| Title |
Motivation and emotion predict medical students’ attention to computer-based feedback
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Advances in Health Sciences Education, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10459-017-9806-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Laura M. Naismith, Susanne P. Lajoie |
| Abstract |
Students cannot learn from feedback unless they pay attention to it. This study investigated relationships between the personal factors of achievement goal orientations, achievement emotions, and attention to feedback in BioWorld, a computer environment for learning clinical reasoning. Novice medical students (N = 28) completed questionnaires to measure their achievement goal orientations and then thought aloud while solving three endocrinology patient cases and reviewing corresponding expert solutions. Questionnaires administered after each case measured participants' experiences of five feedback emotions: pride, relief, joy, shame, and anger. Attention to individual text segments of the expert solutions was modelled using logistic regression and the method of generalized estimating equations. Participants did not attend to all of the feedback that was available to them. Performance-avoidance goals and shame positively predicted attention to feedback, and performance-approach goals and relief negatively predicted attention to feedback. Aspects of how the feedback was displayed also influenced participants' attention. Findings are discussed in terms of their implications for educational theory as well as the design and use of computer learning environments in medical education. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 13% |
| United States | 2 | 13% |
| South Africa | 1 | 7% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 7% |
| Spain | 1 | 7% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 7 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 20% |
| Scientists | 2 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 87 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 9% |
| Researcher | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 18% |
| Unknown | 31 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 16 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Unknown | 32 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 April 2020.
All research outputs
#3,501,798
of 24,983,099 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#139
of 934 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,293
of 451,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#5
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,983,099 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 934 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 451,122 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.