IRMA-International.org: Creator of Knowledge
Information Resources Management Association
Advancing the Concepts & Practices of Information Resources Management in Modern Organizations

Impacts of Behavior Modeling in Online Asynchronous Learning Environments

Impacts of Behavior Modeling in Online Asynchronous Learning Environments
View Sample PDF
Author(s): Charlie C. Chen (Appalachian State University, USA), Albert L. Harris (Appalachian State University, USA)and Lorne Olfman (Claremont Graduate University, USA)
Copyright: 2007
Pages: 24
Source title: Issues and Trends in Technology and Human Interaction
Source Author(s)/Editor(s): Bernd Carsten Stahl (De Montfort University, UK)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59904-268-8.ch006

Purchase

View Impacts of Behavior Modeling in Online Asynchronous Learning Environments on the publisher's website for pricing and purchasing information.

Abstract

The continued and increasing use of online asynchronous learning (OAL) environments for training raises the question whether behavior modeling, the most effective training method in live instruction, will prove to be effective in OAL environments. If it is effective, to what extent will it be effective? In this study, behavior modeling training was delivered in three modes: face-to-face, videotaped, and scripted. Each behavior modeling mode expresses social presence to a different degree, and therefore could impact both learning performance and the willingness of students to take online asynchronous training. This study reports on the effect of behavior modeling modes on three variables in an OAL environment, perceived usefulness, near-knowledge, and far-knowledge transfer, when learning a software application. Nine hypotheses were proposed. Four hypotheses were supported and five were not. This research found that the face-to-face environment is not significantly more effective than an OAL environment. The impacts of social presence seem to be higher in face-to-face OAL environments. Although videotaped instruction and scripted instruction were lower than face-to-face instruction, they deliver same degrees of social presence and lead to similar satisfaction level.

Related Content

G. Surekha, Edwin Shalom Soji. © 2026. 20 pages.
P. Vidhya, S. Silvia Priscila. © 2026. 28 pages.
G. Surekha, Edwin Shalom Soji. © 2026. 20 pages.
P. Kiruthiga, S. Silvia Priscila. © 2026. 28 pages.
C. Ashwini, S.T.V.T. Anantha Krishnama Charyulu, N. Avinash Chowdary, S.T.V. Sathvik, A. Thenmozhi, Sureshkumar Somayajula, Muhammad Saleem. © 2026. 26 pages.
Divya Divya, Kamlesh Kumar Yadav. © 2026. 20 pages.
S. Kiruthika, S. Silvia Priscila. © 2026. 24 pages.
Body Bottom