Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36718425›Full record

ArticleEducation and information technologies2023

More factors, better understanding: model verification and construct validity study on the community of inquiry in MOOC.

Xuemei Bai, Xiaoqing Gu, Rifa Guo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Education and information technologies, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Xuemei BaiDepartment of Educational Technology, School of Education, Ningxia University, 217 North Wencui Street, Yinchuan, China.
Xiaoqing GuDepartment of Educational Information Technology, East China Normal University, 3663 North Zhongshan Road, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8256-5408
Rifa GuoInstitute of Education, Tsinghua University, Qinghuayuan, Haidian District, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to verify the applicability of the community of inquiry (CoI) survey instrument in MOOC involving 1,186 college students from 11 different disciplines in China. Exploratory factor analysis was used to explore potential factor structure models, and confirmatory factor analysis was utilized to verify the four-factor structure obtained from exploratory factor analysis. The original three- and new six-factor structure models were also included in the study. Confirmatory factor analysis results indicating that all three models fit very well with the data. Then Chi-square difference test was used to select the optimal model. Results indicate that the six-factor structure model with teaching presence, social presence, cognitive presence, design and organization, affective expression, and resolution is the optimal one, with good convergent and discriminant validity. Especially, the chi-square difference results indicate that design and organization can be significantly distinguished from teaching presence, whereas affective expression can be significantly distinguished from social presence, and resolution can be significantly distinguished from cognitive presence. Based on these findings, the present study argues that the six-factor structure model can provide a better understanding for the fine design and implementation of MOOC.

Indexed as

CoI survey instrumentFactor analysisMOOCOptimal model structure

Identifiers

PMID36718425
PMCPMC9878488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.