on task performance, error rate, and affective state , 2006, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[34]  J. Alison Bryant,et al.  IMing, Text Messaging, and Adolescent Social Networks , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[35]  N. Postman,et al.  "Mix a Little Folly with Your Wisdom"--Horace@@@Children and Television.@@@Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. , 1987 .

[36]  Richard A. Lanham.  What's Next for Text? , 2001 .

[37]  C. Lee,et al.  Affordances and Text-Making Practices in Online Instant Messaging , 2007 .

[38]  Ryan D. Padgett,et al.  The impact of college student socialization, social class, and race on need for cognition , 2010 .

[39]  A. Lenhart,et al.  Teens and Mobile Phones: Text Messaging Explodes as Teens Embrace It as the Centerpiece of Their Communication Strategies with Friends. , 2010 .

[40]  Ute Kraidy,et al.  Digital Media and Education: cognitive impact of information visualization , 2002 .

[41]  Charles K. Crook,et al.  Ubiquitous Computing on Campus: Patterns of Engagement by University Students , 2001, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[42]  V. Rideout,et al.  Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds , 2010 .

[43]  Stephen D. Perry,et al.  Student Instant Message Use in a Ubiquitous Computing Environment: Effects of Deficient Self-Regulation , 2004 .

[44]  J. Barlow.  The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains , 2010 .

[45]  Christopher S. Walsh.  Creativity as capital in the literacy classroom: youth as multimodal designers , 2007 .

[46]  Paul J. Feltovich,et al.  Cognitive Flexibility Theory: Hypermedia for Complex Learning, Adaptive Knowledge Application, and Experience Acceleration. , 2003 .

[47]  Michelle Smith.  Teens, Technology, and Literacy; Or, Why Bad Grammar Isn’t Always Bad, Linda W. Braun. Libraries Unlimited, Westport, CT (2007), 105 pp. , 2008 .

[48]  Amy B. Jordan,et al.  Measuring the Time Teens Spend with Media: Challenges and Opportunities , 2007 .

[49]  Michael J. Sherrard,et al.  The role of sensation seeking and need for cognition on web-site evaluations : a resource-matching perspective , 2005 .

[50]  Rand J. Spiro and Jihn-ChangJehng.  Cognitive Flexibility and Hypertext: Theory and Technology for the Nonlinear and Multidimensional Traversal of Complex Subject Matter , 2012 .

[51]  P. Vorderer,et al.  Psychological Escapism: Predicting the Amount of Television Viewing by Need for Cognition , 2001 .

[52]  David Crystal,et al.  Txtng: the Gr8 Db8 , 2008 .

[53]  Clare Wood,et al.  Txt msg n school literacy: does texting and knowledge of text abbreviations adversely affect children's literacy attainment? , 2008 .

[54]  R. Rubin,et al.  A New Measure of Cognitive Flexibility , 1995 .

[55]  Nativ Are Listed.  Looking Toward the Future of Technology Enhanced Education : Ubiquitous Learning and the Digital Native , 2009 .