Computers in Human Behavior 45 (2015) 290–298

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers in Human Behavior

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh

Cyberloafing as a barrier to the successful integration of information and

communication technologies into teaching and learning environments
Fatma Gizem Karaoğlan Yılmaz a, Ramazan Yılmaz a, Hayriye Tuğba Öztürk b, Barısß Sezer c,⇑,
Tuğra Karademir b
a
Bartın University, Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technologies, Bartın, Turkey
b
Ankara University, Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technologies, Ankara, Turkey
c
Hacettepe University, Department of Medical Education and Informatics, Ankara, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Along with the dissemination of mobile technologies and wireless networks in teaching and learning
environments, research has shown that students tend to cyberloaf during the courses. As a result, their
performance is impeded and they could be distracted from the course. In order to prevent cyberloafing
Keywords: behaviors, in some occasions, information and communication technologies (ICT) have been banned or
Cyberloafing behaviors their use is restricted in the schools causing to harm ICT integration in education. In this context, the
Cyberslacking aim of this study was to identify the level of cyberloafing situations observed in courses in computer lab-
University students
oratories and reveal likely variables effective on cyberloafing behaviors which in turn would be helpful
ICT integration
for practitioners to prevent cyberloafing behaviors of students. This research was conducted by using sur-
vey method. Participants in the study were 288 first year undergraduate students who took Computing I
course held in a computer laboratory at the Fall Semester of the academic year of 2013–2014. In order to
identify cyberloafing behaviors of the students when they were fulfilling the learning activities assigned
to them, cyberloafing activities scale as well as Demographic Information Form were used. As a result of
the research, by demonstrating the cyberloafing levels of the students, findings related to the cyberloa-
fing behaviors were interpreted with regard to the variables addressed in the study, considering the total
score obtained from cyberloafing activities scale and the sub-dimensions of the scale, ‘‘individual’’,
‘‘search’’, ‘‘social’’ and ‘‘news’’.
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction from information and communication technologies; consequently,

Since the advent of computer and internet technologies, the
continuous and rapid developments occurred in technology based
applications have become an important part of the reality of the
life for many people in the world. Especially, internet has had a
crucial impact on people’s life. As a result, today, computer and
internet technologies have become basis for so called ‘‘e’’ phenom-
enon such as e-communication, e-education, e-trade, e-health and
e-business.
From the educational perspective, today at the education insti-
tutions several implications are carried out in an effort to benefit
⇑ Corresponding author at: Hacettepe University, Faculty of Medicine, Depart-
ment of Medical Education and Informatics, 06100 Sıhhiye, Ankara, Turkey. Tel.:
+90 544 244 52 42; fax: +90 312 310 05 80.
E-mail addresses: gkaraoglanyilmaz@gmail.com (F.G. Karaoğlan Yılmaz),
ramazanyilmaz067@gmail.com (R. Yılmaz), tozturk@ankara.edu.tr (H.T. Öztürk),
barissezer13@hotmail.com (B. Sezer), karademir@ankara.edu.tr (T. Karademir).
ICT is integrated into education. To this end, at the higher educa-
tion institutions and schools affiliated to Ministries of Education,
information and communication technologies (ICT) laboratories
have been built, and computer and internet supported courses
have been taught in these classes. Through the wired and wireless
networks that these labs are equipped with, in their learning pro-
cesses students can benefit from the information sources on the
internet. Despite many benefits that these technologies contrib-
uted to the learning-teaching processes, the inadvisable, excessive
and uncontrolled use of these technologies by learners herewith
gives rise to several problems such as cyberloafing.
Especially in ICT related courses delivered in the computer labs,
it has been often observed that during the courses learners use
internet for not course content purposes but for sending/receiving
e-mails, surfing in news and sports websites, downloading music,
chatting, playing online games, reading blogs, visiting social net-
works and updating personal websites (Blanchard & Henle, 2008;
Garrett & Danziger, 2008; Ugrin, Pearson, & Odom, 2008; Ugrin &

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.023
0747-5632/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 F.G. Karaoğlan Yılmaz et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 45 (2015) 290–298
Pearson, 2013; Whitty & Carr, 2006). It is observed that behaviors
of use of internet for the purposes other than course content,
named as Cyberloafing in the literature, has a variety of conse-
quences to students’ learning such as drawing students’ attention
to areas other than the course, and that these behaviors could be
regarded as obstacles to successful integration of information
and communication technologies into the learning-teaching envi-
ronments and impede learners’ performance (Ergün & Altun,
2012; Kalaycı, 2010; Kurt, 2011; Yasßar, 2013).
On taking a closer look at the concept of cyberloafing, it was
originated in the studies dealing with workplace environments
and issues around knowledge management. There has been con-
siderable debate over cyberloafing as a counterproductive work
behavior (CWB). In research studies focusing on work related
issues, its relations to job satisfaction (Everton, Mastrangelo, &
Jolton, 2005); negative, positive, neutral effects on performance
or lower task performance (Askew, 2012); types of cyberloafing
(Lim & Chen, 2012) and some other variables have been examined.
It is noteworthy that in most of the CWB studies social networks
and mobile technologies which lead to cyberloafing have been
regarded as the tools impeding performance. However, in the field
of education, these technologies have been rapidly taking place
and have significantly been integrated into the education. For
instance, educational potential of Facebook has widely been dis-
cussed (Pollara & Zhu, 2011; Roblyera, McDanielb, Webbc,
Hermand, & Wittye, 2010) and Facebook has been adopted in edu-
cation; podcasting applications which are available on mobile
devises have been adopted in educational context to enhance stu-
dent learning experience and to improve students’ academic
achievement (Foster & Havemann, 2008; Karaoğlan Yılmaz,
2014). However, along with the integration of aforementioned
technologies and social networks into education, there have been
instances where these technologies are banned or their use is
restricted due to cyberloafing as well as some anti-social behaviors
(Barkham & Moss, 2012) while this is a barrier to successful inte-
gration of ICT in schools. These instances show that ICT integration
is not only about equipping the schools with technologies but also
coping with its unexpected and undesired consequences such as
cyberloafing.
It is observed that especially students in higher education insti-
tutions cyberloaf during courses by using their mobile phones
which have access to the internet. There are several studies con-
ducted to explore cyberloafing situations of students at higher edu-
cation institutions. In his study, Kalaycı (2010) carried a descriptive
analysis to discover cyberloafing situations of university students
and examined what kind of actions student took on what kind of
websites. As a result of the study, cyberloafing behaviors per-
formed by university students were examined quantitatively. In a
study by Kurt (2011), university students’ cyberloafing behaviors
in daily life and cyberloafing behaviors during computing courses
in a computer laboratory were analysed comparatively. Also in a
study by Ergün and Altun (2012), it was aimed to qualitatively
reveal the reasons for cyberloafing behaviors of students by inter-
viewing and observing them. In the same vein, Yasßar (2013) exam-
ined cyberloafing situations of university students by considering
the variables of locus of control and attitude towards computer
laboratory.
However, in terms of cyberloafing in education, a significant
body of the studies has been carried out with teacher candidates
while cyberloafing concerns all university students as they are
likely to use mobile technologies (e.g. cell phones) for leisure than
for school or work (Lepp, Li, Barkley, & Salehi-Esfahani, 2015). In
this research, different from other studies, it was aimed to extend
the scope of this research area by examining the cyberloafing situ-
ations of students from the departments of universities other than
education faculties and to examine general profiles of the university
291
students who cyberloaf. Moreover, it was attempted to identify sit-
uations of cyberloafing behaviors of the students based on their
daily internet use as well as to examine likely variables effective
on cyberloafing. In terms of dealing with obstacles for ICT integra-
tion in education, in addition to examining who tend to cyberloaf as
educational actors, context of teaching and learning practices in
computer labs also takes an important place today since these labs
are used as a digital library, help students do their assignments,
print out, check their emails and so on. However, as mentioned ear-
lier, since the degree of cyberloafing in labs is higher than in class-
rooms; cyber loafing behaviors in computer labs must be
investigated. In particular, at the higher education institutions,
some courses have been delivered either via online learning or
blended learning approach and this requires students to frequently
use computer labs. Blended and online courses are run in virtual
classes with computer-based systems support relying on computer
based communications (Zhang, Ordóñez de Pablos, & Xu, 2014).
Computer based communication raises the question of social cyber-
loafing behaviors which are likely to impede productivity compared
to other types of cyberloafing behaviors (Lim & Chen, 2012). In that
sense, computer labs play an important role in emergence of
cyberloafing.
To this end, the goal of the study is to investigate cyberloafing
behaviors of the university students in computer labs based on
some variables. The remainder of this article will explore the fol-
lowing research questions:
1. What is the cyberloafing situation of university students in
computer labs?
2. Does level of cyberloafing of university students differ with
regard to;
(a) Gender.
(b) The department in which they study.
(c) The location where they connect to internet.
(d) Daily duration of use of internet?
2. Method
In this section, the model of the research, study group, data col-
lection tools and data analysis are presented.
2.1. Research method
In this study, survey method was used in order to reveal cyber-
loafing situations of university students. As is known, survey
method helps researchers describe an event or circumstance in
the form they exist. The event or circumstance is defined in the
conditions they happen and in the form they exist (Fraenkel &
Wallen, 2006).
2.1.1. Study group
The study group consisted of 288 students who took Computing
I course run at a state university in 2013–2014 in Turkey. In the
computer lab, there were projection, smartboard, wired network
and wireless network through which the students could connect
to the internet with their mobile devises. In assigning the student
in the study group, convenience sampling method was used. The
reason why convenience sampling method was used is that this
method allows researcher to choose sampling among people in
his/her neighborhood (Ergün & Altun, 2012). In sampling, in terms
of easy accessibility, the students who took at least 2 h course
scheduled weekly in the computer lab were selected on a volun-
tary basis with regard to convenience sampling approach. Among
the students, the students in Management Information Systems
department took 3 h Computing I course in the computer lab,
292 F.G. Karaoğlan Yılmaz et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 45 (2015) 290–298
while students in Turkish Language and Literature department
took 3 h and the students in History department took 2 h course.
This study group was selected to investigate whether taking an
ICT related course in computer labs has an effect on cyberloafing
behaviors of the students studying in different departments. Also,
the student groups whose course length is different than each
other were chosen to investigate the effect of length of the course
on cyberloafing behaviors. Furthermore, since same researchers of
present study run the courses with the study group, further stu-
dent groups were not selected. These groups of students were cho-
sen because the researchers observed their cyberloafing behaviors
as a problem in delivering the course. In other words, an emerging
problem in the teaching and learning practices was the driving
force of this research and thus, this study group was chosen to
identify the problem in detail in real life context.
The present study group could provide an insight into cyberloa-
fing behaviors of university students in wider population. Conve-
nience sampling method to some extent represents the
population (Balcı, 2010). Fraenkel and Wallen (2006: 99) suggest
that ‘‘In general, convenience samples cannot be considered repre-
sentative of any population and should be avoided if at all possi-
ble’’; for this reason demographic information of the participants
must be presented. In accordance with this suggestion, the demo-
graphic information of the students is presented in Table 1 below.
2.1.2. Data collection tools
Data of this research were collected using cyberloafing activities
scale aiming to assess cyberloafing behaviors of the students. The
students’ demographic information was collected using Demo-
graphic Information Form.
The cyberloafing activities scale which was developed by
Blanchard and Henle (2008), adapted to Turkish by Kalaycı
(2010) and revised by Yasßar (2013) through adding several items
was used. In the revised version of the scale, in addition to adding
items into the scale, a subdimension, ‘‘searching’’, was also
included. The revised scale consists of 23 items. Scale items are a
type of five point likert scale and gradings are in the form of
‘‘never’’, ‘‘rarely’’, ‘‘sometimes’’, ‘‘generally’’, ‘‘always’’. The follow-
ing two items could provide examples of the items on the scale;
‘‘During the course I visit social networks (Facebook, Twitter,
etc)’’; ‘‘During the course, I play online games’’. After adding new
items into the scale, the validity and reliability of the scale was
tested again by Yasßar (2013). The scale consists of four sub-dimen-
sions, and the internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient) of these dimensions valued as ‘‘individual’’ 0.94,
‘‘search’’ 0.77, ‘‘social’’ 0.84 and ‘‘news’’ 0.76. The fit indices
between four-factor model and the data were acceptable
(GFI = 0.92; CFI = 0.92; NNFI = 0.92; RMSEA = 0.08). According to
Nunnally and Bernstein (1994) Cronbach’s alpha coefficient value
should be greater than 0.70. Drawing on the measures of the scale,
it could be seen that each subdimension of the scale is reliable
(Yasßar, 2013).
Table 1
Demographic information of the students.
Variable Group N %
Gender Female 150
Male 138
Total 288
Department Management Information Systems 114
History 80
Turkish Language and Literature 94
Total 288
Demographic Information Form was formed by the researchers
of present study. The students were asked to answer the questions
in relation to their department in which they are enrolled, their
gender, locations to connect to the internet and daily duration of
time on the internet.
3. Findings
Within the context of the research problems, the findings and
discussions on the findings are presented below respectively about
the departments in which the students are enrolled, locations
where they connected to internet and their daily duration of use
of internet.
With regard to the first sub-problem of the research, the
descriptive statistics are presented in Table 2 which shows the sit-
uations regarding the cyberloafing levels of the students.
According to Table 2, the average of total score that obtained
from cyberloafing activities scale is 59.88 (2.60 out of 5). In this
sense, it can be stated that the cyberloafing situations of university
students are at medium-level.
The situation whether the cyberloafing points of university stu-
dents in the study group display normal distribution was examined
by using Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. As a result of findings gathered
from the test, it was confirmed that the data collected from cyber-
loafing activities scale displays normal distribution (p > .05). There-
fore, T-test and Anova parametric tests were used in analyzing
homogeneous data; and Mann Whitney U and Kruskal Wallis
non-parametric tests were used in analyzing non-homogeneous
data. In the research, in the significance tests .05 confidence level
was taken basis.
With regard to the second sub-problem of the research, t-test
was used to test whether cyberloafing levels of university students
differ significantly according to gender. The result of this analysis is
presented in Table 3.
Table 3 shows that the average cyberloafing scores male stu-
dents got from the cyberloafing activities scale is 65.14, whereas
the average score of female students is 55.03. When considering
the scale generally with regard to gender, cyberloafing levels of
students show statistically significant difference [t(286) = 3.68,
p < .05]. In other words, the level of cyberloafing of male students
is higher than that of female students. In terms of sub-dimensions
of the scale, it can be observed that respectively the sub-dimen-
sions individual [t(261.30) = 4.56, p < .05), search [t(286) = 4.72,
p < .05], social [t(286) = 3.68, p < .05] and news [t(286) = 5.65,
p < .05] differ statistically significantly according to gender vari-
able. It is determined that this difference results from male stu-
dents and the scores obtained from sub-dimensions of the scale
are higher than those of female university students.
Within the context of the second sub-problem of the research,
the descriptive values of the cyberloafing degrees based on the
departments of the students are shown in Table 4.
Table 4 shows that the average point students got from cyber-
loafing activities scale is respectively 63.46 for those studying at
Management Information Systems department, 56.64 for those
studying at History department and 58.29 for those studying at
Turkish Language and Literature department. It is observed that
there are differences between average points obtained from cyber-
52.1 loafing activities scale based on the department variable. One-way
47.9
(factor) ANOVA for independent measures is used in order to deter-
100.0 mine whether this difference is statistically significant. The results
of the test are shown in Table 5.
39.6
27.8
Table 5 shows that there is a statistically significant difference
32.6 between cyberloafing levels of the students [F(2, 285) = 5.08,
100.0 p < .05]. In other words, cyberloafing levels of the students signifi-
cantly change based on the department of the students. According
 F.G. Karaoğlan Yılmaz et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 45 (2015) 290–298 293

Table 2
Students’ scores on their cyberloafing degree.

Scale Number of items Minimum score Maximum score X Sd X/k

Cyberloafing scale 23 23.00 106.00 59.88 16.03 2.60

Table 3
T-test Results of the Students Based on Their Cyberloafing Degree and Gender.

Subdimensions of cyberloafing scale Gender N 

x S sd T p
Individual Female 150 17.43 5.47 261.30 4.56 .000
Male 138 20.80 6.89
Search Female 150 9.88 3.48 286 4.72 .000
Male 138 11.78 3.31
Social Female 150 16.56 5.25 286 3.68 .000
Male 138 18.89 5.50
News Female 150 11.15 3.96 286 5.65 .000
Male 138 13.68 3.61
General Female 150 55.03 14.70 286 5.63 .000
Male 138 65.14 15.80

Table 4
Descriptive analysis results of the students based on their department and cyberloafing degree.

Subdimensions of cyberloafing scale Department N X sd

Individual Management Information Systems 114 20.81 6.82

History 80 17.39 5.54
Turkish Language and Literature 94 18.32 6.11
Search Management Information Systems 114 10.99 3.44
History 80 10.66 3.67
Turkish Language and Literature 94 10.65 3.52
Social Management Information Systems 114 18.59 5.43
History 80 17.35 5.38
Turkish Language and Literature 94 16.85 5.53
News Management Information Systems 114 13.07 3.95
History 80 11.24 3.75
Turkish Language and Literature 94 12.47 4.08
General Management Information Systems 114 63.46 16.57
History 80 56.64 15.36
Turkish Language and Literature 94 58.29 15.22

Table 5
ANOVA results of the students based on their department and cyberloafing degree.

Subdimensions of Source of variance Sum of squares Sd Mean squares F P Significant difference

cyberloafing scale
Individual Between groups 623.25 2 311.62 7.96 .000 Management Information
Within groups 11153.17 285 39.13 Systems – History Management
Sum 11776.41 287 Information Systems – Turkish
Levene: 2.559 p: .079 Language and Literature
Search Between groups 7.78 2 3.89 .31 .732
Within groups 3560.29 285 12.49
Sum 3568.08 287
Levene: .104 p: .901
Social Between groups 167.23 2 83.62 2.82 .062
Within groups 8463.74 285 29.70
Sum 8630.97 287
Levene: .102 p: .903
News Between groups 159.39 2 79.69 5.14 .006 Management Information
Within groups 4417.33 285 15.50 Systems – History
Sum 4576.72 287
Levene: .694 p: .501
General Between groups 2537.487 2 1268.74 5.08 .007 Management Information
Within groups 71212.01 285 249.87 Systems – History
Sum 73749.50 287

Levene: .622 p: .537

294 F.G. Karaoğlan Yılmaz et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 45 (2015) 290–298

to the results, it is identified that the difference is between the
departments of Management Information Systems ( x ¼ 63:46,
S = 16.57) and History ( x ¼ 56:64, S = 15.36). When looked at
sub-dimensions, it can be noticed that the difference observed in
individual sub-dimension is between Management Information
Systems and History, and between Management Information Sys-
tems and Turkish Language and Literature; the difference observed
in news sub-dimension is between Management Information Sys-
tems and History. However, a significant difference cannot be
observed in search [F(2, 285) = .31, p < .05] and social
[F(2, 285) = 2.82, p < .05] sub-dimensions.
Within the context of second sub-problem, the descriptive val-
ues of the cyberloafing degrees based on the locations to connect to
the internet are shown in Table 6.
Table 6 shows that the average point students got from cyber-
loafing activities scale based on the locations to connect to the
internet is respectively 60.54 at home, 50.83 at school, 59.42 in
dormitory, 59.50 in internet cafe and 59.84 on mobile devices.
One-way (factor) ANOVA for independent measures in homoge-
nous groups is used in order to determine whether this difference
is statistically significant. The results of the test are shown in
Table 7.
Table 7 shows that the scores obtained from the scale in the
sub-dimensions individual [F(4, 283) = .623, p > .05], search
[F(4, 283) = .591, p > .05] and news [F(4, 283) = .023, p > .05] do
not significantly differ between cyberloafing levels of the students
based on the location to connect to the internet. In other words,
cyberloafing levels do not differ based on the locations to connect
to the internet.
Kruskal Wallis is used in order to determine whether there is a
statistically significant difference for non-homogenous groups. The
results of the test are shown in Table 8.
Table 8 shows that the scores obtained from the social sub-
dimension [x2(sd = 4, n = 288) = .115, p > .05] and general scale
[x2(sd = 4, n = 288) = .210, p > .05] do not statistically significantly
differ between cyberloafing levels of the students based on the
location to connect to the internet.
Within the context of second sub-problem of the research, the
descriptive values of the cyberloafing degrees based on daily
duration of use of internet and cyberloafing degree of university
students are shown in Table 9.
Table 9 shows that the average score students got from cyber-
loafing activities scale is respectively 51.43 for those using internet
daily for less than 1 h, 60.42 for those using internet daily for

Table 6
Descriptive analysis results of the students based on their locations to connect to the internet and cyberloafing degree.

Subdimensions of cyberloafing scale Locations to connect to the internet N X Sd

Individual Home 67 20.04 6.82

School 12 19.17 6.64
Dormitory 106 18.75 6.85
Internet cafe 10 17.60 3.27
Mobil devices 93 18.80 5.80
Search Home 67 10.46 3.83
School 12 11.92 3.32
Dormitory 106 10.84 3.58
Internet cafe 10 11.60 2.95
Mobile devices 93 10.73 3.34
Social Home 67 17.67 6.16
School 12 17.50 6.72
Dormitory 106 17.49 5.92
Internet cafe 10 17.60 4.90
Mobile devices 93 17.92 4.32
News Home 67 12.36 4.45
School 12 12.25 3.77
Dormitory 106 12.33 4.07
Internet cafe 10 12.70 3.86
Mobile devices 93 12.39 3.67
General Home 67 60.54 18.16
School 12 60.83 16.95
Dormitory 106 59.42 17.52
Internet cafe 10 59.50 11.43
Mobile devices 93 59.84 12.92

Table 7
ANOVA results of the students based on their locations to connect to the internet and cyberloafing degree.

Subdimensions of cyberloafing scale Source of variance Sum of squares sd Mean squares F P

Individual Between groups 102.74 4 25.69 .623 .647
Within groups 11673.67 283 41.25
Sum 11776.41 287
Levene: 2.226 p: .066
Search Between groups 29.55 4 7.39 .591 .669
Within groups 3538.53 283 12.50
Sum 3568.08 287
Levene: 1.265 p: .284
News Between Groups 1.456 4 .36 .023 .999
Within groups 4575.26 283 16.17
Sum 4576.72 287
Levene: .807 p: .521
 F.G. Karaoğlan Yılmaz et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 45 (2015) 290–298 295

Table 8
Kruskal Wallis test results of the students based on their cyberloafing degree and locations to connect to the internet.

Subdimensions of cyberloafing scale Locations to connect to the internet N Sum of ranks Sd x2 P

Social Home 67 144.78 4 .115 .998
School 12 141.21
Dormitory 106 143.07
Internet cafe 10 142.50
Mobile devices 93 146.57
Levene: 4.198 p: .003
General Home 148.04 148.04 4 .210 .995
School 146.96 146.96
Dormitory 142.33 142.33
Internet cafe 142.40 142.40
Mobile devices 144.33 144.33
Levene: 3.042 p: .018

Table 9
Descriptive analysis results of the students based on their daily duration of time on the internet and cyberloafing degree.

Subdimensions of cyberloafing scale Daily duration of time on the internet N X sd

Individual Less than 1 h 68 15.62 4.69

Between 1 and 3 h 133 19.22 6.44
Between 4 and 6 h 54 20.11 6.18
Between 7and 9 h 16 22.38 6.95
10 h and more 17 24.88 5.38
Search Less than 1 h 68 9.54 3.33
Between 1 and 3 h 133 10.93 3.58
Between 4 and 6 h 54 11.22 3.37
Between 7 and 9 h 16 11.06 3.62
10 h and more 17 13.00 2.83
Social Less than 1 h 68 14.87 5.05
Between 1 and 3 h 133 17.42 5.43
Between 4 and 6 h 54 19.07 4.93
Between 7 and 9 h 16 22.00 4.34
10 h and more 17 22.41 2.87
News Less than 1 h 68 11.40 4.25
Between 1 and 3 h 133 12.85 3.87
Between 4 and 6 h 54 11.80 4.20
Between 7 and 9 h 16 12.50 3.50
10 h and more 17 14.12 2.57
General Less than 1 h 68 51.43 13.93
Between 1 and 3 h 133 60.42 15.83
Between 4 and 6 h 54 62.20 15.51
Between 7 and 9 h 16 67.94 14.68
10 h and more 17 74.41 10.85

between 1 and 3 h, 62.20 for those using internet daily for between
4 and 6 h, 67.94 for those using internet daily for between 7 and
9 h, and 74.41 for those using internet daily for 10 h and above.
One-way (factor) ANOVA for independent measures in homoge-
nous groups is used in order to determine whether this difference
is statistically significant. The results of the test are shown in
Table 10.
Table 10 shows that the scores obtained from the search sub-
dimension [F(4, 283) = 4.258, p < .05] and general scale
[F(4, 283) = 10.866, p < .05] do not statistically significantly differ
between cyberloafing levels of the students based on the daily
duration of use of internet. In other words, the cyberloafing levels
of the students differ significantly based on daily duration of inter-
net use.
Kruskal Wallis is used in order to determine whether there is a
statistically significant difference for non-homogenous groups. The
results of the test are shown in Table 11.
Table 11 shows that cyberloafing levels of the students signifi-
cantly differ in the sub-dimensions individual [x2(sd = 4,
n = 288) = 41.685, p < .05], social [x2(sd = 4, n = 288) = 46.306,

Table 10
ANOVA results of the students based on their daily duration of time on the internet and cyberloafing degree.

Subdimensions of cyberloafing scale Source of variance Sum of squares sd Mean squares F p

Search Between groups 202.55 4 50.638 4.258 .002
Within groups 3365.53 283 11.892
Sum 3568.08 287
Levene: .557 p: .694
General Between groups 9818.63 4 2454.658 10.866 .000
Within groups 63930.87 283 225.904
Sum 73749.50 287
Levene: 1.489 p: .206
296 F.G. Karaoğlan Yılmaz et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 45 (2015) 290–298

Table 11
Kruskal Wallis test results of the students based on their cyberloafing degree and duration of internet use.

Subdimensions of cyberloafing scale Daily duration of time on the internet N Sum of ranks Sd x2 P Groups which are significantly different
Individual Less than 1 h 68 98.26 4 41.685 .000 Less than 1 h – Between 1 and 3 h
Between 1 and 3 h 133 146.83 Less than 1 h – Between 4 and 6 h
Between 4 and 6 h 54 160.25 Less than 1 h – Between 7 and 9 h
Between 7 and 9 h 16 187.03 Less than 1 h – 10 h and more
10 h and more 17 221.18 Between 1 and 3 h – 10 h and more
Between 4 and 6 h – 10 h and more
Levene: 3.192 p: .014
Social Less than 1 h 68 100.69 4 46.306 .000 Less than 1 h – Between 1 and 3 h
Between 1 and 3 h 133 141.18 Less than 1 h – Between 4 and 6 h
Between 4 and 6 h 54 164.52 Less than 1 h – Between 7 and 9 h
Between 1 and 3 h 16 210.78 Less than 1 h – 10 h and more
10 h and more 17 219.74 Between 1 and 3 h – Between 1 and 3 h
Between 1 and 3 h – 10 h and more
Between 4 and 6 h – Between7 and 9 h
Between 4 and 6 h – Between7 and 9 h
Levene: 2.876 p: .023
News Less than 1 h 68 124.05 4 10.381 .034 Less than 1 h – Between 1 and 3 h
Between 1 and 3 h 133 154.91 Less than 1 h – 10 h and more
Between 4 and 6 h 54 132.50 Between 4 and 6 h – 10 h and more
Between 7 and 9 h 16 148.28
10 h and more 17 179.41
Levene: 2.479 p: .044

p < .05] and news [x2(sd = 4, n = 288) = 10.381, p < .05] based on
daily duration of internet use. Mann Whitney-U test is used in
order to determine in what intervals of daily duration of internet
use this significant difference exist. It is observed that scores
obtained from the individual sub-dimension of the scale differ
between the students using internet daily for ‘‘less than 1 hour’’
and the students using internet daily for ‘‘1–3 hours’’, ‘‘4–6 hours’’,
‘‘7–9 hours’’ and ‘‘10 hours and more’’. The score got by the stu-
dents using internet daily ‘‘less than 1 hour’’ from the individual
sub-dimension is lower than the score obtained by the students
using internet daily more than 1 h. It is observed that scores
obtained from the individual sub-dimension of the scale differ
between the students using internet daily for ‘‘10 hours and more’’
and the students using internet daily for ‘‘1–3 hours’’ and ‘‘4–
6 hours’’. The score got by the students using internet daily
‘‘10 hours and more’’ from the individual sub-dimension is higher
than the score obtained by the students using internet daily less
than 10 h. It is observed that scores obtained from the social sub-
dimension of the scale differ between the students using internet
daily for ‘‘less than 1 hour’’ and the students using internet daily
for ‘‘1–3 hours’’, ‘‘4–6 hours’’, ‘‘7–9 hours’’ and ‘‘10 hours and
more’’. The score got by the students using internet daily ‘‘less than
1 hour’’ from the sub-dimension social is lower than the score
obtained by the students using internet daily more than 1 h. It is
observed that scores obtained from the social sub-dimension of
the scale differ between the students using internet daily for ‘‘1–
3 hours’’ and the students using internet daily for ‘‘7–9 hours’’
and ‘‘10 hours and more’’. Similarly, it is observed that scores
obtained from the social sub-dimension of the scale differ between
the students using internet daily for ‘‘4–6 hours’’ and the students
using internet daily for ‘‘7–9 hours’’ and ‘‘10 hours and more’’. It is
observed that scores obtained from the news sub-dimension of the
scale differ between the students using internet daily for ‘‘less than
1 hour’’ and the students using internet daily for ‘‘1–3 hours’’ and
‘‘10 hours and more’’. The score got by the students using internet
daily ‘‘less than 1 hour’’ from the news sub-dimension is lower
than the score obtained by the students using internet daily more
than 1 h. It is observed that scores obtained from the news sub-
dimension of the scale differ between the students using internet
daily for ‘‘4–6 hours’’ and the students using internet daily for
‘‘10 hours and more’’. The score got by the students using internet
daily ‘‘10 hours and more’’ from the news sub-dimension is higher
than the score obtained by the students using internet daily less
than 10 h. When the average score obtained from individual, social
and news sub-dimensions of the scale was analysed based on the
daily duration of internet use, it can be seen that the students
who use internet daily 10 h and more get the highest average
score, whereas the students who use internet daily less than 1 h
get the lowest average score.
4. Conclusion and discussion
When looked at the findings of this research which aim to
determine cyberloafing behaviors of university students in com-
puter labs, it can be said that level of cyberloafing situations of
the students were generally at medium-level.
It is observed that cyberloafing level of the students signifi-
cantly differ with regard to the scale generally based on gender
variable. With respect to this finding, cyberloafing levels of male
students are higher than those of female students. This finding of
the research is in line with the results in the literature (Askew,
2012; De Lara, 2007). In his research, Selwyn (2008) reports that
female students use internet for academic purposes at a higher
level than male students. However, it is noticed that there is no sig-
nificant difference in the levels of cyberloafing behavior of socializ-
ing between male and female students. Similarly, Blanchard and
Henle (2008) separate cyberloafing behaviors as serious and insig-
nificant and show that male demonstrates serious cyberloafing
behaviors more than female and there is not a significant differ-
ence in insignificant cyberloafing behaviors.
It is observed that there are differences between the average
scores got from cyberloafing activities scale based on department
variable of the students. According to the analysis results, it is
determined that the difference is between Management Informa-
tion Systems and History departments. With regard to this finding,
students in Management Information Systems department who
took weekly 4 h course in the computer lab cyberloafed more com-
pared to the students in History department who took 2 h weekly
course in the computer lab. With regard to this finding, it is possi-
ble to comment that increase in course hours in the computer lab
leads to the increase in the observation rate of cyberloafing behav-
 F.G. Karaoğlan Yılmaz et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 45 (2015) 290–298
iors. However it is important to note that at the first sight even if
decreasing course hours in computer labs could be seen as a solu-
tion to prevent cyberloafing behaviors, research has shown that
students cyberloaf through widespread use of wireless networks
(Brubaker, 2006), smart boards, computer and mobile devices in
all classrooms at a school. For this reason, it is important to train
the students as well as the teachers and families on ethical use
of technology and raise awareness on this issue in order to prevent
cyberloafing behaviors.
It is observed that the scores obtained from the scale in individ-
ual, search and news sub-dimensions depending on the location to
connect to the internet in daily life do not significantly differ
between cyberloafing levels of the students. This finding shows
that the location and time of using internet at home, in school or
via mobile devices do not create a significant difference on cyber-
loafing behaviors. One of the reasons of this finding could be due to
the characteristics of the students as digital natives. According to
Prensky (2001: 1), as digital natives, the students have ‘‘spent their
entire lives surrounded by and using computers, videogames, dig-
ital music players, video cams, cell phones, and all the other toys
and tools of the digital age’’. Therefore, it is expected that regard-
less of where to connect to the internet, the students are capable
of accessing to the internet at home, in school or so on, as a result,
they can cyberloaf wherever they are unless they have wireless or
similar network.
A further finding concerns the level of cyberloafing behavior of
the students which changes significantly depending on daily dura-
tion of internet use. When compared the level of cyberloafing with
regard to duration of internet use, it is concluded that increase in
duration of internet use leads to increase in cyberloafing behaviors.
A possible reason for this finding could be that as the time spent on
the internet increases, the productivity of the individuals is likely
to decrease. Research has shown that as individuals spend time
on the internet, they tend to socialize and play games while reduc-
ing the academic productivity (Chou & Hsiao, 2000). Relationship
between duration of time on the internet and cyberloafing is
important since researchers point out that it is harmful when
cyberloafing is done in excess and ‘‘frequent long durations of
cyberloafing should negatively predict task performance’’ (Askew,
2012: 21; Blanchard & Henle, 2008). Long durations of cyberloafing
behaviors lead us to question whether ‘‘addiction’’ could be an
antecedent of cyberloafing. This needs a further investigation.
Students from the faculties other than faculty of education are
dealt with within the scope of the study. When compared both stu-
dent groups regarding the results of the studies, level of cyberloa-
fing is at medium-level and close to each other. Especially, within
the scope of the nation-wide projects being implemented by the
educational institutes worldwide, the classrooms in the schools
and in the higher education institutes are equipped with wireless
internet, smart boards and tablet computers. This has the potential
to bring about the problem of cyberloafing especially for the stu-
dents with low self-control skills and as a result undesirable
behaviors may appear during learning process while trying to con-
tribute to learning process with the technological support. As dis-
cussed earlier, as a solution, the head teachers and teachers tend to
ban students from bringing ICT in the classrooms. This is a serious
barrier to ICT integration. Instead of banning, attention of the stu-
dents, who are distracted due to cyberloafing, could be drawn via
teaching and learning methods. Also, they could be given learning
tasks (e.g. searching for information with regard to a given prob-
lem by the teacher) which they can fulfil via ICT so as to direct
them to meaningful engagement in the course.
In the present study, as a limitation, only certain subdimensions
of cyberloafing behaviors on the cyberloafing activities scale were
taken into account but in future studies, some extreme cyberloa-
297
fing behaviors such as hacking and spreading virus (Askew,
2012; Blanchard & Henle, 2008) could be examined. Also, number
of the participants could be increased as well as different depart-
ments could be included in a future study to generalize the find-
ings of this research or reveal out the differences with this
research to give insights of contextual differences in emergence
of cyberloafing behaviors. Finally, further psychological factors as
antecedents of cyberloafing such as addiction could be researched.
References
Askew, K. L. (2012). The relationship between cyberloafing and task performance and
an examination of the theory of planned behavior as a model of cyberloafing.
Graduate Theses and Dissertations, University of South Florida.
_
Balcı, A. (2010). Sosyal Bilimlerde Arasßtırma: Yöntem, Teknik ve Ilkeler [Research in
Social Sciences: Methods, Techniques and Principles]. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
Barkham, P., & Moss, S. (2012). Should mobile phones be banned in schools? The
Guardian (27.11.12).
Blanchard, A. L., & Henle, C. A. (2008). Correlates of different forms of cyberloafing:
The role of norms and external locus control. Computers in Human Behavior,
24(3), 1067–1084.
Brubaker, A. T. (2006). Faculty perceptions of the impact of student laptop use in a
wireless internet environment on the classroom learning environment and teaching
information and library science. Unpublished Master Thesis, University of North
Carolina, Chapel Hill.
Chou, C., & Hsiao, M. C. (2000). Internet addiction usage, gratification, and pleasure
experience: The Taiwan college students case. Computers & Education, 35(1),
65–80.
De Lara, P. Z. M. (2007). Relationship between organizational justice and
cyberloafing in the workplace: Has ‘Anomia’ a say in the matter?
CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(3), 464–470.
Ergün, E., & Altun, A. (2012). Öğrenci Gözüyle Siberaylaklık Nedenleri [The Student’s
Perspective of Cyberloafing and Its Causes]. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve
Uygulama, 2(2), 36–51.
Everton, W. J., Mastrangelo, P. M., & Jolton, J. A. (2005). Personality correlates of
employees’ personal use of work computers. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 8(2),
143–153.
Foster, J. S., & Havemann, S. A. (2008). The basics of educational podcasting: Enhancing
the student learning experience. University of Florida, IFAS-EDIS Publication
MB004.
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in
education (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Garrett, R. K., & Danziger, N. J. (2008). On cyberslacking: Workplace status and
personal internet use at work. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 11(3),
287–292.
Kalaycı, E. (2010). Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Siberaylaklık Davranısßları ile Öz
Düzenleme Stratejileri Arasındaki Ilis _ ßkinin Incelenmesi
_ [The Investigation of
Relationship between Cyberloafing and Self-regulated Learning Strategies among
Undergraduate Students]. Unpublished Master Dissertation, Hacettepe
Üniversity, Ankara.
Karaoğlan Yılmaz, F. G. (2014). E-Öğrenme Ortamlarında Yansıtıcı Düsßünme
Etkinliklerinin Öğrencilerin Akademik Basßarısına, Sosyal Buradalığına Ve
Güdülenmesine Etkisi [The Effect of Reflective Thinking Activities in E-Learning
Environments on Academic Success, Social Presence and Motivation]. Unpublished
PhD Thesis, Ankara University, Ankara.
_
Kurt, M. (2011). Siber Aylaklık Davranısßlarının Karsßılasßtırmalı Olarak Incelenmesi
[Contrastive Study of Cyberloafing Behaviors]. In 5th International computer &
instructional technologies symposium, 22–24 September 2011, Fırat University,
Elazığ- Turkey.
Lepp, A., Li, J., Barkley, J. E., & Salehi-Esfahani, S. (2015). Exploring the relationships
between college students’ cell phone use, personality and leisure. Computers in
Human Behavior, 43, 210–219.
Lim, V. K. G., & Chen, D. J. Q. (2012). Cyberloafing at the workplace: Gain or drain on
work? Behaviour & Information Technology, 31(4), 343–353.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Pollara, P., & Zhu, J. (2011). Social networking and education: Using Facebook as an
Edusocial Space. In Proceedings of society for information technology & teacher
education international conference 2011 (pp. 3330–3338). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5).
Roblyera, M. D., McDanielb, M., Webbc, M., Hermand, J., & Wittye, J. V. (2010).
Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and
student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher
Education, 13(3), 134–140.
Selwyn, N. (2008). An investigation of differences in undergraduates’ academic use
of the internet. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9, 11–22.
Ugrin, J. C., & Pearson, J. M. (2013). The effects of sanctions and stigmas on
cyberloafing. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 812–820.
Ugrin, J. C., Pearson, J. M., & Odom, M. D. (2008). Cyber-slacking: Self-control, prior
behavior and the impact of deterrence measures. Review of Business Information
Systems, 12(1), 75–88.
298 F.G. Karaoğlan Yılmaz et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 45 (2015) 290–298

Whitty, M. T., & Carr, A. N. (2006). New rules in the workplace: Applying object-
relations theory to explain problem internet and email behavior in the
workplace. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 235–250.
Yasßar, S. (2013). Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Denetim Odağı ve Bilgisayar Laboratuvarına
Yönelik Tutumlarının Siberaylaklık Davranısßlarına Etkisi [The Effects of Students
Locus of Control and Attitudes towards Computer Laboratory on Their Cyberloafing
Behavior]. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Hacettepe Üniversity, Ankara.
Zhang, X., Ordóñez de Pablos, P., & Xu, Q. (2014). Culture effects on the knowledge
sharing in multi-national virtual classes: A mixed method. Computers in Human
Behavior, 31, 491–498.