Cited by 796Generational Differences and TrendsLearning Styles and Cognitive DifferencesDigital Media and Philosophy

The myths of the digital native and the multitasker

Open access
Kirschner, Paul A., De Bruyckere, Pedro·2017·Teaching and Teacher Education

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.001

Cites

64 of 64 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
Kirschner, P. A., & De Bruyckere, P.
Affiliations
Open University of the Netherlands (NL)
Corresponding author
Kirschner, Paul A.
Venue
Teaching and Teacher Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-10
Volume
67
Pages
135-142
ISSN
0742-051X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2625526009
Cited by
796
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 104 · 2025: 95 · 2024: 73 · 2023: 101 · 2022: 99 · 2021: 93 · 2020: 90 · 2019: 93 · 2018: 44 · 2017: 4
FWCI
176.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Teaching and Teacher Education (publishedVersion)
  • DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Joint Information Systems Committee
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Life-span and Life-course Studies › Generational Differences and Trends
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Learning Styles and Cognitive Differences
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Digital Media and Philosophy
Keywords
digital natives, multitasking, information skills, digital media, generational differences, education policy, information processing, learning design

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