The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Efficacy of Computer-Assisted Instruction Versus Face-to-Face Instruction in Academic Libraries: A Systematic Review
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Zhang et al. (2007) conducted a systematic review and reported that nine out of ten studies found computer-assisted instruction equally as efficacious as face-to-face instruction.
“The following year, Zhang et al. (2007) also conducted a systematic review on the topic and reported that nine out of ten studies found that computer-assisted instruction was equally as efficacious as face-to-face instruction.”
From Evaluating the Impact of Information Literacy Workshops on Student Success (2025) · cites this paper as Zhang et al. (2007)
Citations
Cites
Kraiger, K., Ford, J. K., & Salas, E. (1993) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.311 · Cited by 1,831
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Salisbury, 1971, “An Overview of CAI”, Educational Technology, 11, 48
- Michel, 2001, “What Do They Really Think? Assessing Student and Faculty Perspectives of a Web-Based Tutorial to Library Research”, College & Research Libraries, 62, 317, 10.5860/crl.62.4.317 · DOI
- Orme, 2004, “A Study of the Residual Impact of the Texas Information Literacy Tutorial on the Information-Seeking Ability of First Year College Students”, College & Research Libraries, 65, 205, 10.5860/crl.65.3.205 · DOI
- Joint, 2003, “Information Literacy Evaluation: Moving Towards Virtual Learning Environments”, Electronic Library, 21, 322, 10.1108/02640470310491559 · DOI
- Cherry, 1991, “An Experimental Investigation of Two Types of Instruction for OPAC Users”, Canadian Journal of Information Science, 16, 2
- Nichols, 2003, “Changing the Face of Instruction: Is Online or In-Class More Effective”, College & Research Libraries, 64, 378, 10.5860/crl.64.5.378 · DOI
- Moher, 1999, “Improving the Quality of Reports of Meta-Analyses of Randomised Controlled Trials: The QUOROM Statement”, Lancet, 354, 1896, 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)04149-5 · DOI · Paper page
- Downs, 1998, “The Feasibility of Creating a Checklist for the Assessment of the Methodological Quality both of Randomised and Non-randomised Studies of Health Care Interventions”, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 52, 377, 10.1136/jech.52.6.377 · DOI · Paper page
- Bren, 1998, “Effectiveness of Hands-on Instruction of Electronic Resources”, Research Strategies, 16, 41, 10.1016/S0734-3310(98)90005-2 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Evaluating the Impact of Information Literacy Workshops on Student Success
Shannon, A., Skira, A., Chen, Y., & Shreffler, M. (2025) · Evidence Based Library and Information Practice · doi:10.18438/eblip30698 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhang, L., Watson, E. M., & Banfield, L.
- Affiliations
- Brock University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Zhang, Li
- Venue
- The Journal of Academic Librarianship
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2007-07
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 478-484
- ISSN
- 0099-1333 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1972296831
- Cited by
- 104
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 3.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Journal of Academic Librarianship (publishedVersion)
- HARVEST (University of Saskatchewan) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Information Literacy
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Web and Library Services
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Administration
- Keywords
- computer-assisted instruction, face-to-face teaching, library instruction, academic libraries, instructional efficacy, teaching methods comparison
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
