University students who choose e-textbooks report greater self-regulation of learning than students who choose print textbooks¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i1 Students who chose and used e-textbooks scored higher on the MSLQ self-regulation subscale than students who chose and used traditional print textbooks, with eta squared = .03. → Amanda J. Rockinson-Szapkiw 2013

Evidence¶

Amanda J. Rockinson-Szapkiw 2013¶

Amanda J. Rockinson-Szapkiw, Jillian Wendt, and Rebecca Lunde. (2013). Electronic Versus Print Textbooks: The Influence of Textbook Format on University Students' Self-Regulated Learning Strategies, Motivation, and Text Anxiety. American Journal of Distance Education, 27(3), 179-188. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2013.796230

q2 · i1 · associational · r1

Same causal-comparative MANOVA follow-up on the self-regulation subscale (e-textbook M = 50.37 vs print M = 47.20). The article reports F(1, 536) = 15.46 with the printed effect size eta squared = .03 and states the effect size was low, indicating little practical significance.

"and F(1, 536) = 15.46, p > .001, eta squared = .03, observed power = 98, respectively. The effect size for both analyses was low, indicating little practical significance."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Textbook format choice produces a significant multivariate difference in university students' motivation and self-regulated learning scores — a broader claim this one bears on
• University students who choose e-textbooks report greater use of cognitive strategies than students who choose print textbooks — related
• HelpCoach did not significantly outperform Baseline in improving or retaining self-reported self-regulation — related