Cited by 1,850Online Learning and AnalyticsVisual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesInnovations in Educational Methods

How video production affects student engagement: an empirical study of MOOC videos

Guo, Philip J., Kim, Juho, Rubin, Rob·2014·Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference

Abstract

Videos are a widely-used kind of resource for online learning. This paper presents an empirical study of how video production decisions affect student engagement in online educational videos. To our knowledge, ours is the largest-scale study of video engagement to date, using data from 6.9 million video watching sessions across four courses on the edX MOOC platform. We measure engagement by how long students are watching each video, and whether they attempt to answer post-video assessment problems.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/2556325.2566239

Cites

10 of 10 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?

  • Shorter videos (about 10 minutes) are more engaging compared to longer YouTube videos.

    “Another criterion for choosing YouTube as a video clip is the length of the video because shorter videos (about 10 minutes) are more engaging compared to longer YouTube videos (Guo, Kim and Rubin, 2014), Thus, YouTube video clips which are used in this research was retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?kuFWbA-k (accessed May 24, 2019).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Ilioudi , C. , Giannakos , M. N. , and Chorianopoulos , K . Investigating Differences among the Commonly Used Video Lecture Styles . In Proceedings of the Workshop on Analytics on Video-based Learning, WAVe'13 ( 2013 ). Ilioudi, C., Giannakos, M. N., and Chorianopoulos, K. Investigating Differences among the Commonly Used Video Lecture Styles. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Analytics on Video-based Learning, WAVe'13 (2013).
  2. Roam , D. The Back of the Napkin (Expanded Edition): Solving Problems and Selling Ideas with Pictures . Portfolio Hardcover , 2009 . Roam, D. The Back of the Napkin (Expanded Edition): Solving Problems and Selling Ideas with Pictures. Portfolio Hardcover, 2009.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Rochester (US)
  • MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (US)
  • edX, Cambridge, MA, USA
Venue
Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference
Publisher
ACM
Published
2014-03-04
Pages
41-50
OpenAlex
W2051525497
Cited by
1,850
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 113 · 2025: 138 · 2024: 168 · 2023: 172 · 2022: 204 · 2021: 173 · 2020: 172 · 2019: 200 · 2018: 165 · 2017: 142 · 2016: 92 · 2015: 90 · 2014: 19
FWCI
72.58
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
  • Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Educational Methods
Keywords
educational videos, student engagement, online learning, MOOCs, edX, video length, learner behavior

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