skip to main content
10.1145/1516241.1516267acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicuimcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

The effects of personality factors on participation in online learning

Published: 15 February 2009 Publication History

Abstract

The e-learning is a new approach in higher education and the market is increasing. Multimedia-learning environments have led to the development of a new pedagogy in online courses. Research in human factor provides a possible explanation for the performance in e-learning environment. Individuals' personality factors can affect their performance in online learning. The study examined whether personality types as measured by the Myers Briggs Type Indicator influence participation in online asynchronous discussion. The results of the study suggested personality factors have no impact on participation. However, students with introverted, intuition, thinking, and judging for each dichotomous personality got higher means of participation.

References

[1]
Ahern, T., Shaw, S. & Liu, X. (2006). Teaching courses online: a review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76, 1, 93--135.
[2]
Allen, E., (2003). Sizing the Opportunity: The Quality and Extent of Online Education in the United States, 2002 and 2003. The Sloan Consortium. Retrieved June 12, 2004, from http://www.sloan-c.org/resources/sizing_opportunity.pdf
[3]
Arbaugh, J. B. & Stelzer, L. (2003). Learning and teaching via the web: what do we know?. In C. Wankel & R. DeFillippi (eds.) Educating Managers with Tomorrow's Technologies (pp. 17--51). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
[4]
Atman, K. S. (1988). Psychological type elements and goal accomplishment style: Implications for distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 2(3), 36--44.
[5]
Chickering, A. W. & Ehrmann, S. C. (1996). Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever AAHE bulletin. Retrieved March 18, 2002, from http://www.tltgroup.org/programs/seven.html
[6]
Dennen, V. P., (2003). Prompting online dialogues: An experimental study of the effects of instructor directions on asynchronous discussion activities, San Diego State University. Retrieved August 19, 2003, from http://www.vanessadennen.com/aera03.html
[7]
Ellis, A. E. (2003). Personality Type and Participation in Networked Learning Environments. Educational Media International, 40 (2), 101--114.
[8]
Ellsworth, J. H. (1995). Using computer-mediated communication in teaching university courses. In Zane L. Berge and Mauri P. Collins (eds.) Computer Mediated Communication and the Online Classroom. Vol 1: Overview and Perspectives. Cresskill: Hampton Press, Inc.
[9]
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2003). A theory of critical inquiry in online distance education. In Moore, M. G., & Anderson, W. G. (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 113--127). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
[10]
Gorsky, P. & Caspi, A. (2005). Dialogue: A theoretical framework for distance education instructional systems. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), pp. 137--144
[11]
Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A. & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research 17(4), 397--431.
[12]
Hartley, K., & Bendixen, L. D. (2001). Educational research in the Internet age: Examining the role of individual characteristics. Educational Researcher, 30(9), 22--26.
[13]
Ho, S., (2002). Evaluating students' participation in on-line discussions. The Eighth Australian World Wide Web Conference. Retrieved August 19, 2003, from http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw02/papers/refereed/ho/paper.html
[14]
Kelly, K., & Schorger, J. (2002). Online learning: Personalities, preferences and perceptions. University of Montana-Missoula (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 470663)
[15]
Keirsey, D. (1998). Please Understand Me II: Temperament, Character, Intelligence. Del Mar, CA: Prometheus Nemesis Book Company.
[16]
Lawrence, G. D. (1997). Looking at Type and Learning Styles. Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type, Inc.
[17]
Levenburg, N. and Major, H. (2000). Motivating the online learner: The effect of frequency of online postings and time spent online on achievement of learning goals and objectives. Retrieved May 11, 2002 from http://as1.ipfw.edu/2000tohe/papers/Levenburg/levenburg.htm
[18]
Monroe, B. (2003, Fall). Fostering Critical Engagement in Online Discussions: The Washington State University Study. The Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education, Fall 2003. Retrieved December 19, 2004, from http://www.evergreen.edu/washcenter/Fall2003Newsletter/Pg31-33.pdf
[19]
Palmer, S., Holt, D. and Bray, S. (2008). Does the discussion help? The impact of a formally assessed online discussion on final student results. British Journal of Educational Technology. 39(5), 847--858
[20]
Polleys, M. S. (2002) A Study of Relationships between Self-Regulated Learning, Personality, and Achievement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Chattanooga, TN.
[21]
Sener, J, & Humbert, J. (2002). Student satisfaction with online learning: An expanding universe In: Bourne, J. & Moore, J. (Eds.). Elements of Quality Online Education, Vol. 4, SCOLE, Needham, MA, 245--260.
[22]
Sherry, L. (2000). The nature and purpose of online conversations: A brief synthesis of current research. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications. 6(1), 19--52.
[23]
Stix, A. (1997). Creating rubics through negotiable contracting and assessment, US Department of Education ERIC, Retrieved March 2, 2003, from http://www.interactiveclassroom.com/articles_006.htm
[24]
Tiene, D. (2000). Online Discussions: A Survey of Advantages and Disadvantages Compared to Face-to-Face Discussions. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia 9(4), 369--382.
[25]
Whittington, C. D. & Dewar, T. D. (2000). A strategy for studying learners using advanced learning. Technologies Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Advanced Learning, Technologies, Palmerston North, New Zealand, Retrieved May 16, 2003 from http://cvu.strath.ac.uk/dave/publications/iwalt2k.rtf

Index Terms

  1. The effects of personality factors on participation in online learning

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ICUIMC '09: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Ubiquitous Information Management and Communication
      February 2009
      704 pages
      ISBN:9781605584058
      DOI:10.1145/1516241
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 15 February 2009

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. Keirsey temperament sorter (KTS)
      2. Myers Briggs type indicator
      3. online asynchronous discussion
      4. online learning
      5. participation

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Conference

      ICUIMC '09
      Sponsor:

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • 0
        Total Citations
      • 562
        Total Downloads
      • Downloads (Last 12 months)4
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
      Reflects downloads up to 13 Feb 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Figures

      Tables

      Media

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media