Learning concentration deserves in-depth investigation in the field of mobile learning. Therefore, this study examined the interaction effects of learning styles and interest on the learning concentration and academic achievement of students who were asked to learn conceptual knowledge via their mobile phones in a classroom setting. A total of 92 Chinese college students majoring in education participated in the study. With the application of correlation analysis, regression analysis, and analysis of variance (i.e., one, two, and three way), four main findings were obtained: (a) Interest is significantly correlated with concentration. The same case applies to concentration and posttests as well as to immediate and delayed posttests; (b) learning styles have no significant effect both on concentration and achievement; (c) learning styles and interest do not yield interaction effects on the learning concentration of students, but interest alone significantly affects the latter; and (d) learning styles, interest, and concentration do not yield interaction effects on the academic achievement of students. Overall, these findings imply that low interest always leads to lower learning concentration. Thus, appropriate mobile learning materials should be developed and used to educate students on the basis of their respective concentration, interest, and learning styles. The implications, limitations, and future research plans are presented in this article.
Allert, J. (2004). Learning style and factors contributing to success in an introductory computer science course. Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, 2004, 385–389. doi:10.1109/ICALT.2004.1357442.
BerkR. A. (2009) Multimedia teaching with video clips: TV, movies, YouTube, and mtvU in the college classroom. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning5(1): 1–21.
4.
BesterG.BrandL. (2013) The effect of technology on learner attention and achievement in the classroom. South African Journal of Education33(2): 1–15.
5.
BomsdorfB. (2005) Adaptation of learning spaces: Supporting ubiquitous learning in higher distance education. In: DaviesN.Kirste,T.SchumannH. (eds) Mobile computing and ambient intelligence, Dagstuhl, Germany: Leibniz-Zentrum Für Informatik.
6.
Brand, L. M. (2010). The effect of technology on attention and concentration within the classroom context. Retrieved from http://oasis.col.org/handle/11599/558.
7.
CavusN.IbrahimD. (2009) M-Learning: An experiment in using SMS to support learning new English language words. British Journal of Educational Technology40(1): 78–91.
8.
ChenC. J.TohS. C.IsmailW. M. F. W. (2005) Are learning styles relevant to virtual reality?Journal of Research on Technology in Education38(2): 123–141.
9.
ChenC. M.HuangS. H. (2014) Web based reading annotation system with an attention‐based self‐regulated learning mechanism for promoting reading performance. British Journal of Educational Technology45(5): 959–980.
10.
ChenC. M.SunY. C. (2012) Assessing the effects of different multimedia materials on emotions and learning performance for visual and verbal style learners. Computers & Education59(4): 1273–1285.
11.
ChenC. M.WangH. P. (2011) Using emotion recognition technology to assess the effects of different multimedia materials on learning emotion and performance. Library & Information Science Research33(3): 244–255.
12.
Chen, I. H., Yang, Y. T. C., & Hsu, S. W. (2013). Development and evaluation of a concentration questionnaire for students in classroom. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 2013, 4226–4230. Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
13.
ChenI. J.ChangC. C.YenJ. C. (2012) Effects of presentation mode on mobile language learning: A performance efficiency perspective. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology28(1): 122e137.
14.
ChenN. S.HsiehS. W.KinshukA. (2008) Effects of short-term memory and content representation type on mobile language learning. Language Learning & Technology12(3): 93–113.
15.
ChunM. M.Turk-BrowneN. B. (2007) Interactions between attention and memory. Current Opinion in Neurobiology17(2): 177–184.
16.
CostabileM. F.De AngeliA.LanzilottiR.ArditoC.BuonoP.PedersonT. (2008, April) Explore! possibilities and challenges of mobile learning. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY: ACM, pp. 145–154.
Cruz, Y. (2013, July). Examining the Effect of Learning Styles on Mobile Learning Adoption. IEEE 13th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), 2013, 510–511. doi:10.1109/ICALT.2013.168.
19.
Delgado, M. R., Phelps, E. A., & Robbins, T. W. (Eds.). (2011). Decision making, affect, and learning: Attention and performance XXIII (Vol. 23). Oxford University Press.
20.
DengY. Y. (2015) An exploration of split-attention effect in the iPad-supported classroom settings. China Modern Educational Equipment16, 97–98.
21.
DenkM.WeberM.BelfinR. (2007) Mobile learning–challenges and potentials. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation1(2): 122–139.
22.
EcheverríaA.NussbaumM.CalderónJ. F.BravoC.InfanteC.VásquezA. (2011) Face-to-face collaborative learning supported by mobile phones. Interactive Learning Environments19(4): 351–363.
23.
FelderR. M. (1993) Reaching the second tier. Journal of College Science Teaching23(5): 286–290.
24.
FreitasA.SchlemmerE. (2013) Mobile learning: Definition, uses and challenges. In: WankelL. A.BlessingerP. (eds) Increasing student engagement and retention using mobile applications: Smartphones, skype and texting technologiesVol. 47, Bingley, England: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 47–82.
25.
GappiL. L. (2013) Relationships between learning style preferences and academic performance of students. International Journal of Educational Research and Technology (IJERT)4(2): 7.
26.
GeX. S. (2006) The top ten factors of influencing learning attention. Instructional Research6: 555–557.
27.
GilakjaniA. P. (2012) The significant role of multimedia in motivating EFL learners’ interest in English language learning. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science (IJMECS)4(4): 57.
28.
GrafS.LiuT. C. (2009) Supporting teachers in identifying students’ learning styles in learning management systems: an automatic student modelling approach. Educational Technology & Society12(4): 3.
29.
Han, J., Jo, M., Park, S., & Kim, S. (2005, August). The educational use of home robots for children. IEEE International workshop on Robot and human interactive communication, 2005. ROMAN 2005 (pp. 378–383). New York, NY: IEEE.
30.
HidiS. (2006) Interest: A unique motivational variable. Educational Research Review1(2): 69–82.
31.
HomerB. D.PlassJ. L.BlakeL. (2008) The effects of video on cognitive load and social presence in multimedia-learning. Computers in Human Behavior24(3): 786–797.
32.
HoneyP.MumfordA. (1992) The manual of learning styles, Berkshire, England: Honey, Ardingly House.
HsiehS. W.JangY. R.HwangG. J.ChenN. S. (2011) Effects of teaching and learning styles on students’ reflection levels for ubiquitous learning. Computers & Education57(1): 1194–1201.
35.
HsuC. C.ChenH. C.SuY. N.HuangK. K.HuangY. M. (2012) Developing a reading concentration monitoring system by applying an artificial bee colony algorithm to e-books in an intelligent classroom. Sensors12(10): 14158–14178.
36.
HsuC. K.HwangG. J.ChangC. K. (2013) A personalized recommendation-based mobile learning approach to improving the reading performance of EFL students. Computers & Education63: 327–336.
37.
HuangE. Y.LinS. W.HuangT. K. (2012) What type of learning style leads to online participation in the mixed-mode e-learning environment? A study of software usage instruction. Computers & Education58(1): 338–349.
38.
HuangG. Z.WangH. Y.FangH. G.LinY. S. (2011) Effect of cognitive styles on context-aware ubiquitous learning—A case study on an elementary school butterfly ecology course. Modern Educational Technology21(5): 18–23.
39.
Huber, J., Steimle, J., & Mühlhäuser, M. (2010, October). Toward more efficient user interfaces for mobile video browsing: An in-depth exploration of the design space. Proceedings of the International Conference on Multimedia (pp. 341–350). New York, NY: ACM.
40.
HwangG. J.ChangH. F. (2011) A formative assessment-based mobile learning approach to improving the learning attitudes and achievements of students. Computers & Education56(4): 1023–1031.
41.
HwangG. J.WuP. H. (2014) Applications, impacts and trends of mobile technology–enhanced learning: a review of 2008–2012 publications in selected SSCI journals. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation8(2): 83–95.
42.
JaberM. Y.BonneyM. (1996) Production breaks and the learning curve: the forgetting phenomenon. Applied Mathematical Modelling20(2): 162–169.
43.
JaberM. Y.KherH. V. (2002) The dual-phase learning–forgetting model. International Journal of Production Economics76(3): 229–242.
44.
JensenA. R. (1998) The g factor: The science of mental ability, Westport, CT: Praeger.
45.
Jumisko-Pyykkö, S., & Häkkinen, J. (2005, November). Evaluation of subjective video quality of mobile devices. Proceedings of the 13th Annual ACM International Conference on Multimedia (pp. 535–538). New York, NY: ACM.
46.
KangC.ZhouA. B. (2009) The effect of representational mode of information and personality traits of learners on the learning in multimedia environment. Psychological Development and Education25(1): 81–90.
47.
KeefeJ. W.MonkJ. S. (1988) Learning style profile: Technical manual, Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
48.
KirschnerP. A.van MerriënboerJ. J. (2013) Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist48(3): 169–183.
KrankM.StewartS. H.O’ConnorR.WoicikP. B.WallA. M.ConrodP. J. (2011) Structural, concurrent, and predictive validity of the Substance Use Risk Profile Scale in early adolescence. Addictive behaviors36(1): 37–46.
51.
LinQ. S. (2012) The application of multimedia technology in web education. Physics Procedia33: 1553–1557.
52.
LiuP. L. (2014) Using eye tracking to understand the responses of learners to vocabulary learning strategy instruction and use. Computer Assisted Language Learning. 27(4), 330–343.
53.
LiuS. H.LiaoH. L.PengC. J. (2005) Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to online e-learning users’ acceptance behavior. E-learning4(H6): H8.
54.
LiuS. H.LiaoH. L.PrattJ. A. (2009) Impact of media richness and flow on e-learning technology acceptance. Computers & Education52(3): 599–607.
55.
LiuT. C.LinY. C.TsaiM. J.PaasF. (2012) Split-attention and redundancy effects on mobile learning in physical environments. Computers & Education58(1): 172–180.
56.
LynchT. G.WoelflN. N.SteeleD. J.HanssenC. S. (1998) Learning style influences student examination performance. The American Journal of Surgery176(1): 62–66.
57.
Maniar, N., Bennett, E., & Gal, D. (2007, March). The effect that screen size has on video-based m-learning. In Fifth Annual IEEE International Conference on Pervasive computing and communications workshops, 2007. PerCom workshops’ 07 (pp. 145–148). New York, NY: IEEE.
58.
ManiarN.BennettE.HandS.AllanG. (2008) The effect of mobile phone screen size on video based learning. Journal of Software3(4): 51–61.
59.
MarshH. W.TrautweinU.LüdtkeO.KöllerO.BaumertJ. (2005) Academic self‐concept, interest, grades, and standardized test scores: Reciprocal effects models of causal ordering. Child Development76(2): 397–416.
60.
MasonL.PluchinoP.TornatoraM. C.AriasiN. (2013) An eye-tracking study of learning from science text with concrete and abstract illustrations. The Journal of Experimental Education81(3): 356–384.
61.
Metcalf, D., Raasch, S., Milrad, M., Hamilton, A., & Cheek, D. (2008, March). My sports pulse: Increasing student interest in STEM disciplines through sports themes, games and mobile technologies. Fifth IEEE International Conference on Wireless, Mobile, and Ubiquitous Technology in Education, 2008. WMUTE 2008 (pp. 23–30). New York, NY: IEEE.
62.
NashS. S. (2007) Mobile learning, cognitive architecture and the study of literature. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology4: 811–818.
63.
NorazahM. N.RidzwanC. R.ArifA. A. (2013) Relationship between the acceptance of mobile learning for AutoCAD course and learning style in polytechnic. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences102: 177–187.
64.
OcepekU.BosnićZ.ŠerbecI. N.RugeljJ. (2013) Exploring the relation between learning style models and preferred multimedia types. Computers & Education69: 343–355.
65.
Paget, R. (2010). A guide to study and revision. Retrieved from www.lulu.com.
66.
PallapuP. (2007) Effects of visual and verbal learning styles on learning. Institute for Learning Styles Journal1(1): 34–41.
67.
Park, H. (2005, November). Design and development of a mobile learning management system adaptive to learning style of students. IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education, 2005. WMTE 2005 (pp. 67–69). New York, NY: IEEE.
68.
PashlerH.McDanielM.RohrerD.BjorkR. (2008) Learning styles concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest9(3): 105–119.
RenningerK.WozniakR. H. (1985) Effect of interest on attentional shift, recognition, and recall in young children. Developmental Psychology21(4): 624.
71.
RogersY.PriceS. (2008) The role of mobile devices in facilitating collaborative inquiry in situ. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning3(03): 209–229.
72.
RotgansJ. I.SchmidtH. G. (2012) Problem-based learning and student motivation: The role of interest in learning and achievement. In: O’GradyG.YewE. H. J.GohK. P. L.SchmidtH. G. (eds) One-day, one-problem, Singapore: Springer, pp. 85–101.
73.
SampsonD. G.ZervasP. (2013) Context-aware adaptive and personalized mobile learning systems. In: SampsonD. G.IsaiasP.IfenthalerD.SpectorJ. M. (eds) Ubiquitous and mobile learning in the digital age, New York, NY: Springer, pp. 3–17.
74.
Saran, M., Cagiltay, K., & Seferoglu, G. (2008, March). Use of mobile phones in language learning: Developing effective instructional materials. In Fifth IEEE International Conference on Wireless, Mobile, and Ubiquitous Technology in Education, 2008. WMUTE 2008. (pp. 39–43). IEEE.
75.
SharplesM.Arnedillo-SánchezI.MilradM.VavoulaG. (2009) Mobile learning, Netherlands: Springer, pp. 233–249.
76.
ShihB. Y.ChenC. Y.LiC. E. (2013) The exploration of the mobile mandarin learning system by the application of TRIZ theory. Computer Applications in Engineering Education21(2): 343–348.
77.
Silander, P., Sutinen, E., & Tarhio, J. (2004). Mobile collaborative concept mapping-combining classroom activity with simultaneous field exploration. Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education, 2004 (pp. 114–118). New York, NY: IEEE.
78.
Sleegers, P. J. C., Moolenaar, N. M., Galetzka, M., Pruyn, A., Sarroukh, B. E., & van der Zande, B. (2013). Lighting affects students’ concentration positively: Findings from three Dutch studies. Lighting Research and Technology. 45(2), 159–175..
SulaimanW. I. W.MahbobM. H.AzlanA. A. (2011) Learning outside the classroom: Effects on student concentration and interest. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences18: 12–17.
81.
TakahashiK.AritaK. (2013) A warning system in e-learning using web cameras. Procedia Computer Science22: 571–579.
82.
Tan, T. H., & Liu, T. Y. (2004, August). The mobile-based interactive learning environment (MOBILE) and a case study for assisting elementary school English learning. Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, 2004 (pp. 530–534). New York, NY: IEEE.
83.
TerrellS. R.DringusL. (2000) An investigation of the effect of learning style on student success in an online learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology Systems28(3): 231–238.
84.
TingY. L. (2013) Using mobile technologies to create interwoven learning interactions: An intuitive design and its evaluation. Computers & Education60(1): 1–13.
YangY. T. C.ChangC. H. (2013) Empowering students through digital game authorship: Enhancing concentration, critical thinking, and academic achievement. Computers & Education68: 334–344.
87.
YangX.GuoX.YuS. (in press) Effects of cooperative translation on Chinese EFL student levels of interest and self-efficacy in specialized English translation. Computer Assisted Language Learning.
88.
YangX.LiX.LuT. (2015) Using mobile phones in college classroom settings: Effects of presentation mode and interest on concentration and achievement. Computers & Education88: 292–302.
89.
Zhang, L. (2013, September). Mobile phone technology engagement in EFL classroom. Proceedings of the 2013 International conference on software engineering and computer science, Atlantis Press, Hubei, China.
90.
ZhangD.ZhouL.BriggsR. O.NunamakerJ. F. (2006) Instructional video in e-learning: Assessing the impact of interactive video on learning effectiveness. Information & Management43(1): 15–27.
91.
ZhaoX.AnmaF.NinomiyaT.OkamotoT. (2008) Personalized adaptive content system for context-aware mobile learning. International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security8(8): 153–161.
