Exploring the Association Between Leisure Time Digital Immersion, Attention and Reasoning Ability in Pre-Teens

Some researchers claim that digital natives are endowed with greater cognitive abilities than digital immigrants, due to the interactive nature of digital technologies. This study investigates relationships between different types of digital activity, reasoning ability and attention in a pre-teen population. Two hundred twenty-four participants 139 males, 85 females aged 10-12 years completed a questionnaire measuring leisure time digital immersion. Factor analysis reveals 5 distinct types of users. Ninety-two participants completed tests of reasoning and attention to ascertain the relationship between type of digital user and cognitive ability. Results indicate that users who engaged in simple low level writing and drawing tasks with technology were inclined to have low literacy levels and poor concentration levels. In addition, users who engaged in computer mediated communication and content creation showed inconsistent and unstable attentional ability.

[1]  Stephen W. Harmon,et al.  Instructional Strategies for Teaching in Synchronous Online Learning Environments (SOLE) , 2010 .

[2]  Alexandra Rankin Macgill,et al.  Teens, Video Games, and Civics: Teens' Gaming Experiences Are Diverse and Include Significant Social Interaction and Civic Engagement. , 2008 .

[3]  Eric Zillmer.  The d2 test of attention : manual , 1998 .

[4]  Diana G. Oblinger,et al.  Educating the Net Generation , 2005 .

[5]  H. Ono,et al.  Gender and the Internet , 2003 .

[6]  Michael Bieber,et al.  Utilizing Web Tools for Computer-Mediated Communication to Enhance Team-Based Learning , 2007, Int. J. Web Based Learn. Teach. Technol..

[7]  Nancy K. Herther.  Digital Natives and Immigrants: What Brain Research Tells Us , 2009 .

[8]  Sue Bennett,et al.  The 'digital natives' debate: A critical review of the evidence , 2008, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[9]  Genevieve Marie Johnson,et al.  Internet Use and Cognitive Development: A Theoretical Framework , 2006 .

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

[11]  Nigel Ford.  Web-based learning through educational informatics - information science meets educational computing , 2008 .

[12]  M. Prensky.  H. Sapiens Digital: From Digital Immigrants and Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom , 2009 .

[13]  M. Prensky.  Do They Really Think Differently , 2001 .

[14]  R. Nisbett,et al.  Culture and systems of thought: holistic versus analytic cognition. , 2001, Psychological review.

[15]  I. Wasserman,et al.  Gender and the Internet: Causes of Variation in Access, Level, and Scope of Use , 2005 .

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

[17]  John Lim,et al.  Computer-Supported Collaborative Work and Learning: A Meta-Analytic Examination of Key Moderators in Experimental GSS Research , 2007, Int. J. Web Based Learn. Teach. Technol..

[18]  Elisheva F. Gross,et al.  The impact of home computer use on children's activities and development. , 2000, The Future of children.

[19]  Jennifer K. Holtz,et al.  Online Science: Its Role in Fostering Global Scientific Capital , 2008 .

[20]  Nigel Ford.  Educational Informatics Systems: Social Approaches , 2008 .

[21]  E. Vandewater,et al.  Media and Attention, Cognition, and School Achievement , 2008, The Future of children.

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

[23]  Jeffrey M. Halperin,et al.  The influences of environmental enrichment, cognitive enhancement, and physical exercise on brain development: Can we alter the developmental trajectory of ADHD? , 2011, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[24]  George Zhou,et al.  Technology Capacity Building for Preservice Teachers through Methods Courses: Taking Science as an Example , 2011, Int. J. Online Pedagog. Course Des..

[25]  Matthew C. Makel,et al.  Growing up digital , 2020, Transformative Digital Humanities.

[26]  K. F. Downing,et al.  Online Science Learning: Best Practices and Technologies , 2008 .

[27]  Carol Lomicky,et al.  Web 2.0 Technologies: Student Contributions to Online Courses , 2012, Int. J. Web Based Learn. Teach. Technol..

[28]  R. Eynon,et al.  Digital natives: where is the evidence? , 2010 .

[29]  Tom McHale,et al.  Portrait of a Digital Native: Are Digital-Age Students Fundamentally Different from the Rest of Us?. , 2005 .

[30]  Susannah Fox,et al.  Generations online in 2009 , 2009 .

[31]  Fredrik Paulsson,et al.  Suggesting an SOA Framework for Modular Virtual Learning Environments: Comparing Two Implementation Approaches , 2008, Int. J. Web Based Learn. Teach. Technol..

[32]  Michael W. O'Boyle,et al.  On the Relevance of Research Findings in Cognitive Neuroscience to Educational Practice , 1998 .

[33]  F. Biocca,et al.  Does home internet use influence the academic performance of low-income children? , 2006 .

[34]  Zane L. Berge,et al.  Training Generation N: How Educators Should Approach the Net Generation. , 2008 .

[35]  Michael Robert Owen 羅明新 Robinson,et al.  Digital nature and digital nurture: Libraries, learning and the digital native , 2008 .