ArticleComputers in human behavior2021
Individualized learning potential in stressful times: How to leverage intensive longitudinal data to inform online learning.
Article in Computers in human behavior, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Working memory and daily internalizing problems: Pubertal timing moderates adult relations.Journal of affective disorders · 2026Article
- A cross-sectional study of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: Student perceptions.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Averting the Next Credibility Crisis in Psychological Science: Within-Person Methods for Personalized Diagnostics and Intervention.Journal for person-oriented research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Societal events - such as natural disasters, political shifts, or economic downturns - are time-varying and impact the learning potential of students in unique ways. These impacts are likely accentuated during the COVID-19 pandemic, which precipitated an abrupt and wholesale transition to online education. Unfortunately, the individual-level consequences of these events are difficult to determine because the extant literature focuses on single-occasion surveys that produce only group-level inferences. To better understand individual-level variability in stress and learning, intensive longitudinal data can be leveraged. The goal of this paper is to illustrate this by discussing three different techniques for the analysis of intensive longitudinal data: (1) regression analyses; (2) multilevel models; and (3) person-specific network models, (e.g., group iterative multiple model estimation; GIMME). For each technique, a brief background in the context of education research is provided, an illustrative analysis is presented using data from college students who completed a 75-day intensive longitudinal study of cognition, somatic symptoms, anxiety, and intellectual interests during the 2016 U.S. Presidential election - a period of heightened sociopolitical stress - and strengths and limitations are considered. The paper ends with recommendations for future research, especially for intensive longitudinal studies of online education during COVID-19.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.