Cited by 679Online and Blended LearningInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsEducational Leadership and Innovation

Comparing online and blended learner's self-regulated learning strategies and academic performance

Open access
Broadbent, Jaclyn·2017·The Internet and Higher Education

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.01.004

Cites

62 of 62 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

1 of the 63 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Broadbent, J.
Affiliations
Deakin University (AU)
Corresponding author
Broadbent, Jaclyn
Venue
The Internet and Higher Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-04
Volume
33
Pages
24-32
ISSN
1096-7516 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2580551395
Cited by
679
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 52 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 87 · 2023: 104 · 2022: 123 · 2021: 118 · 2020: 75 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 5
FWCI
143.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Internet and Higher Education (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Leadership and Innovation
Keywords
student self-regulation, online learning, blended learning, academic performance, time management strategies, elaboration strategies, rehearsal strategies, peer learning, help-seeking, Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire

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