Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Combining Vicarious and Enactive Training in IS: Does Order Matter?

256 views

Published on

Authors : Félix G. Lafontaine, Pierre-Majorique Léger, Élise Labonté-LeMoyne, Patrick Charland, Paul Cronan
Abstract. The objective of the article is to provide empirical support for curriculum development to instructors using enactive learning in IS. Specifically, we are interested in understanding
which instructional design, combining enactive and vicarious learning, leads to the most effective learning achievement and development of self-efficacy. Specifically, we compare two
different training sequences to determine which is the best combination of the two instructional designs (vicarious/enactive) to train people in using business dashboards efficiently. In a controlled lab environment, we collected i) behavioral data (performance, software interactions) ii) oculometric data and iii) self-assessed self-efficacy data to assess the learning processes and strategies. Our results show that providing the vicarious training first when using a combination of enactive and vicarious learning leads to a higher self-efficacy increase. It also has a significant impact on the attentional efficiency of students using dashboards in a business setting.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Combining Vicarious and Enactive Training in IS: Does Order Matter?

  1. 1. Combining vicarious and enactive training in IS : Does order matter ? PIERRE-MAJORIQUE LÉGER, Ph.D. Co-director Tech3Lab, HEC Montréal FÉLIX G. LAFONTAINE HEC Montréal ÉLISE LABONTE-LEMOYNE, Ph.D. HEC Montréal PATRICK CHARLAND, Ph.D. Université du Québec à Montréal PAUL CRONAN, Ph.D. University of Arkansas
  2. 2. GARTNER PREDICTS : ‘‘By 2017, most business users will have access to technologies that will enable them to prepare and analyze data’’ Source :Parenteau, J., Chandler, N., L. Salam, R., Laney D., D. Duncan, A. Predicts 2015: Power Shift in Business Intelligence and Analytics Will Fuel Disruption (ID: G00270932). Retrieved from Gartner database. (2014, November 21)
  3. 3. Dashboard and user attentional efficiency
  4. 4. © Copyright Tech3Lab 2016 Research goals and hypothesis Combination of enactive learning and vicarious learning leads to greater learning outcomes, but in which order ? H1 : Vicarious training accelerates the attentional efficiency of the learner. H2 : Order does not impact learning outcome
  5. 5. © Copyright Tech3Lab 2016 Experimental Design © Copyright Tech3Lab 2016 VICARIOUS TRAINING ▪▪ 15 minutes demonstration video including a voiceover explaining the different principles that guided the creations of the different indicators and which of them were useful in the context of a given task. ENACTIVE TRAINING ▪▪ 15 minutes enactive training in which the participants were asked to perform a task in the simulated busi- ness environment, i.e. ERPsim (Montréal, Canada) using an online dashboard and a SAP GUI. CONDITION 1 CONDITION 2 FIRST TRAINING SECOND TRAINING VICARIOUS VICARIOUS ENACTIVE ENACTIVE
  6. 6. © Copyright Tech3Lab 2016 Experimental Stimuli ERPSIM ONLINE DASHBOARD 4 Types of Indicators ▪▪ useful information, well presented ▪▪ useful information, badly presented ▪▪ useless in-formation, well presented ▪▪ useless information, badly presented Lab Serious games to learn enterprise systems and business analytics 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Sample indicators for the inventory data
  7. 7. © Copyright Tech3Lab 2016 Tobii EyeTracker X60 © Copyright Tech3Lab 2016 Instruments ▪▪ ERPsim Simulation Game (Logistics Version) ▪▪ Tobii X60 EyeTracker ▪▪ Online Self-Refreshing Dashboard Measures Attentional efficiency (Eyetracking measure) ▪▪ Average Visit Duration Learning Outcomes ▪▪ Learning (Objective and Perceived Knowledge) ▪▪ Dashboard Self-Efficacy ▪▪ Satisfaction with the learning process ▪▪ Enterprise System Management Knowledge
  8. 8. © Copyright Tech3Lab 2016 Pre Questionnaire Post Questionnaire Pre Questionnaire Post Questionnaire Vicarious Training (15 minutes) Vicarious Training (15 minutes) Enactive Training (15 minutes) Enactive Training (15 minutes) Experiment Timeline Condition 1 Condition 2 T1 (first 5m) T3 (last 5m)
  9. 9. © Copyright Tech3Lab 2016 Results ATTENTIONAL EFFICIENCY LEARNING OUTCOMES ▪▪ Average Visit Duration : ▪▪ Learning (Objective and Perceived Knowledge) ▪▪ Dashboard Self-Efficacy ▪▪ Satisfaction with the learning process ▪▪ Enterprise System Management Knowledge
  10. 10. © Copyright Tech3Lab 2016 Eye fixations Triangulation and machine learning Visualization of emotion and/or cognitive states at fixation Next step ENABLING THE VISUALIZATION OF TRIANGULATED ATTENTION, EMOTIONAL, AND COGNITIVE MEASURES. Courtemanche, F., P.-M. Léger, M. Frédette, S. Sénécal, and A. Dufresne (2015) Method and Product for Visualizing the Emo- tions of a User, Provisional patent application. US 62/121,552 p. 14. PATENT PENDING
  11. 11. © Copyright Tech3Lab 2016 Dashboard visual efficiency: Bar Chart vs Bubble Chart BAR CHART BUBBLE CHART
  12. 12. © Copyright Tech3Lab 2016 BAR CHART BUBBLE CHART POSITIVE VALENCE AT FIXATION NEGATIVE VALENCE AT FIXATION PUPIL DILATION AT FIXATION Dashboard visual efficiency: Bar Chart vs Bubble Chart
  13. 13. © Copyright Tech3Lab 2016 POSITIVE VALENCE AT FIXATION NEGATIVE VALENCE AT FIXATION PUPIL DILATION AT FIXATION BAR CHART BUBBLE CHART Dashboard visual efficiency: Bar Chart vs Bubble Chart
  14. 14. Thank you!

×