The Effect of Device When Using Smartphones and Computers to Answer Multiple-Choice and Open-Response Questions in Distance Education

Traditionally in higher education, online courses have been designed for computer users. However, the advent of mobile learning (m-learning) and the proliferation of smartphones have created two challenges for online students and instructional designers. First, instruction designed for a larger computer screen often loses its effectiveness when displayed on a smaller smartphone screen. Second, requiring students to write remains a hallmark of higher education, but miniature keyboards might restrict how thoroughly smartphone users respond to open- response test questions. The present study addressed both challenges by featuring m-learning’s greatest strength (multimedia) and by investigating its greatest weakness (text input). The purpose of the current study was to extend previous research associated with m- learning. The first goal was to determine the effect of device (computer vs. smartphone) on performance when answering multiple-choice and open-response questions. The second goal was to determine whether computers and smartphones would receive significantly different usability ratings when used by participants to answer multiple-choice and open-response questions. The construct of usability was defined as a composite score based on ratings of effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction. This comparative study used a between-subjects, posttest, experimental design. The study randomly assigned 70 adults to either the computer treatment group or the smartphone treatment group. Both treatment groups received the same narrated multimedia lesson on how a solar cell works. Participants accessed the lesson using either their personal computers (computer treatment group) or their personal smartphones (smartphone treatment group) at the time and location of their choice. After viewing the multimedia lesson, all participants answered the same multiple-choice and open-response posttest questions. In the current study, computer users and smartphone users had no significant difference in their scores on multiple-choice recall questions. On open-response questions, smartphone users performed better than predicted, which resulted in no significant difference between scores of the two treatment groups. Regarding usability, participants gave computers and smartphones high usability ratings when answering multiple-choice items. However, for answering open-response items, smartphones received significantly lower usability ratings than computers

Impacts of Social Distancing Policies on Mobility and COVID-19 Case Growth in the US

Social distancing remains an important strategy to combat the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. However, the impacts of specific state-level policies on mobility and subsequent COVID-19 case trajectories have not been completely quantified. Using anonymized and aggregated mobility data from opted-in Google users, we found that state-level emergency declarations resulted in a 9.9% reduction in time spent away from places of residence. Implementation of one or more social distancing policies resulted in an additional 24.5% reduction in mobility the following week, and subsequent shelter-in-place mandates yielded an additional 29.0% reduction. Decreases in mobility were associated with substantial reductions in case growth 2 to 4 weeks later. For example, a 10% reduction in mobility was associated with a 17.5% reduction in case growth 2 weeks later. Given the continued reliance on social distancing policies to limit the spread of COVID-19, these results may be helpful to public health officials trying to balance infection control with the economic and social consequences of these policies.Comment: Co-first Authors: GAW, SV, VE, and AF contributed equally. Corresponding Author: Dr. Evgeniy Gabrilovich, [email protected] 32 pages (including supplemental material), 4 figures in the main text, additional figures in the supplemental materia

Comparing nuclear power trajectories in Germany and the UK: from ‘regimes' to ‘democracies’ in sociotechnical transitions and Discontinuities

This paper focuses on arguably the single most striking contrast in contemporary major energy politics in Europe (and even the developed world as a whole): the starkly differing civil nuclear policies of Germany and the UK. Germany is seeking entirely to phase out nuclear power by 2022. Yet the UK advocates a ‘nuclear renaissance’, promoting the most ambitious new nuclear construction programme in Western Europe.Here,this paper poses a simple yet quite fundamental question: what are the particular divergent conditions most strongly implicated in the contrasting developments in these two countries. With nuclear playing such an iconic role in historical discussions over technological continuity and transformation, answering this may assist in wider understandings of sociotechnical incumbency and discontinuity in the burgeoning field of‘sustainability transitions’. To this end, an ‘abductive’ approach is taken: deploying nine potentially relevant criteria for understanding the different directions pursued in Germany and the UK. Together constituted by 30 parameters spanning literatures related to socio-technical regimes in general as well as nuclear technology in particular, the criteria are divided into those that are ‘internal’ and ‘external’ to the ‘focal regime configuration’ of nuclear power and associated ‘challenger technologies’ like renewables. It is ‘internal’ criteria that are emphasised in conventional sociotechnical regime theory, with ‘external’ criteria relatively less well explored. Asking under each criterion whether attempted discontinuation of nuclear power would be more likely in Germany or the UK, a clear picture emerges. ‘Internal’ criteria suggest attempted nuclear discontinuation should be more likely in the UK than in Germany– the reverse of what is occurring. ‘External’ criteria are more aligned with observed dynamics –especially those relating to military nuclear commitments and broader ‘qualities of democracy’. Despite many differences of framing concerning exactly what constitutes ‘democracy’, a rich political science literature on this point is unanimous in characterising Germany more positively than the UK. Although based only on a single case,a potentially important question is nonetheless raised as to whether sociotechnical regime theory might usefully give greater attention to the general importance of various aspects of democracy in constituting conditions for significant technological discontinuities and transformations. If so, the policy implications are significant. A number of important areas are identified for future research, including the roles of diverse understandings and specific aspects of democracy and the particular relevance of military nuclear commitments– whose under-discussion in civil nuclear policy literatures raises its own questions of democratic accountability

Using a Family History Intervention to Improve Cancer Risk Perception in a Black Community.

Few studies examine the use of family history to influence risk perceptions in the African American population. This study examined the influence of a family health history (FHH) intervention on risk perceptions for breast (BRCA), colon (CRC), and prostate cancers (PRCA) among African Americans in Pittsburgh, PA. Participants (n = 665) completed pre- and post-surveys and FHHs. We compared their objective and perceived risks, classified as average, moderate, or high, and examined the accuracy of risk perceptions before and after the FHH intervention. The majority of participants had accurate risk perceptions post-FHH. Of those participants who were inaccurate pre-FHH, 43.3%, 43.8%, and 34.5% for BRCA, CRC, and PRCA, respectively, adopted accurate risk perceptions post-FHH intervention. The intervention was successful in a community setting. It has the potential to lead to healthy behavior modifications because participants adopted accurate risk perceptions. We identified a substantial number of at-risk individuals who could benefit from targeted prevention strategies, thus decreasing racial/ethnic cancer disparities