[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Examining the Primacy and Recency Effect on Learning Effectiveness with the Application of Interactive Response Systems (Irs)

  • Original research
  • Published:
Technology, Knowledge and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study first examined the factors that enhance learning effectiveness and student satisfaction when an interactive response system (IRS) is introduced to a financial planning course. Second, we examined the influence of the initial experience of using an IRS on subsequent learning results. A total of 217 financial practitioners participated in a three-session financial course. During the course, the instructor interacted with the participants using the IRS. Participants were asked to use the smartphone-based IRS to interact with their instructor, and they were requested to complete two tests (a pretest and a posttest) and a satisfaction survey after each session. Participation data were directly imported into the UMU system for statistical analysis. The results indicated that task–technology fit (TTF) and instructor ability were predictors of learning effectiveness and student satisfaction. The perception of TTF in the first session had a positive effect on the cognitive results in the subsequent stages, which was the primacy effect. Moreover, a recency effect was observed in the affective results, meaning that the influence of the perception of TTF and instructor ability in the concurrent session on student satisfaction was stronger than the influence of previous experiences. Research and practical implications are presented to conclude the paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Notes

  1. Student satisfaction was evaluated three times. SS1, SS2, and SS3 refer to the student satisfaction during the first, second, and third session, respectively. The posttest was administered three times, with the results referred to as Posttest1, Posttest2, and Posttest3 in the following discussion.

References

  • Ahmad, K. Z., & Bakar, R. A. (2003). The association between training and organizational commitment among white-collar workers in Malaysia. International Journal of Training and Development, 7(3), 166–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, N. H. (1981). Foundations of information integration theory. Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, B. H., & Maletta, M. J. (1999). Primacy effects and the role of risk in auditor belief-revision processes. Auditing A Journal of Practice & Theory, 18(1), 75–89. https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.1999.18.1.75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asare, S. K. (1992). The auditor’s going-concern decision: Interaction of task variables and the sequential processing of evidence. The Accounting Review, 67(2), 379–393

    Google Scholar 

  • Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41(3), 258–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ataş, A. H., & Delialioğlu, O. (2018). A question–answer system for mobile devices in lecture-based instruction: A qualitative analysis of student engagement and learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(1), 75–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basso, A., Goldberg, D., Greenspan, S., & Weimer, D. (2001). First impressions: emotional and cognitive factors underlying judgments of trust E-commerce. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, 137–143.

  • Buchert, S., Laws, E. L., Apperson, J. M., & Bregman, N. J. (2008). First impressions and professor reputation: Influence on student evaluations of instruction. Social Psychology of Education, 11(4), 397–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. CBE Life Sciences Education, 6(1), 29–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crano, W. D. (1977). Primacy versus recency in retention of information and opinion change. Journal of Social Psychology, 101(1), 87–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBacker, T. K., & Crowson, H. M. (2008). Measuring need for closure in classroom learners. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 711–732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dori, Y. J., & Belcher, J. (2005). How does technology-enabled active learning affect undergraduate students’ understanding of electromagnetism concepts? The journal of the learning sciences, 14(2), 243–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, K. M., & Healy, M. A. (2001). Key factors influencing student satisfaction related to recruitment and retention. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 10(4), 1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Files, C., & Marshall, J. (2006). Classroom response systems: A review of the literature. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 101–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forgas, J. P. (2011). Can negative affect eliminate the power of first impressions? Affective influences on primacy and recency effects in impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(2), 425–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frymier, A. B. (2005). Students’ classroom communication effectiveness. Communication Quarterly, 53(2), 197–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 213–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haugtvedt, C. P., & Wegener, D. T. (1994). Message order effects in persuasion: An attitude strength perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 205–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hou, S. T., & Fan, H. L. (2011). The antecedents and consequences of negative technology sense-making: A longitudinal field study of the Taiwan taxi fleet. Management Review, 30(3), 149–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao, R. L., Hou, S. T., & Ou, S. H. (2011). Evolving technology sensemaking: Analyzing the innovation process of GPS-dispatch systems. Journal of Information Management, 18(4), 91–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingalls, V. (2018). Students vote: A comparative study of student perceptions of three popular web-based student response systems. (pp. 1–11). Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johar, G. V., Jedidi, K., & Jacoby, J. (1997). A varying-parameter averaging model of on-line brand evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(2), 232–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, E. N. (1995). Effects of information order, group assistance, and experience on auditors’ sequential belief revision. Journal of Economic Psychology, 16(1), 137–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2008). Persuasive design of destination web sites: An analysis of first impression. Journal of Travel Research, 47(1), 3–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, T. J., Sorebo, A. M., & Sorebo, O. (2009). The role of task-technology fit as users’ motivation to continue information system use. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(5), 778–784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, N., Marsh, V., Rienties, B., & Whitelock, D. (2017). Online learning experiences of new versus continuing learners: A large scale replication study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(4), 657–672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, W. S. (2012). Perceived fit and satisfaction on web learning performance: IS continuance intention and task-technology fit perspectives. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 70(7), 498–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Love, E. G., Love, D. W., & Northcraft, G. B. (2010). Is the end in sight? Student regulation of in-class and extra-credit effort in response to performance feedback. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(1), 81–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Lukaitis, A., & Davey, B. (2009). Capturing the mature traveler: Assessing web first impressions. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 6, 845–853

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lund, F. (1925). The psychology of belief IV: The law of primacy in persuasion. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 20, 183–191

    Google Scholar 

  • McGill, T. J., & Hobbs, V. J. (2008). How students and instructors using a virtual learning environment perceive the fit between technology and task. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(3), 191–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGill, T. J., & Klobas, J. E. (2009). A task-technology fit view of learning management system impact. Computers & Education, 52(2), 496–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLinden, D. J., Davis, M. J., & Sheriff, D. E. (1993). Impact on financial productivity: A study of training effects on consulting services. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 4(4), 367–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108, 1017–1054

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, S., & Huebner, A. (2011). The relationship between students’ motives to communicate with their instructors and perceived instructor credibility, attractiveness, and homophily. College Student Journal, 45, 84–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, Q., Rienties, B., Toetenel, L., Ferguson, R., & Whitelock, D. (2017). Examining the designs of computer-based assessment and its impact on student engagement, satisfaction, and pass rates. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 703–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obermiller, C., Ruppert, B., & Atwood, A. (2012). Instructor credibility across disciplines: Identifying students’ differentiated expectations of instructor behaviors. Business Communication Quarterly, 75(2), 153–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsson, J., & Granberg, C. (2019). Dynamic software, task solving with or without guidelines, and learning outcomes. Technology, knowledge and learning, 24(3), 419–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posselt, T., & Gerstner, E. (2005). Pre-sale vs post-sale e-satisfaction: impact on repurchase intention and overall satisfaction. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19(4), 3547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proserpio, L., & Gioia, D. A. (2007). Teaching the virtual generation. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6(1), 69–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puhala, J. J. (2020). Changing classroom practice: Elementary teacher experiences of a PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25(1), 129–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruppert, B., & Green, D. A. (2012). Practicing what we teach: credibility and alignment in the business communication classroom. Business Communication Quarterly, 75(1), 2944

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez-Franco, M. J., & Roldan, J. L. (2010). Expressive aesthetics to ease perceived community support: Exploring personal innovativeness and routinised behaviour as moderators in Tuenti. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1445–1457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, L., Currie, G., & Delbosc, A. (2015). Lost in transit? Unfamiliar public transport travel explored using a journey planner web survey. Transportation, 42(1), 101–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shieh, R. S., & Chang, W. (2013). Implementing the interactive response system in a high school physics context: Intervention and reflections. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(5), 748–761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shieh, R. S., Chang, W., & Liu, E. Z. F. (2011). Technology enabled active learning (TEAL) in introductory physics Impact on genders and achievement levels. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shonfeld, M., & Magen-Nagar, N. (2017). The impact of an online collaborative program on intrinsic motivation, satisfaction and attitudes towards technology. (pp. 1–17). Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stec, M., Smith, C., & Jacox, E. (2019). Technology enhanced teaching and learning: Exploration of faculty adaptation to iPad delivered curriculum. (pp. 1–15). Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun, J. (2016). Multi-dimensional alignment between online instruction and course technology: A learner-centered perspective. Computers & Education, 101, 102–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, J. C. Y., & Chen, A. Y. Z. (2016). Effects of integrating dynamic concept maps with Interactive response system on elementary school students’ motivation and learning outcome: The case of anti-phishing education. Computers & Education, 102, 117–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teven, J., & McCroskey, J. (1997). The relationship of perceived teacher caring with student learning and teacher evaluation. Communication Education, 46, 1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y. H. (2017). The effectiveness of using cloud-based cross-device IRS to support classical Chinese learning. Educational Technology & Society, 20(2), 127–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, B., & Chen, X. (2017). Continuance intention to use MOOCs: Integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM) and task technology fit (TTF) model. Computers in Human Behavior, 67, 221–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Y. C., Wu, T., & Li, Y. (2017). Impact of using classroom response systems on students’ entrepreneurship learning experience. Computers in Human Behavior, in press, pp. 1–12.

Download references

Acknowledgments

None

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, No. 43, Sec. 4, Keelung Rd, 106, Taipei City, Taiwan

    Ying-Jung Yvonne Yeh

  2. Institute of Management, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, Taiwan

    Min-Hung Chen

Authors
  1. Ying-Jung Yvonne Yeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Min-Hung Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ying-Jung Yvonne Yeh.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

For this type of study formal consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yeh, YJ.Y., Chen, MH. Examining the Primacy and Recency Effect on Learning Effectiveness with the Application of Interactive Response Systems (Irs). Tech Know Learn 27, 957–970 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-021-09521-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-021-09521-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation