Cited by 22Visual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesParental Involvement in EducationChild Development and Digital Technology

Experimental effects of radio and television distractors on children’s performance on mathematics and reading assignments

Cool, Valerie A., Yarbrough, Donald B., Patton, James E., Runde, Ruth, Keith, Timothy Z.·1994·The Journal of Experimental Education

Abstract

One explanation for why many students routinely choose to do their homework with a radio or TV operating is that this distraction facilitates studying. To investigate the validity of this explanation, the authors carried out two experiments with sixth-grade students who worked on two difficulty levels of individualized mathematics assignments (N = 12) and reading assignments (N = 9) under three distraction conditions: quiet; self-selected, self-regulated radio; and self-selected, self-regulated TV. The data yielded no evidence of sizable distractor effects on students' time spent studying, computational accuracy, reading comprehension, or reading rate. These results generally are consistent with the theoretical conceptualization of attention as flexible and adaptable.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00220973.1994.9943839

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • The other three experimental studies on study time found no relationship between media use while studying and time needed to complete an academic task.

    “The other three studies found no relationship (Cool et al., 1994;Pool et al., 2000Pool et al., , 2003b)).”

    From The consequences of media multitasking for youth: A review (2015) · cites this paper as Cool et al., 1994

  • Four of ten studies found no effect of media use while reading on reading comprehension.

    “The other four studies found no effect (Bowman, Levine, Waite, & Gendron, 2010;Cool, Yarbrough, Patton, Runde, & Keith, 1994;Lee, Lin, & Robertson, 2012;Subrahmanyam et al., 2013).”

    From The consequences of media multitasking for youth: A review (2015) · cites this paper as Cool et al., 1994

  • Another experimental study found that watching television while working on a math assignment had no effect on math performance.

    “whereas the other study found that watching television while working on a math assignment had no effect on math performance (Cool et al., 1994).”

    From The consequences of media multitasking for youth: A review (2015) · cites this paper as Cool et al., 1994

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cool, V. A., Yarbrough, D. B., Patton, J. E., Runde, R., & Keith, T. Z.
Affiliations
  • University of Iowa (US)
  • Alfred University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Experimental Education
Published
1994-04
Volume
62
Issue
3
Pages
181-194
ISSN
  • 0022-0973 (ISSN-L)
  • 1940-0683
OpenAlex
W1975989230
Cited by
22
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2
FWCI
1.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Journal of Experimental Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
  • Social Sciences › Education › Parental Involvement in Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
Keywords
radio, television, children's homework, mathematics achievement, reading comprehension, reading speed, computational accuracy, sixth grade students, study time

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