Cited by 565Visual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesPersonal Information Management and User BehaviorInnovations in Educational Methods

Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with technology on real-time classroom learning

Wood, Eileen, Zivcakova, Lucia, Gentile, Petrice, Archer, Karin, De Pasquale, Domenica, Nosko, Amanda·2012·Computers & Education

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.029

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wood, E., Zivcakova, L., Gentile, P., Archer, K., De Pasquale, D., & Nosko, A.
Affiliations
Wilfrid Laurier University (CA)
Corresponding author
Wood, Eileen
Venue
Computers & Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-01
Volume
58
Issue
1
Pages
365-374
ISSN
0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2106965099
Cited by
565
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 68 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 51 · 2017: 50 · 2016: 45 · 2015: 50 · 2014: 44 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 13
FWCI
32.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers & Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Personal Information Management and User Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Educational Methods
Keywords
digital technology use, classroom lectures, note-taking, Facebook, text messaging, email, student learning, university students

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