Cite this article as:

Ponosov F. N., Malakhova O. N., Zhuchenko O. A. Students’ choice of digital educational resource: Psychological aspect. Izvestiya of Saratov University. Educational Acmeology. Developmental Psychology, 2021, vol. 10, iss. 2, pp. 158-167. DOI:

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0).

Students’ choice of digital educational resource: Psychological aspect


The issue of psychological feasibility of distance learning is understudied and remains relevant both in theoretical and practical terms. The purpose of the study viewed in the article is to identify the connection between students’ preferences to study using the Internet and electronic textbooks with their personal psychological traits. Presumably, confident, self-organized students have a positive attitude towards their use, while anxious, emotionally unstable students have a negative attitude. The study involves 1st – 4th year students (N = 270, aged from 17 to 21 years; 61.3% women) students, who specialize in Economics and Agricultural Industry in Izhevsk State Agricultural Academy. We used the following techniques: questionnaire developed by O. N. Malakhova, O. A. Zhuchenko, aimed at studying students’ preferences and Cattell’s Personality Factor Questionnaire (16-PF), form C, which has the goal to study personality traits that are significant for the research. It was found that there was a direct interconnection between students’ preference to use digital educational resources with their personal psychological traits. The study revealed that students with self-discipline and analytical mindset have a negative attitude to the use of electronic textbooks and distance learning. It was found that among the main personal psychological characteristics of students, which influence their preferences, are sensitivity and radicalism, anxiety and lack of self-discipline. We did not confirm the hypothesis put forward in the study. The applied aspect of the problem under study can be implemented in educational practice to increase the efficiency of educational process and in the development of digital training courses. The research perspectives are related to the study of teacher preferences.

  1. Tereshchuk K. S. Factors for successful learning in higher school that uses distance learning. M. A. Vasinovich, ed. Nauka vchera, segodnya, zavtra: sb. st. po materialam XLIV mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. konf. № 3 (37) [The Science Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow: Collection of articles of the XLIV International scientifi c and practical conference. No. 3 (37)]. Novosibirsk, ANS «SibAC» Publ., 2017, pp.61–65 (in Russian).
  2. Al-Khatir Al-Arimi A. M. Distance Learning. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2014, vol. 152, pp. 82–88. DOI:
  3. Lopatinskaya V. V. K voprosu o gotovnosti studentov k avtonomnomu obucheniyu v usloviyakh perekhoda k distantsionnym formam obucheniya. In: N. M. Mekeko, ed. Innovatsionnost’ i mul’tikompetentnost’ v prepodavanii i izuchenii inostrannykh yazykov: sb. nauch. trudov [Innovations and Multicompetence in Teaching and Learning Foreign Languages: Collection of science articles]. Moscow, People`s Friendship University of Russia, 2016, pp. 118–129 (in Russain).
  4. Seaton J. X., Schwier R. A. An Exploratory Case Study of Online Instructors: Factors Associated with Instructor Engagement. International Journal of E-Leaning & Distance Education, 2014, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 8–9. Available at: (accessed 24 April 2019).
  5. Aleksandrova E. A., Akhmetov S. I., Attia M. R. Advantages and Directions of Electronic Interaction in Web-Learning. Izv. Saratov Univ. (N. S.), Ser. Educational Acmeo logy. Developmental Psychology, 2020, vol. 9, iss. 4 (36), pp. 385–391 (in Russian). DOI:
  6. Cropley A. J., Kahl T. N. Distance education and distance learning: Some psychological considerations. Distance Education, 1983, vol. 4, iss. 1, pp. 27–39. DOI:
  7. Terras M. M., Ramsay J. Massive open online courses (MOOCs): Insights and challenges from a psychological perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 2015, vol. 46, iss 3, pp. 472–487. DOI:
  8. Makani J., Durier-Copp M., Kiceniuk D., Blandford A. Strengthening Deeper Learning Through Virtual Teams in E-learning: A Synthesis of Determinants and Best Practices. International Journal of E-Leaning & Distance Education, 2016, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 1–16. Available at: http://www.ijede. ca/index.php/jde/issue/view/76 (accessed 24 April 2019).
  9. Baranov A. A., Zhuchenko O. A. Students’ preferences for different forms of fi nal control of knowledge, depending on their personal characteristics. In: N. P. Makarkin, ed. Integratsiya regional’nykh sistem obrazovaniya: sb. materialov V mezhdunar. konferentsii [Integration of Regional Integration Systems of Education: in 2 pt. Pt. 1]. Saransk, Mordovskiy universitet Publ., 2006, pp. 187–188 (in Russian).
  10. Pisareva S. A., Tryapitsina A. P. Methodological Aspects of Transition to a New Educational Process Organization. Izv. Saratov Univ. (N. S.), Ser. Educational Acmeology. Developmental Psychology, 2020, vol. 9, iss. 3 (35), pp. 281–288 (in Russian). DOI:
  11. Ladyshewsky R. K. The Virtual Professor and Online Teaching, Administration and Research: Issues for Globally Dispersed Business Faculty. International Journal of E-Leaning & Distance Education, 2016, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 1–15. Available at: (accessed 24 April 2019).
  12. Usova A. V. Formation of educational and cognitive skills in the process of studying natural cycle subjects. Fizika [Physics], 2006, no. 16 (816). Available at: http://fi z.1september. ru/article.php?ID=200601602 (accessed 8 February 2019).
  13. Ilyasov I. I. The System of Learning Skills. Chelovek. Iskusstvo. Vselennaya [Man. Art. Universe], 2015, no. 1, pp. 216–227 (in Russian).
  14. Ilyasov I. I. The Work of Students With Factors of Learning as Complementary Learning Competencies. Chelovek. Iskusstvo. Vselennaya [Man. Art. Universe], 2016, no. 1, pp. 92–105 (in Russian).
  15. Elkina M. E., Ilyasov I. I., Nagibina L. N. Remote Education in Russia and Germany. Chelovek. Iskusstvo. Vselennaya [Man. Art. Universe], 2016, no. 1, pp. 84–91 (in Russian).
  16. Fojtic R. Comparision of Full-Time and Distance Learning. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2015, vol. 182, pp. 402–407. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.804
  17. Carnevale D. Internet Experts Consult Their Crystal Balls. Information Technology, 2005, vol. 51, no. 20, pp. 26–30.
  18. Baker K. Q., Moyer D. M. The Relationship between Students’ Characteristics and Their Impressions of Online Courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 2019, vol. 33, iss. 1, pp. 16–28. DOI:
  19. Park S., Yun H. The Infl uence of Motivational Regulation Strategies on Online Students’ Behavioral, Emotional, and Cognitive Engagement. American Journal of Distance Education, 2018, vol. 32, iss. 1, pp. 43–56. DOI:
  20. Pam M. S. Preference. In: Psychology Dictionary: Professional reference. The only Free Online Psychology Dictionary. Available at: preference/ (accessed 10 January 2020).
  21. Alishev B. S. Preference as a function of the psyche. Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye Nauki, 2011, vol. 153, no. 5, pp. 7–16 (in Russian).
  22. Libin A. V. Differentsial’naya psikhologiya: na peresechenii evropeyskikh, rossiyskikh i amerikanskikh traditsiy [Differential Psychology: At the Intersection of European, Russian and American Traditions]. Moscow, Academiya Publ., 2004. 527 p. (in Russian).
  23. Lichtenstein S., Slovic P. The Construction of Preferences. New York, Cambridge University Press, 2006. 808 p.
  24. Kapustina A. N. Mnogofaktornaya lichnostnaya metodika [Multifactorial Personal Methods]. Moscow, Rech Publ., 2007. 104 p.
  25. Malakhova O. N., Zhuchenko O. A. Monitoring of Mental States of Students in Distance and Classroom Communication. Open and Distance Education, 2017, no. 4 (68), pp. 5–12 (in Russian). DOI:
Full text (in Russian):
(downloads: 32)
Short text (in English):
(downloads: 21)