You are here:

Student communication and study habits of first-year university students in the digital era | Communication tudiante et habitudes d’tude des tudiants universitaires de premire anne l’poque numrique

, ,

CJLT Volume 42, Number 1, ISSN 1499-6677 e-ISSN 1499-6677 Publisher: Canadian Network for Innovation in Education


This paper reports on research into how first-university students communicate with peers and professors and their general study habits and to examine the possible relationship between students’ use of digital technologies. The research is positioned in the interpretive paradigm. We conclude that most students feel comfortable with digital technologies and they see Facebook/MySpace as more about connecting and interacting with friends than for academic communication. Results show that students prefer face-to-face communication for both academic/school and social communication. Regarding study habits, students prefer to learn by themselves, work independently and to study at home. Cet article prsente la recherche sur les habitudes d’tude des tudiants universitaires, leur usage des technologies numriques et leur faon de communiquer entre eux et avec leurs professeurs. Nous concluons que la plupart des tudiants se sentent l’aise avec les technologies numriques et qu’ils utilisent les mdias sociaux pour leurs liens et interactions avec leurs amis plutt que pour la communication scolaire. Les tudiants prfrent les communications en personne en ce qui a trait aux communications scolaires et sociales et prfrent apprendre par eux-mmes, travailler de manire autonome et tudier la maison.


Gallardo-Echenique, E., Bullen, M. & Marqus-Molas, L. (2016). Student communication and study habits of first-year university students in the digital era | Communication tudiante et habitudes d’tude des tudiants universitaires de premire anne l’poque numrique. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology / La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 42(1),. Canadian Network for Innovation in Education. Retrieved March 19, 2019 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Abdul Karim, N.S., & Hasan, A. (2007). Reading habits and attitude in the digital age: Analysis of gender and academic program differences in Malaysia. The Electronic Library, 25(3), 285–298.
  2. Acılar, A. (2011). Exploring the aspects of digital divide in a developing country. The Journal of Issues in Informing Science& Information Technology, 8(1), 231–244. Retrieved from
  3. Bajt, S.K. (2011). Web 2.0 technologies: Applications for community colleges. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2011(154), 53–62. Doi:10.1002/cc.446
  4. Bargh, J.A., & McKenna, K.Y.A. (2004). The Internet and social life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55(1), 573–590.
  5. Battro, A.M., & Fischer, K.W. (2012). Mind, brain, and education in the digital era. Mind, Brain, and Education, 6(1), 49–50. Doi:10.1111/J.1751-228X.2011.01137.x
  6. Benfield, G., Ramanau, R., & Sharpe, R. (2009). Student learning technology use: Preferences for study and contact. The Brookes eJournal of Learning and Teaching (BeJLT), 2(4).
  7. Biesenbach-Lucas, S. (2007). Students writing emails to faculty: An examination of e-politeness among native and non-native speakers of English. Language Learning& Technology, 11(2), 59–81. Doi:10.1016/S0889-4906(05)80009-2
  8. Boneva, B.S., Quinn, A., Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., & Shklovski, I. (2006). Teenage communication in the instant messaging era. In R. Kraut, M. Brynin, & S. Kiesler (Eds.), Computers, phones, and the Internet: Domesticating information technology (pp. 201–218). New
  9. Browne, T., Hewitt, R., Jenkins, M., Voce, J., Walker, R., & Yip, H. (2010). 2010 Survey of Technology Enhanced Learning for higher education in the UK. Oxford, United Kingdom: Universities and Colleges Information Systems Association (UCISA), University of Oxford. Retrieved from Ashx
  10. Bryant, J.A., Sanders-Jackson, A., & Smallwood, A.M.K. (2006). IMing, text messaging, and adolescent social networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 577–592.
  11. Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2003). Business research methods. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  12. Bullen, M., Morgan, T., Belfer, K., & Qayyum, A. (2008, October). The digital learner at BCIT and implications for an e-strategy. Paper presented at the 2008 research workshop of the European Distance Education Network (EDEN), Paris, France.
  13. Bullen, M., Belfer, K., Morgan, T., & Qayyum, A. (2009). The net generation in higher education: Rhetoric and reality. International Journal of Excellence in E-Learning, 2(1), 1-13. Retrieved from & IID=21
  14. Bullen, M., Morgan, T., Romero, M., Sangrà, A., & Guitert, M. (2012). Social use and educational practice: Developing an understanding of the digital learner and ICT use. In J.M. Sancho, L. Fraga, J. Arrazola, R. Miño, & X. Giró (Eds.), III European Conference on Information Technology in Education and Society: A Critical Insight (pp. 52–54). Retrieved from
  15. Czerniewicz, L., Williams, K., & Brown, C. (2009). Students make a plan: Understanding student agency in constraining conditions. ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology, 17(2), 75–88. Doi:10.1080/09687760903033058
  16. Chen, N.-S., Wei, C.-W., Huang, Y.-C., & Kinshuk. (2012). The integration of print and digital content for providing learners with constructive feedback using smartphones. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(5), 837–845.
  17. Collins, K.M.T., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Jiao, Q.G. (2006). Prevalence of mixed-methods sampling designs in social science research. Evaluation& Research in Education, 19(2), 83–101.
  18. Conole, G., de Laat, M., Dillon, T., & Darby, J. (2005). An in-depth case study of students’ experiences of e-Learning– how is learning changing? In L. Markauskaite, P. Goodyear, & P. Reimann (Eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education: Who’s Learning? Whose Technology? (pp. 153–161). Sydney, Australia: Sydney University
  19. Czerniewicz, L., Williams, K., & Brown, C. (2009). Students make a plan: Understanding student agency in constraining conditions. ALT-J, Research in Learning Technology, 17(2), 75–88. Doi:10.1080/09687760903033058
  20. Duthler, K.W. (2006). The politeness of requests made via email and voicemail: Support for the hyperpersonal model. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 500–521.
  21. Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2004). Digital Literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93–106.
  22. Gallardo-Echenique, E.E., Marqués-Molías, L., Bullen, M., & Strijbos, J.-W. (2015). Let’s talk about digital learners in the digital era. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3). Retrieved from
  23. Gibbons, S. (2007). Redefining the roles of information professionals in higher education to engage the net generation. Paper presented at EDUCAUSE Australasia. Retrieved from
  24. Greenhow, C., & Robelia, B. (2009). Old communication, new literacies: Social network sites as social learning resources. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 1130– 1161.
  25. Gutnick, A.L., Robb, M., Takeuchi, L., & Kotler, J. (2010). Always connected: The new digital media habits of young children. New York, NY: The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop.
  26. Hawkins, B.L., & Rudy, J.A. (2008). EDUCAUSE core data service 2007 summary report. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from
  27. Hedestig, U., & Kaptelinin, V. (2002). Re-contextualization of teaching and learning in videoconference-based environments. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning Foundations for a CSCL Community-CSCL ’02 (pp. 179–188). Boulder, CO: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
  28. Igun, S.E., & Adogbeji, O.B. (2007). Study habits of postgraduate students in selected Nigerian universities. Library Philosophy and Practice, 9(2), 1–5. Retrieved from
  29. Jelfs, A., & Richardson, J.T.E. (2012). The use of digital technologies across the adult lifespan in distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(2), 338–351.
  30. Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B., Bennett, S., Judd, T., Gray, K., & Chang, R. (2008). Immigrants and natives: investigating differences between staff and students’ use of technology. In R. Atkinson& C. McBeath (Eds.), Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE 2008) (pp. 484–492). Melbourne, Australia: Deakin University. Retrieved from
  31. Kolikant, Y.B.-D. (2010). Digital natives, better learners? Students’ beliefs about how the Internet influenced their ability to learn. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1384– 1391.
  32. Košir, K., Sočan, G., & Pečjak, S. (2007). The role of interpersonal relationships with peers and with teachers in students’ academic achievement. Review of Psychology, 14(1), 43–58.
  33. Lewis, K., Kaufman, J., & Christakis, N. (2008). The taste for privacy: An analysis of college student privacy settings in an online social network. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(1), 79–100.
  34. Li, L., Finley, J., Pitts, J., & Guo, R. (2010). Which is a better choice for student-faculty interaction: synchronous or asynchronous communication? Journal of Technology Research, 2, 1–12. Retrieved from
  35. Littlejohn, A., Margaryan, A., & Vojt, G. (2010). Exploring students’ use of ICT and expectations of learning methods. Electronic Journal of E-Learning (EJEL), 8(1), 13– 20. Retrieved from
  36. Lount, R.B., & Pettit, N.C. (2012). The social context of trust: The role of status. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 15–23.
  37. Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers& Education, 56(2), 429– 440.
  38. Miah, M., & Omar, A. (2012). Technology Advancement in developing countries during Digital Age. International Journal of Science and Applied Information Technology, 1(1), 30– 38. Retrieved from
  39. Neo, R.L., & Skoric, M.M. (2009). Problematic instant messaging use. Journal of ComputerMediated Communication, 14(3), 627–657.
  40. New Zealand Ministry of Education. (2015). Digital technology: Safe and responsible use in schools. Retrieved from
  41. Oblinger, D.G., & Hawkins, B.L. (2005). The Myth about Students. EDUCAUSE Review, 40(5), 12–13. Retrieved from
  42. Oblinger, D.G., & Oblinger, J.L. (Eds.) (2005). Educating the net generation. Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from
  43. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.
  44. Qayyum, A.A. (2010). Exploring students’ course-related communication behaviour outside of postsecondary classrooms (Doctoral dissertation, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada). Retrieved from
  45. Quan-Haase, A. (2007). University students’ local and distant social ties: Using and integrating modes of communication on campus. Information, Communication& Society, 10(5), 671–693.
  46. Romero, M., Guitert, M., Sangrà, A., & Bullen, M. (2013). Do UOC students fit in the Net generation profile? An approach to their habits in ICT use. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(3), 158–181. Retrieved from
  47. Roussel, P., Elliot, A.J., & Feltman, R. (2011). The influence of achievement goals and social goals on help-seeking from peers in an academic context. Learning and Instruction, 21(3), 394–402.
  48. Shepherd, J. (2004). What is the digital era? In G.I. Doukidis, N. Mylonopoulos, & N. Pouloudi (Eds.), Social and economic transformation in the digital era (pp. 1–18). Hershey, PA:
  49. Simoneaux, S., & Stroud, C. (2010). Bridging the generation gaps in the retirement services workplace. Journal of Pension Benefits: Issues in Administration, 17(2), 66–75.
  50. Tipton, P.H., Pulliam, M., Allen, S.H., & Sherwood, C. (2011). Lessons learned: Pointers for successfully teaching via videoconferencing. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 6(1), 27–30.
  51. Universitat Rovira i Virgili. (2013) Overview 2013. Tarragona, Spain: Universitat Rovira i Virgili. Retrieved from
  52. Vander Meijden, H., & Veenman, S. (2005). Face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication in a primary school setting. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(5), 831– 859.
  53. Van Harmelen, M., & Randall, D. (2011). LibUX: Improving user experience in libraries within the higher education sector (pp. 1-29). Retrieved from
  54. Winger, A.R. (2005). Face-to-face communication: Is it really necessary in a digitizing world? Business Horizons, 48(3), 247–253.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact