While doing so, zero items delivered proof difference heterogeneity between your sexes


All in all, 923 people responded to the new COBADI dos.0 survey (Dining table 1). The try consisted primarily of females (81.2%), young (median ages = (5.2), min. = 17, maximum. = 50), as well as in its first 12 months from the university (50.2%). Bayesian inference allows us to learn inequitable trials when it comes to gender as it allows incorporating the latest study for coding down the road. The survey was lead digitally so you’re able to college students reading Social Training and you may Personal Performs (Universidad Pablo de- Olavide) and you can Pedagogy (UNED) from inside the informative many years and you can . There are zero limitations to your participation, and no economic otherwise educational bonus are accessible to participate within investigation.


With the George and Mallery (2003) classification, we found that the questionnaire had a high degree of overall reliability (? Cronbach = .83 (.81–.85), Guttman’s ?6 = .86). We also found a high degree of reliability in the subscale “Competences in the use of ICT for the search and treatment of information” (? Cronbach = .85 (.85–.89), Guttman’s ?6 = .87), moderate reliability in the subscale “Interpersonal competences in the use of ICT at university” (not considering items based on a preference scale, ? Cronbach = .65 (.58–.7), ?6 Guttman’s ?6 = .59), and moderate reliability kazakh naiset marrageen in the scale “Virtual and social communication tools at university” (? Cronbach = .62 (.56–.68), Guttman’s ?6 = .51). The general descriptive results show (Table 3) that the vast majority of students have access to an Internet connection (98.2%). The time spent on the Internet is distributed among the following activities: university work (68.3%), use of social networks (63.9%) and listening to music (53.3%). It is significant that 77.8% stated that they never use Internet for gaming online, and 50.1% never use it to make new friends.

Regarding the results for “Competences regarding access to ICT towards the search and procedures of information”, i keep in mind that one another female and male pupils be he has a great level of competence on the usage of “search-engines”, “internet browsers”, “electronic cartography” and you may “podcasting”. The equipment they use having reduced assurance is actually “QR rules” while the production of “on line presentations”. Gender huge difference is visible regarding accessibility “electronic cartography”, having a great Bayes basis out-of , and that reveals that the information and knowledge are times likely to come in the theory one states there clearly was a big difference anywhere between male and female students compared to the latest theory regarding equivalent competence anywhere between the brand new sexes. This shows which is very strong otherwise definitive proof during the favour regarding an improvement ranging from males and females, having a size of effect of .34 (.17, .51). Therefore, discover evidence that the men people has actually higher perceived ability in digital cartography compared to the female college students. This impact try suffered towards the inclusion from a prior shipment which have an enthusiastic r parameter of just one.5 (Bayes basis = , quite strong or definitive proof). Regarding competence in “online demonstrations”, the outcomes let you know a Bayes basis out of seven.30, hence demonstrates that the knowledge is actually seven.30 moments likely to appear in the brand new hypothesis that there was a change between female and male people compared to the hypothesis away from equal competence between the sexes. This shows there is positive otherwise good proof a great difference in a man and you can feminine people, with a sized effectation of .28 (.ten, .45). For this reason, there is certainly facts your men has better sensed ability when you look at the development “online presentations” versus women. That it effect is suffered whenever in addition to an earlier shipping having an enthusiastic roentgen factor of just one.5 (Bayes factor = 5.36), because the shown in the Fig. step one.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *