Cited by 19Educational Games and GamificationLearning Styles and Cognitive DifferencesGenerational Differences and Trends

Exploring Digital Nativeness as a Predictor of Digital Game-Based L2 Vocabulary Acquisition

Calvo-Ferrer, José Ramón·2020·Interactive Learning Environments

Abstract

Although the “digital natives” theory is still used to justify the implementation of technologies such as video games in the language classroom, whether digital nativeness (i.e. the extent to which an individual embodies the characteristics attributed to digital natives) may be used as a predictor of digital game-based learning outcomes is to be analysed. An empirical study was conducted to test the predictive strength of some attributes of digital nativeness, as determined by Teo’s (2013) Digital Native Assessment Scale, on L2 vocabulary acquisition and on educational engagement. A vocabulary learning game was played by 86 university EFL students, who additionally completed post- and delayed knowledge tests on the vocabulary contained in the game, the DNAS questionnaire, and questions on educational disengagement and perceived need for technology-related changes. The regression analysis revealed that the factor “able to multitask” was a predictor of poorer L2 vocabulary acquisition, whereas the factors “comfortable with technology” and “thrive on instant gratifications and rewards” had a positive impact on learning outcomes. Additionally, the analysis showed that none of the attributes of digital natives that make up the DNAS could predict either students’ disengagement with the educational system or their perceived need for technology-based changes in education.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10494820.2018.1548489

Cites

83 of 83 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?

  • Participants with high proficiency in English may benefit more from the learning affordances provided by digital-game based scenarios.

    “This is also in line with previous research carried out by the researchers [76-79], which suggests that participants with high proficiency in English may benefit more from the learning affordances provided by digital-game based scenarios.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 84 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Calvo-Ferrer, J. R.
Affiliations
Departamento de Filología Inglesa, Universidad de Alicante, San Vicente del Raspeig, Spain
Venue
Interactive Learning Environments
Published
2018-11-19
Volume
28
Issue
7
Pages
902-914
ISSN
  • 1049-4820 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-5191
OpenAlex
W2900844513
Cited by
15
References
84
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1
FWCI
1.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Interactive Learning Environments (publishedVersion)
  • Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Alicante (Universidad de Alicante) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Vice-Rectorate for Quality and Educational Innovation – Institute of Educational Sciences of the University of Alicante
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Learning Styles and Cognitive Differences
  • Social Sciences › Life-span and Life-course Studies › Generational Differences and Trends
Keywords
digital natives, digital game-based learning, second language vocabulary acquisition, academic engagement, EFL learners, multitasking, technology comfort, instant gratification, student disengagement, technology in language education

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