Despite the diverse opportunities digital technologies offer that enhance learning and improve instructional practice, the main challenge faced by many institutions is the distracting effects of hyper-connectivity caused by mobile devices during learning activities. Some students find it difficult to balance online leisure activity with school work because of the guilty pleasures associated with using certain types of media. The failure of college students to reduce distractions from academic cyberloafing could negatively impact their achievement of academic success. This scholarly paper is designed to explore how contemporary research has investigated this emerging phenomenon to better understand important strategies for control.

1. The 5th Annual Teaching–Innovation–Presence(TIP) 2018 Conference
By
Zizo Aku, Ph.D.
Purdue University Global
August 28, 2018
A CONTENT ANALYSIS OF THE
EMERGING RESEARCH ON
ACADEMIC CYBERLOAFING

2. Presentation
Outline
Background and Purpose
Some Facts about College Students
Overview of the Literature on Academic Cyberloafing
Design and Rationale
Results and Discussion
Conclusion

3. Background and
Purpose
Background
§ Academic Cyberloafing refers to the use of digital
devices by college students during learning activity for
non-academic purposes (Knight, 2017).
§ The Problem - An increasing concern that college
students are wasting time on their digital devices
rather than spending time on more productive
learning activity (Akbulut, Dönmez, & Dursun, 2017).
Purpose
§ To give a report on a content analysis of
contemporary academic cyberloafing research
literature.

4. Some Facts about
College Students
§97% own smartphones, 95% own laptops, and 57% own tablets
(EDUCAUSE, 2017).
§45% use smartphones to cyberloaf during learning activities
(EDUCAUSE, 2017).
§Faculty are banning or discouraging the use of digital devices more
often than in previous years (Educause, 2017).
§Related reasons for academic cyberloafing:
o Unpreparedness
o Boredom
o Personal issues
o Motivation issues (Varo & Yildirim, 2017).

5. Overview of
Literature
Review
Chris Piotrowski - University of West Florida conducted most
recent cyberloafing research content analysis.
Academic cyberloafing and performance (le Roux & Parry, 2017;
Patterson, 2017; & Womack & McNamara, 2017).
Antecedents and typologies of academic cyberloafing
(Blanchard & Henle, 2008; Nath, Chen, & Muyingi, 2015; &
Sheikh, Atashgah, & Adibzadegan, 2015).
Definitional issues of academic cyberloafing (Knight, 2017;
Oravec, 2018; & Yuwanto, 2018).
Dimensions of nomophobia (Arpaci, IBaloğlu, Kozan, & Kesici,
2017; Gökçearslan, Mumcu, Haşlaman, & Çevik, 2016; & Prasad
et al., 2017).

6. Overview of
Literature
Review cont.
Gender and academic cyberloafing (Baturay & Toker, 2015;
Fernández-Villa, et al., 2015; Odacı & Çıkrıkçı, 2014).
Managing digital distractions and hyper-connectivity (Cheong,
Shuter, & Suwinyattichaiporn, 2016; Elliott-Dorans, 2018; &
Seemiller, 2017).
Task switching and multitasking (Delello, Reichard, & Mokhtari,
2016; Marone, Thakkar, Suliman, O’Neill, & Doubleday, 2018; &
Rosen, Carrier, & Cheever, 2013).
Time management and procrastination (Meier, Reinecke, &
Meltzer, 2016; Panek, 2014; & Van Koningsbruggen, Hartmann,
& Du, 2017).

7. Design and
Rationale
Design
 Summative content analysis approach to identify and quantify
certain content in text to understand its contextual use (Hsieh &
Shannon, 2005).
 Preliminary keyword searches together with footnote chasing used
to obtain data sources.
 Coding process involved organizing large quantities of text into much
fewer content categories.
 Analysis involved reviewing categories and developing themes.
Rationale
 Content analysis is a systematic method used to analyze and make
inferences from textual content (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005).

8. Results and Discussion
Table 1.
Areas of Focus in Academic Cyberloafing Research
Major Focus Areas Frequency
Academic Cyberloafing and Performance 47
Academic Cyberloafing and Task Switching/Multitasking 48
Academic Cyberloafing and Time Management/Procrastination 11
Antecedents and Typologies of Academic Cyberloafing 11
Definitional Issues of Academic Cyberloafing 8
Digital Distractions in 21st Century College Classrooms 26
Dimensions of Nomophobia and Academic Cyberloafing 18
Gender and Academic Cyberloafing 8
Managing Student Digital Distractions and Hyper-connectivity 18
Reaction Modes of Faculty towards Academic Cyberloafing 5
Relationship Between Cyberloafing Activities and Cyberloafing Behavior in Academia 11
Students Perceptions of Academic Cyberloafing 7
Students' Problematic Internet Use 29
TOTAL 247

9. Results and Discussion cont.
Neglected Areas within Research
Academic cyberloafing within the online learning context.
Managing academic cyberloafing in online higher education.
Student perceptions about academic cyberloafing in online degree programs.
Online higher education strategies for curbing academic cyberloafing in online programs.

10. CONCLUSION

11. References
Akbulut, Y., Dönmez, O., & Dursun, Ö. Ö. (2017). Cyberloafing and social desirability bias among students and
employees. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 87-95. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.043
Arpaci, I., Baloğlu, M., Kozan, H. İ. Ö., & Kesici, Ş. (2017). Individual differences in the relationship between attachment
and nomophobia among college students: The mediating role of mindfulness. Journal of medical Internet research,
19(12). doi:10.2196/jmir.8847
Baturay, M. H., & Toker, S. (2015). An investigation of the impact of demographics on cyberloafing from an educational
setting angle. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 358-366. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.081
Blanchard, A. L., & Henle, C. A. (2008). Correlates of different forms of cyberloafing: The role of norms and external
locus of control. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 1067-1084. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.03.008
Brooks, D. C., & Pomerantz, J. (2017). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology, 2017.
Research report. Louisville, CO: ECAR, October 2017.
Cheong, P. H., Shuter, R., & Suwinyattichaiporn, T. (2016). Managing student digital distractions and hyperconnectivity:
Communication strategies and challenges for professorial authority. Communication Education, 65(3), 272-289.
doi:10.1080/03634523.2016.1159317
College student cyberloafing. [Photograph]. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://medium.com/@dweobong/part-two-what-
can-you-do-about-cyberloafing-eef3cd956514
College student taking pictures on cell phone during class. [Photograph]. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://mediadistractionstocollegestudents.blogspot.com/
College student using laptop during class. [Photograph]. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://admizz.com/nepal//article/64
Delello, J. A., Reichard, C. A., & Mokhtari, K. (2016). Multitasking Among College Students: Are Freshmen More
Distracted?. International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning (IJCBPL), 6(4), 1-12.
Elliott-Dorans, L. R. (2018). To ban or not to ban? The effect of permissive versus restrictive laptop policies on student
outcomes and teaching evaluations. Computers & Education, 126, 183-200. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.008
Fernández-Villa, T., Ojeda, J. A., Gómez, A. A., CARRAL, J., CANCELA, M., Delgado-Rodríguez, M., ... & Moncada, R. O.
(2015). Problematic Internet Use in University Students: associated factors and differences of gender. Adicciones,
27(4), 265-275. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26706809
Gökçearslan, Ş., Mumcu, F. K., Haşlaman, T., & Çevik, Y. D. (2016). Modelling smartphone addiction: The role of
smartphone usage, self-regulation, general self-efficacy and cyberloafing in university students. Computers in Human
Behavior, 63, 639-649. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.091

12. References
cont.
Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative health
research, 15(9), 1277-1288. doi:10.1177/1049732305276687
Knight, R. M. (2017). Academic cyberloafing: A study of perceptual and behavioral differences on in-class
cyberloafing among undergraduate students. (Master's Thesis, East Carolina University). Retrieved from
http://hdl.handle.net/10342/6133.
le Roux, D. B., & Parry, D. A. (2017, July). A new generation of students: Digital media in academic contexts.
In Annual Conference of the Southern African Computer Lecturers' Association (pp. 19-36). Springer, Cham.
Marone, J. R., Thakkar, S. C., Suliman, N., O’Neill, S. I., & Doubleday, A. F. (2018). Social media interruption
affects the acquisition of visually, not aurally, acquired information during a pathophysiology lecture.
Advances in Physiology Education, 42(2), 175-181. doi:10.1152/advan.00097.2017
Meier, A., Reinecke, L., & Meltzer, C. E. (2016). “Facebocrastination”? Predictors of using Facebook for
procrastination and its effects on students’ well-being. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 65-76.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.011
Nath, R., Chen, L., & Muyingi, H. N. (2015). An empirical study of the factors that influence in-class digital
distraction among university students: A US–Namibia cross-cultural study. Information Resources
Management Journal (IRMJ), 28(4), 1-18. doi:10.4018/IRMJ.2015100101
Odacı, H., & Çıkrıkçı, Ö. (2014). Problematic internet use in terms of gender, attachment styles and
subjective well-being in university students. Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 61-66.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.11.019
Oravec, J. A. (2018). Cyberloafing and constructive recreation. Encyclopedia of Information Science and
Technology, Fourth Edition, 4316-4325. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-2255-3.ch374
Panek, E. (2014). Left to their own devices: College students' "guilty pleasure” media use and time
management. Communication Research, 41(4), 561-577. doi:10.1177/0093650213499657
Patterson, M. C. (2017). A naturalistic investigation of media multitasking while studying and the effects on
exam performance. Teaching of Psychology, 44(1), 51-57. doi:10.1177/0098628316677913

13. References
cont.
Piotrowski, C. (2012). Cyberloafing: A content analysis of the emerging literature. Journal of Instructional
Psychology, 39(3-4), 259-261. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-
com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/docview/1490691578?accountid=35812
Prasad, M., Patthi, B., Singla, A., Gupta, R., Saha, S., Kumar, J. K., ... & Pandita, V. (2017). Nomophobia: A
cross-sectional study to assess mobile phone usage among dental students. Journal of Clinical and
Diagnostic Research: JCDR, 11(2), ZC34. doi:10.7860/JCDR/2017/20858.9341
Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. A. (2013). Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced
task-switching while studying. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 948-958.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.001
Seemiller, C. (2017). Curbing digital distractions in the classroom. Contemporary Educational Technology,
8(3), 214-231.Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1148591.pdf
Sheikh, A., Atashgah, M. S., & Adibzadegan, M. (2015). The antecedents of cyberloafing: A case study in an
Iranian copper industry. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 172-179. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.042
Van Koningsbruggen, G. M., Hartmann, T., & Du, J. (2017). Always on? Explicating impulsive influences on
media use. Permanently Online, Permanently Connected: Living and Communicating in a POPC World;
Routledge: New York, NY, USA.
Varol, F., & Yıldırım, E. (2018). An examination of cyberloafing behaviors in classrooms from students'
perspectives. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 9(1), 26-46. doi:10.17569/tojqi.349800
Womack, J. M., & McNamara, C. L. (2017). Cell phone use and its effects on undergraduate academic
performance. The Kennesaw Journal of Undergraduate Research, 5(1), 3. Retrieved from
https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/kjur/vol5/iss1/3
Yuwanto, L. (2018). Academic flow and cyberloafing. Psychology, 8(4), 173-177. doi:10.17265/2159-
5542/2018.04.006