Available via license: CC BY-NC 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
2121
International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(1) 2025, pages: 2121-2132
ISSN: 2617-6548
URL: www.ijirss.com
Shaping digital communication culture in prospective teachers: The role of digital etiquette
training in Kazakhstan
Ulzharkyn Аbdigapbarova1, Aigul Syzdykbayeva2, Elmira Aitenova3, Sabira Nishanbayeva4, Saniya
Nurgaliyeva5*
1,3,4,5Abai Kazakh National Pedagogical University, Almaty, Kazakhstan.
2Kazakh National Women's Teacher Training University, Almaty, Kazakhstan.
Corresponding author: Saniya Nurgaliyeva (Email: sanianur@mail.ru)
Abstract
This study examines the impact of digital etiquette training on the development of a digital communication culture among
future teachers by providing new perspectives and access to scientific knowledge in the field of digital etiquette. A mixed-
methods approach was used both before and after the test. The study included 115 respondents. The preliminary testing
between the groups showed that both groups were at the same level in terms of communicative culture indicators.
Additionally, participants had no prior knowledge of digital etiquette. An authors' program was created specifically for the
course and implemented to help students become more skilled with technology. A set of measures was carried out to develop
a digital communicative culture through the means of netiquette and the introduction of technology for individualization and
personalization of learning. This study found the impact of digital etiquette on the development of a digital communication
culture in future teachers by providing new perspectives and access to scientific knowledge in the field of digital etiquette,
as well as the practical application of this knowledge to support cultural digital interaction.
Keywords: Development, Digital communication culture, Digital etiquette, Prospective teachers, Training.
DOI: 10.53894/ijirss.v8i1.4903
Funding: This work is supported by the Science Committee of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of
Kazakhstan (Grant number: BR21882318).
History: Received: 8 January 2025/Revised: 11 February 2025/Accepted: 17 February 2025/Published: 24 February 2025
Copyright: © 2025 by the authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative
Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ Contributions: All authors contributed equally to the conception and design of the study. All authors have read and agreed
to the published version of the manuscript.
Transparency: The authors confirm that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study; that no
vital features of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned have been explained. This study
followed all ethical practices during writing.
Publisher: Innovative Research Publishing
1. Introduction
The development of digital ethics is continuing not only in Kazakhstan but globally as well. Every author, community,
and organization creates its own rules either in the form of a charter or a basic set of guidelines. There are currently no
universal standards governing digital etiquette. This issue is especially important for educational organizations [1].
International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(1) 2025, pages: 2121-2132
2122
Researchers believe that digital etiquette is based on new and emerging information and communication technologies. It
reflects both the specifics of etiquette communication and the nature of these technologies [2, 3]. The specifics of strategies
for teaching the basics of digital etiquette include methodological components. Teaching etiquette offline is both facultative
and optional. Teaching the basics of digital etiquette focuses on the technological component, which contributes to the disdain
for others in digital collaboration. The researchers emphasize that young people's excessive Internet use can make it difficult
for them to develop normal face-to-face communication skills [4, 5]. Their ability to engage in deep and meaningful
communication diminishes. In this regard, researchers' critical approach to assessing Internet communications as a tool for
reducing genuine interpersonal communication has spread as a natural intellectual reaction to a new leap in the development
of communication technologies. The more time a user spends online, the less time they devote to authentic relationships. In
this regard, the future development of digital etiquette entails acquiring or improving the skills and knowledge that are needed
in the digital communication culture [6, 7]. Thus, digital etiquette is a communicative phenomenon that reflects the properties
and specifics of etiquette communication in virtual space while also exposing the risks of "communication failures" in digital
reality [8]. These risks are accompanied by specific ethical issues that necessitate the development of digital etiquette in
education, as well as the incorporation of digital etiquette courses into the educational process to foster a culture of digital
interaction. In this regard, the role of digital etiquette in higher education is being debated as the digital interaction system
evolves, as are ideas about ethical and unethical behavior in specific situations, which necessitates the establishment of norms
and regulations governing online activities [9, 10].
This is an important problem for Kazakhstan as well because new technologies are being actively employed in
universities to not only create a digital educational space and change traditional teaching methods but also to form a digital
communicative culture, of which digital etiquette is an important component [11, 12]. However, students in the country's
universities do not currently have a separate subject for "Digital Etiquette" or "Digital Education." This specialized
knowledge is incorporated into other areas of higher education. There are objective explanations for this: Digital etiquette is
new in the digital age and as a full-fledged subject of knowledge. It is still being formed and developed, which is the focus
of research [13, 14]. As a result, curricula and foundational professional education programs at universities provide
insufficient attention to the challenges of cultivating a future teacher's digital communication culture. In this regard, there is
a high risk that the majority of pedagogy graduates will maintain a low level of communicative culture, significantly reducing
the effectiveness of their professional activities and complicating the process of professional growth for future specialists
[15]. However, teaching students the basic concepts of digital etiquette, which is now done indirectly through other subject
knowledge, is becoming an important component of higher education alongside digital literacy [16]. Thus, in our country,
etiquette topics in digital interaction are in a state of comprehension. Although digital rules of behavior are not currently
enshrined in legislation, there are widely accepted rules of behavior as well as unacceptable behaviors condemned by network
users [15]. In this regard, the most important aspect of digital interaction is digital etiquette and its influence on the
development of students’ communication cultures. However, the main question is whether digital etiquette contributes to the
development of a communication culture. If so, how does this happen? Unfortunately, the existing literature has not
sufficiently studied the issue of developing a communication culture among students based on digital etiquette despite the
importance of the problem of creating a culture of digital interaction. In this research, we are focusing on investigating the
efficacy of organizing the process of teaching students’ digital etiquette skills in terms of learning outcomes, fostering digital
communicative culture, and the practical application of this knowledge to support cultural digital interaction.
1.1. Questions for Research
Q1: What is the level of formation of the digital communication culture among students before and after training?
Q2: What is the level of communicative knowledge and skills acquired as a result of attending the training course?
Q3: What impact does a digital etiquette course have on the development and mastery of students' digital culture?
1.2. Objectives
This study aimed to examine the impact of digital etiquette training on the development of a digital communication
culture among future teachers by providing new perspectives and access to scientific knowledge in the field of digital
etiquette.
The hypothesis is that digital etiquette training will significantly improve prospective teachers' digital communication
cultures while facilitating mastery of a culture of digital interaction.
1.3. Significance of Study
This study is significant because it addresses the current issue of fostering a digital communicative culture among
prospective teachers. Specific ethical issues arising from digital interaction necessitate the development of new forms of
communication regulation, including language, style, and formats, as well as moral standards and virtual relationship etiquette
[17, 18]. The study and accurate description of such fundamental principles of digital etiquette is a research task that
necessitates an answer. However, digital etiquette is still in its early stages of development and is only becoming known as a
new type of etiquette communication in the digital environment [19]. This study adds to the existing literature by investigating
how digital etiquette influences the development of pre-service teachers' digital communication culture, providing new
perspectives and access to scientific knowledge in the field of digital etiquette, as well as the practical application of this
knowledge to support cultural digital interaction. This study includes information about digital etiquette by providing new
perspectives and access to scientific knowledge in the field of digital etiquette. The practical application of this knowledge
is critical to supporting cultural digital interaction, as well as the properties and specifics of etiquette communication, which
International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(1) 2025, pages: 2121-2132
2123
will serve as the foundation for future educational programs on digital etiquette in higher education. This study is significant
because it can provide useful information about the potential benefits of instilling a digital communication culture in pre-
service teachers. It can be implemented in pedagogical educational institutions, providing an opportunity for future specialists
to interact digitally while adhering to digital etiquette rules.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Digital Etiquette: Educational Strategies in Universities
Digital etiquette is a relatively new area of computer science that combines ethics, psychology, and information
technology [20]. One aspect of information culture is adhering to Internet etiquette rules. In our opinion, research does not
adequately prepare future teachers for network interaction, and most existing teachers need to improve this skill [21, 22]. The
introduction of digital learning has significantly increased the importance of developing digital etiquette skills for employees
of educational institutions [23, 24]. However, the emphasis on these values has resulted in a diminished and sometimes
complete disregard for the importance of communicative culture in modern society. This has mostly affected Generation Z,
the younger generation, whose members were raised in the digital era and are significantly different from one another [25].
A special focus on oneself, manifested in individualism, the cult of publicity and self-promotion, and opposing one's opinion,
has largely determined freedom as the new generation's primary behavioral value in both real and virtual spaces.
Digital etiquette is not yet a part of universities' educational strategies [26, 27]. On the one hand, it is assumed that first-
year students already have digital literacy. They are familiar with the fundamental rules of digital etiquette. However, this
disciplinary knowledge is in its early stages. It was discovered that few students are familiar with the rules for preparing
homework and presentation materials in digital format, as well as the rules of behavioral culture on the Internet, particularly
at video conferencing events, the rules of electronic business correspondence, and other digital etiquette during the pandemic.
Although there have been some developments in this area, for example, the topic of digital etiquette is included in the subject
fields of disciplines such as "business communication," "business etiquette," "digital culture," and so on. However, these
programs did not resolve the issue. During the pandemic, everyone had to quickly learn the rules of digital etiquette because
it became the norm in almost all spheres of social life, regardless of the type of activity (education, medicine, business, etc.),
and it provided a great opportunity to build effective communication. In general, practice has shown that in the university
environment, digital etiquette as a behavioral culture in the spaces of the digital and physical environments is more than
relevant, and this is determined not only by the quarantine period [28]. Mastering the culture of networking has become the
norm in the new reality. Partially incorporating digital etiquette into other communication disciplines does not solve the
problem. For example, when applying for a graduate job, such knowledge is critical, including proper resume formatting,
video interview recording, interview behavior, and direct communication with the employer. In this regard, the importance
of a personal brand is being updated, the formation of which requires active conscious activity in creating one’s reputation,
an important component of which is etiquette behavior in digital and non-digital environments [29, 30]. Knowledge of
Internet etiquette norms is not only a tool for communication but also an opportunity to make breakthroughs in the problem
of "moral machines," which is becoming a common concern of physicists and lyricists and is regarded by analysts as a trend
towards the increasing importance of the process of humanitarian modern knowledge in response to new realities [31, 32].
This means that engineering professions, including new professions aimed directly at teaching machines communication,
interaction with humans, digital ethics, and etiquette, must develop special humanitarian-oriented educational programs. It
teaches artificial intelligence and demonstrates that the most sophisticated intelligent systems of today are made by people
and only depend on human knowledge, moral principles, and cultural norms. Thus, the practice of teaching digital etiquette
in higher education is in its infancy [33]. Some knowledge is represented in other communication disciplines, but the
importance of the topic requires other decisions. The formulation and cultivation of new rules into the rules of digital etiquette
as a behavioral culture in digital and physical spaces is a global trend that reflects the challenges of the time and actualizes
the importance of digital etiquette as subject knowledge in higher education.
2.2. Digital Communication Culture
Digital communication culture is a set of norms, methods, and modes of interaction that reflect the best behavioral
patterns and values. Researchers view an individual's digital communicative culture as a complex, multifaceted formation
[34-36].
They believe that an individual's communicative culture reflects: (a) the individual's culture; (b) a culture of intellectual
activity that manifests itself in the logical construction of statements as well as mastery of methods for solving communicative
problems; (c) speech culture as a means of forming and formulating thoughts; and (d) a culture of digital interaction between
a person and others [37-40].
The phenomenon of communicative culture must be viewed in tandem with the concepts of "culture" and
"communication" [41, 42]. In philosophical discourse, culture is examined through the lenses of activity, axiology, and
personality. Representatives of the activity approach believe that culture has the potential to shape a socially active personality
focused on transforming our surroundings. Individuals create socially significant patterns, values, and symbols. In its broadest
sense, the concept of "culture" refers to humanity's ability to create a new reality that transcends its biological nature.
According to Davis [43], culture is "an integral unity of the methods and products of human activity in which his activity is
realized and serves his self-improvement, satisfaction, elevation of needs, and harmonization of human-society relations."
Researchers from a philosophical perspective believe that culture and communication are in complex interaction [44, 45].
Communication is an important condition for the production of values, samples, and the way of existence of culture.
International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(1) 2025, pages: 2121-2132
2124
Communication is a complex phenomenon in which technological, mental, and informational aspects are distinguished
[46, 47]. Some researchers believe that communication acts as an integral element of communication [48]. The culture of
communication is a complex of moral and value guidelines for an individual, allowing a person to regulate relationships with
society. Bentahila, et al. [49] define the components of a culture of communication as personal culture based on intellectual,
communicative, and emotional and moral cultures manifested in moral principles, ideals, and norms. Thus, digital
communicative culture is a complex and multidimensional concept and therefore requires diverse analysis. It is
interdisciplinary and is studied in philosophy, linguistics, communication theory, social psychology, and pedagogy.
There have been numerous interpretations of this concept in language theory. Some researchers define communicative
culture as the level of development, application, and use of norms, values, knowledge, and skills in everyday communication,
whereas others associate communicative culture with language skills. Communicative culture is the collection of cultural
norms, knowledge, and values used in the process of communication. Most sources associate the concept with speech culture,
which is an important component of an individual's overall culture [50].
In pedagogy, the content of the concept of “communicative culture” is understood differently. It is defined as skills that
ensure effective interaction between individuals, allowing them to solve communication problems and are the result of
personality development as part of the professional culture of the future specialist. Some researchers consider communicative
culture as part of the professional culture of a specialist, a synthesis of knowledge, skills, norms, and behavioral stereotypes
used in society [51]. The primary function of communicative culture is integrative. It is manifested in communicative culture's
ability to connect people and ensure effective communication. Integration is also seen in the strengthening of pre-existing
ties and forms of association. The integrative function is based on a person's desire to communicate with others and express
themselves. Individuals frequently bridge social and cultural divides by defending their interests and needs. A lack of
integration in communication has the potential to seriously destabilize the situation. Traditional modes of communication are
increasingly being replaced by more effective forms of interaction. These interactions alter values and cultural attitudes,
forming new aspects of identity [52].
Many researchers have noted that the most important tasks that higher professional education assigns to itself are the
development of a communicative culture, education, and professionalism [53, 54]. Communicative culture is a reflection of
a person's overall culture, but it can also be viewed as a component of their professional culture. The formation of a
communicative culture among students involves both self-education and the creation of an appropriate teaching environment
[55]. Thus, the development of ideas about personal communicative culture as a system that improves active interaction with
other communicative systems is necessary to form in students a conscious creative position and a desire to expand the content
and forms of communicative activities to overcome isolation and participate in business and public communications.
3. Method
3.1. Research Design
A mixed-methods approach was used before and after the test to collect and analyze data. Experimental design is a type
of comparative research in which the interaction of two or more variables is investigated under controlled conditions to
determine if there is a relationship and whether they influence the groups under study. An experiment refers to scientific
procedures designed to test hypotheses, discover new processes and phenomena, and demonstrate facts. When we refer to
controlled experimental conditions, we typically mean laboratory studies.
3.2. Research Sample Formation
The experimental and control groups were selected using randomization, also known as random selection. The study
was conducted at the Abai Kazakh National Pedagogical University. According to the experiment's purpose, two groups were
formed using random sampling: the CG (n = 57) and the EG (n = 58). The study will include a seven-week digital etiquette
training session to help EG participants improve their digital communication culture. The respondents' ages ranged from 20
to 28 years.
3.3. Measures
General sociometric indicators were collected, including gender, age, course of study, level of preparation for the
pedagogical education program, and direction of study (see Table 1).
Table 1.
Descriptive information provided by respondents.
The university's name
Abai Kazakh national pedagogical university
115
100%
The areas of study
Pedagogical
115
100%
Student training course
2 courses
115
100%
EG
Female
51
42%
Male
7
8%
Total
58
50%
CG
Female
52
45%
Male
5
5
Total
57
50%
International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(1) 2025, pages: 2121-2132
2125
3.4. Experimental Manipulation and Research Procedures
We devised an experiment that allowed us to identify cause-and-effect relationships because our primary objective was
to evaluate the efficacy of various experimental environments. We used a between-groups study design. The determining
factor was the impact of learning, which we had complete control over. The study's outcome variables, which we anticipated
would change as a result of the independent variable manipulations, included various measures of teaching impact
effectiveness.
Experimental manipulation: Participants were randomly divided into two groups. An original training program was
created to improve the communication skills of the experimental group (EG) participants. The control group was examined
using the traditional method. The experimental manipulation concerned only the teaching method. The control group used
the same educational software, while the experimental group followed the instructor-led course program "Basics of Digital
Etiquette." The training was provided at the university by a full-time teacher in classrooms familiar to the students.
3.5. Experimental Process
Step 1: Algorithm for Developing a Digital Communication Culture for Students. A level-based approach to presenting
results is used to assess the achievement of learning outcome requirements (constructing assessment scales and describing
results). The process of developing a digital communicative culture is accompanied by the formation of guiding principles of
action for students. According to the findings, five levels of the development of digital communication culture were identified
and differentiated (see Figure 1).
Figure 1.
Levels of development of digital communication culture.
(2) The structure of communicative culture as a complex social formation includes the following parts: (1) the cognitive
component, which encompasses knowledge about interpersonal communication and ideas about a tolerant personality; (2)
the emotional-evaluative component, expressed in the ability to empathize with and adequately assess people’s behavior and
speech; and (3) the behavioral component, manifested in interactions between people to establish cooperation in carrying out
joint activities and conducting dialogue.
The cognitive component consists of knowledge and ideas about communicative culture and the basics of interpersonal
communication, as well as ideas about culture and the ethics of communication.
The emotional-evaluative component of communicative culture is associated with the moral qualities of the individual
and manifests itself in the form of value judgments, beliefs, feelings, and moods.
The behavioral component is associated with the actions and deeds of the individual, as well as with interpersonal and
cultural interactions. The level of formation of a communication culture is determined based on behavior.
(3) Assessment of the effectiveness of the influence of digital etiquette on the development of digital communicative
culture is provided by the developed set of criterion-indicative features of communicative culture. The indicators of digital
communicative culture enable the selection of diagnostic tools that will be used to demonstrate the presence of specific
criteria in subjects, revealing the current level of communicative culture among participants.
(4) To ensure that EG participants' communication skills improve, a proprietary course program called "Basics of Digital
Etiquette" has been created.
This course aims to familiarize participants with the concepts and rules of digital etiquette and develop the skill of
applying these rules in the Internet space to build effective communication.
A set of measures was implemented to assess the motivational readiness of students to enhance their communicative
culture through netiquette and the introduction of technology for individualization and personalization of learning. The
content block of the program includes a series of educational modules and practical activities in the digital environment.
Particular attention in the course is given to the critical analysis of various models of communicative culture that predetermine
aggressive or tolerant communication practices. The most intriguing, promising, or indicative communication cultures
International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(1) 2025, pages: 2121-2132
2126
relevant to contemporary Kazakhstani reality are used to illustrate the topic of communication cultures in addition to their
abstract form.
Step 2: Pre-Testing.
Testing was conducted to determine the initial levels of the digital communication culture among the participants. Pre-
training assessments allowed us to categorize participants based on their existing levels. The joint analysis of the results
enabled us to inform participants about their weak points in training that they should focus on in the future. Level
measurements were conducted twice. Students received 7 weeks of training in digital etiquette skills between the two
assessments.
Step 3: Intervention.
An experimental group was trained using a digital etiquette course. Student training is scheduled for two hours per week,
totaling fourteen hours. The session began with an introduction to the course's goals and expectations, followed by an
introduction to digital engagement-related topics. The training involved three technological stages: formation, consolidation,
and transformation.
The systematic progression through all technological stages ensures that the full potential of digital etiquette is realized
and that maximum results are achieved. Next, students were divided into five groups (five groups of ten participants and one
group of eight participants) to work on an individual project called "Network Communication Strategy" on the Telegram
platform. The teacher constantly monitored their work and provided appropriate feedback.
Step 4: Posttest.
Evaluation procedures were conducted to determine the nature of the training's impact on the EG participants following
the intervention. A specifically designed set of criteria and indicators is used to assess the effectiveness of the influence.
3.6. Data Collection Tools
A test was conducted to confirm the hypothesis that digital etiquette training will significantly improve prospective
teachers' digital communication cultures while facilitating mastery of a digital interaction culture.
3.6.1. A Test to Assess the Level of a Communication Culture
Respondents are asked 20 questions to assess their initial level of communication ability. If the answer to a question is
positive, use a "+," and if it is negative, use a "-."
The sum of positive answers to even-numbered questions and negative answers to odd-numbered questions, divided by
20, determines the communicative ability level.
The degree of expression of the following communicative skill indicators was determined: 1) Direction 2) Efficiency 3)
Dominance 4) Self-confidence 5) Exactingness 6) Stubbornness and Negativity 7) Compliance 8) Psychological Tact 9)
Responsiveness. There are four levels of expression, or zones for these abilities: 0–4 points: low level (nominal zone), 4–8
points: average level (potential zone); 8–12 points: high level (promising zone), and more than 12 points: extremely high
level (super zone). The coefficient of knowledge absorption is determined by:
ꝴⅰ=Pi/Ni, where i = 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 are levels of knowledge assimilation.
ꝴⅰ - is the coefficient of knowledge acquisition level.
Pi - is the number of correct answers to questions of a given level of complexity.
Ni - is the number of questions of this level of difficulty.
The criterion for the completeness of knowledge assimilation was the average value of the indicators, the average
coefficient of knowledge assimilation (ꝴav)ȝ, which shows in relative units the percentage of correct answers concerning the
total number of questions asked.
3.7. Data Analysis
A between-group analysis was conducted to measure the differences in the effectiveness of the digital etiquette method
and the traditional method.
The results were analyzed using SPSS software version 26. A Student's t-test was used to evaluate the relationship
between pre- and post-test mean scores on the tests in each group.
4. Results
The following results were obtained during the preliminary testing stage: the initial level of development of the
respondents' communicative culture (see Figure 2).
International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(1) 2025, pages: 2121-2132
2127
Figure 2.
Results of the preliminary tests.
According to the data, 52.2% of those surveyed had a low degree of communicative culture (0.1–0.45) or below average
(0.46-0.55); 36% of respondents have an average level (0.56-0.65), and 11.8% of students have an above-average level (0.65-
0.75). Not a single respondent has a high level of communicative culture development. According to initial testing, the
following issues were identified in respondents: low sociability and communication skills, self-doubt and isolation, a lack of
independence in judgment, an inability to communicate professionally, and an inability to use digital technologies,
particularly netiquette.
The results compare the coefficients of mastering communicative knowledge and skills following the special course
"Basics of Digital Etiquette" (see Table 2). In the experimental group (EG), the coefficient of knowledge for levels 4 and 5
is 0.74 and 0.57, respectively, compared to 0.41 and 0.30 in the control group (CG). Additionally, the coefficient of
communication skills in the CG for levels 4 and 5 is 0.78 and 0.67, respectively, compared to 0.49 and 0.54 in the CG.
Table 2.
Findings from diagnostic tests assessing the levels of communicative knowledge and skills.
Knowledge (Kn) skills (SKs)
Participants
1 level
ꝴ1
2 level
ꝴ2
3 level
ꝴ3
4 level
ꝴ4
5 level
ꝴ5
Pre-test (Kn)
All
participants
0.71
0.60
0.49
0.33
0.20
Post-testing (Kn)
CG
0.76
0.64
0.50
0.41
0.30
EG
0.93
0.88
0.81
0.74
0.57
Pre-test (SKs)
All
participants
0.83
0.73
0.54
0.40
0.31
Post-testing (SKs)
CG
0.86
0.74
0.63
0.49
0.54
EG
0.99
0.90
0.86
0.78
0.67
After the intervention, the EG participants had evaluation processes to teach them digital cultural proficiency (see Table
3). According to the procedural criterion, the EG's dynamics (35.4%) are 28.6% higher than the CG's (6.8%). According to
the motivational criterion, the dynamics in the EG (41.7%) exceed those in the CG (3.1%) by 38.6%. The reflexive criterion
shows that the dynamics in the EG (39.8%) are 35.1% higher than those in the CG (4.7%). According to the development
criterion, the EG (42.9%) has higher dynamics than the CG (5.2%) by 37.7%.
Table 3.
Post-test results.
Indicators
Pre-test (%)
Posttest (%)
Dynamics (%)
EG
CG
EG
CG
EG
CG
Procedural criterion
Original
22.3
26.2
10.2
19.2
-12.1
-7.0
Definite
25.10
17.6
10.4
17.6
-14.7
0
Meaningful
25.8
28.0
17.2
29.9
-8.6
1.9
International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(1) 2025, pages: 2121-2132
2128
Efficient
22.5
21.2
46.7
24.5
24.2
3.3
Creative
4.3
7.0
15.5
8.8
11.2
3.5
Total
100
100
100
100
35.4
6.8
Motivational criterion
Original
24.2
21.2
6.7
14.3
-17.5
-6.9
Definite
27.5
22.6
13.9
19.1
-13.6
-3.5
Meaningful
27.7
26.2
17.1
33.5
-10.6
7.1
Efficient
17.1
24.8
48.6
26.2
31.5
1.4
Creative
3.5
5.2
13.7
6.9
10.2
1.7
Total
100
100
100
100
41.7
3.1
Reflexive criterion
Original
25.8
24.5
6.8
15.7
-19.0
-8.8
Definite
22.5
21.1
12.2
19.4
-10.3
-1.7
Meaningful
31.1
28.1
20.6
35.2
-10.5
7.1
Efficient
17.3
21.1
43.3
22.9
26.0
1.8
Creative
3.3
5.2
17.1
6.8
13.8
2.9
Total
100
100
100
100
39.8
4.7
Development criterion
Original
24.2
21.2
6.8
15.7
-17.4
-5.5
Definite
25.8
29.7
12.2
24.6
-13.6
-5.4
Meaningful
32.7
24.5
20.8
29.9
-11.9
5.4
Efficient
13.6
21.2
44.9
24.4
31.3
3.2
Creative
3.7
3.4
15.3
5.4
11.6
2.0
Total
100
100
100
100
42.9
5.2
Thus, teaching based on digital etiquette has been shown to positively affect the digital communicative culture of EG
(see Figure 3).
Figure 3.
The dynamics of digital communication culture in the EG and CG.
The student's t-test was used to ensure data reliability. The studied feature was statistically indistinguishable (𝑡emp < 𝑡crit)
indicating the homogeneity of the participant samples used. After the intervention, statistical distinctiveness (𝑡emp > 𝑡crit) and
the conditionality of increasing the level of digital communicative culture through the introduction of a specially designed
training program (see Table 4).
International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(1) 2025, pages: 2121-2132
2129
Table 4.
Results of the student's t-test.
Criteria
Pre-test (EG and CG)
Post-test (EG и CG)
𝑡emp
𝑝 = 0.05
𝑡emp
𝑝 = 0.05
Procedural
0.262
𝑡crit = 1.981
2.664
𝑡crit = 1.981
Motivational
0.993
2.586
Reflexive
0.491
3.072
Developmental
0.424
3.341
These findings support the conclusion that the process associated with establishing a digital communication culture in
the EG is more effective. The data demonstrate the benefits of organizing the process of teaching digital etiquette skills to
students using a theoretically based algorithm for the formation of a digital communication culture over traditional training
methods. On this basis, it was determined that the research hypothesis was confirmed. The tasks and the study's purpose were
accomplished.
5. Discussion
This study aims to examine the influence of digital etiquette on the development of a culture of digital communication
among prospective teachers in the context of Kazakhstan. The experimental group received seven weeks of digital etiquette
training to achieve this goal. The initial section revealed the following problems for the experiment participants: low
sociability and communication skills, self-doubt and isolation, lack of independence in judgment, inability to communicate
professionally, and inability to use digital technologies, particularly netiquette. The reasons for the aforementioned
difficulties were identified: the episodic use of communicative dialogue and interactive technologies in the educational
process, resulting in a monologue rather than a dialogic form of teaching in classes and extracurricular activities, and a lack
of orientation in extracurricular activities towards addressing the problems of forming a communicative culture. The
participants lacked experience in constructive conflict resolution and were unmotivated to improve their communication
skills. The lack of methodological support for the process of developing students' communication skills during school and
extracurricular hours is also a major source of communication problems.
In the context of the course, an authors' program was developed and implemented to assist students in improving their
digital competence, as well as a set of measures to help students develop a communicative culture through netiquette and the
introduction of technology for individualization and personalization of learning [56]. The training involved three
technological stages: formation, consolidation, and transformation. The systematic progression through all technological
stages ensures that the full potential of digital etiquette is realized and that maximum results are achieved.
EG participants have a positive attitude towards communication as a means of achieving goals when interacting with
others. They utilize communication skills and speech culture in discussions and class activities, and they are distinguished
by a diverse set of speech techniques and communicative behavior strategies. They are actively involved in the
communication process and possess a higher level of speech literacy [57, 58]. The use of Telegram enabled students to discuss
and exchange ideas and feedback on the network communication strategy project's progress.
An analysis of data on mastering communicative knowledge and skills in the experimental group (EG) as a result of
taking the special course "Basics of Digital Etiquette" discovered that the EG had a higher coefficient. The significance of
the difference by the Student’s t-test is at least 0.95, which confirms the research hypothesis. One of the main results of the
training is a qualitative change in the abilities of the participants in the EG for communicative activities. The experimental
group's classes used the following methods: theoretical information was presented in the form of problem-based lectures and
informational messages. The practical component included sensitive training, analysis, and solutions to specific situations
that demanded a high level of communicative culture. The reflexive component was carried out through verbal and nonverbal
reactions at the emotional and cognitive levels [59, 60].
The course "Basics of Digital Etiquette" focuses on learning about the essence, goals, objectives, principles, methods,
content, and specifics of activities and communication, as well as the effectiveness of organizing activities and
communication and the improvement of communication knowledge and skills. The program emphasizes communication
organization (trust, dialogue, mutual understanding, language unity, and verbal and nonverbal communication methods). The
proposed program serves three purposes: educational (introducing students to the phenomenon of communicative culture),
developmental (creating motivation for students to improve their own communicative culture), and corrective (correcting
students' communicative culture). The basic principles of teaching the course are problematic material presentation, student
activity, individual and collective forms of student work, consideration of students' characteristics, and a flexible algorithm
for class management.
Sensitive skills training included four classes in which conditions for constructive communication were created so that
students developed the ability to feel that a communication partner recognizes his emotional state, analyze situations of
interpersonal interaction based on the emotional reactions of partners, and extract the experience necessary for successful
communication in the future. The students were actively engaged in the training. The effectiveness of the classes is due to
characteristic processes such as the use of involuntary influence as a method, the impact on participants' emotional states,
relieving tension, relaxing the situation, and fostering relaxation during classes; free and open expression by participants of
their thoughts and feelings, active listening to others, and the development of abilities and skills to analyze and draw
conclusions [61, 62]. This strategy is enhanced by regularly checking participants' comprehension, asking questions, and
speaking directly to them. As a result, we can conclude that using a theoretically based algorithm to organize the process of
International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(1) 2025, pages: 2121-2132
2130
teaching students’ digital etiquette skills has an advantage over traditional training in terms of forming a digital
communicative culture.
6. Conclusion
This study investigates the effectiveness of digital etiquette's influence on the development of a digital communication
culture among prospective teachers in Kazakhstan. The experimental group received seven weeks of digital etiquette training
to accomplish this goal. Analysis of the preliminary testing results revealed that both groups were at the same level in terms
of communicative culture indicators. In addition, participants had no prior knowledge of digital etiquette. A proprietary
course program called "Basics of Digital Etiquette" has been created to ensure that participants' communication skills
improve. This course aims to familiarize participants with the concepts and rules of digital etiquette and develop the skill of
applying these rules in the Internet space to build effective communication. A set of measures was implemented to develop
a communicative culture through the means of netiquette and the introduction of technology for individualization and
personalization of learning. This study found the impact of digital etiquette on the development of a digital communication
culture in future teachers by providing new perspectives and access to scientific knowledge in the field of digital etiquette,
as well as the practical application of this knowledge to support cultural digital interaction.
7. The Suggestions and Future Implications
When determining research prospects, it should be noted that additional research on the issue under consideration could
aim to provide new perspectives and access to scientific knowledge in digital etiquette. Some issues also require special
study, particularly in identifying new vectors for the development of teachers' professional skills, improving their
competencies, and mastering the basics of digital etiquette in professional communities and pedagogical communications,
which can be indicators of teachers’ readiness to exchange knowledge in a virtual environment. At the present stage of the
development of the education system and society, there is an urgent need to improve not only professional competencies but
also the psychological and pedagogical knowledge and communicative qualities of teachers. This is especially important in
the context of the digitalization of all processes and the construction of pedagogical activities in a virtual environment. A
modern teacher has to both teach lessons using digital resources and expand their knowledge while exchanging
methodological ideas in online professional communities. Teachers also need to be aware of students’ virtual activities and
their communications and subscriptions on social networks. All of these aspects of a teacher’s professional activity raise the
need for general cultural improvement, mastery of media literacy, and adherence to ethical standards of digital
communication.
References
[1] U. Oral, "Netiquette: Fundamentals of etiquette in digital communication," European Journal of Theoretical and Applied
Sciences, vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 833-847, 2023. https://doi.org/10.59324/ejtas.2023.1(5).70
[2] M. Heitmayer and R. Schimmelpfennig, "Netiquette as digital social norms," International Journal of Human–Computer
Interaction, pp. 1-21, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2188534
[3] A. L. Ponte, Q. M. Balaquinto, D. M. B. Gaerlan, and J. E. Tacadena, "Netiquette of online communication of the bachelor of
elementary education students in UM Panabo College," Journal of Media, Culture and Communication, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 1-5,
2023. https://doi.org/10.55529/jmcc.33.1.5
[4] T. Al-Khatib, "Netiquette rules in online learning through the lens of digital citizenship scale in the post-corona era," Journal of
Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 181-201, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1108/jices-08-2021-
0089
[5] G. Jaisy, W. Wahyunengsih, and A. Rizki, "The impact of online learning on the students’ digital communication ethics," Al-
Azkiya: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MI/SD, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 86-97, 2022. https://doi.org/10.32505/4423
[6] C. Mangkhang and N. Kaewpanya, "The digital etiquette enhancing to global citizenship of social studies teachers in a new
normal society," Higher Education Studies, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 89-94, 2021. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v11n3p89
[7] D. T. K. Ng, J. K. L. Leung, J. Su, R. C. W. Ng, and S. K. W. Chu, "Teachers’ AI digital competencies and twenty-first century
skills in the post-pandemic world," Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 137-161, 2023.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10203-6
[8] R. Soler-Costa, P. Lafarga-Ostáriz, M. Mauri-Medrano, and A.-J. Moreno-Guerrero, "Netiquette: Ethic, education, and behavior
on internet—a systematic literature review," International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 18, no. 3,
p. 1212, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18031212
[9] P. J. Makonye, "Teaching young learners pre-number concepts through ICT mediation," Research in Education, vol. 108, no. 1,
pp. 3-21, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/0034523719840051
[10] M. Saputra and I. H. Al Siddiq, "Social media and digital citizenship: The urgency of digital literacy in the middle of a disrupted
society Era," International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 156-161, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i07.13239
[11] B. Nagima, N. Saniya, Y. Gulden, Z. Saule, S. Aisulu, and M. Nazigul, "Influence of special learning technology on the
effectiveness of pedagogical ethics formation in future teachers," Journal of Education and E-Learning Research, vol. 10, no. 1,
pp. 1-6, 2023. https://doi.org/10.20448/jeelr.v10i1.4313
[12] Z. A. Akhmetova, D. B. Issabayeva, L. C. Rakhimzhanova, U. D. Abdigapbarova, B. E. Tulbassova, and Z. F. Issabayeva,
"Developing a culture of academic integrity in examinations in a distance learning environment," International Journal of
Information and Education Technology, vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 1229-1236, 2022. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2022.12.11.1743
[13] Y. Zheng et al., "Effects of digital game-based learning on students’ digital etiquette literacy, learning motivations, and
engagement," Heliyon, vol. 10, no. 1, p. e23490, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e23490
International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(1) 2025, pages: 2121-2132
2131
[14] C. S. Costa, J. S. Batista, I. Almeida, and M. Menezes, "Exploring teenagers' spatial practices and needs in light of new
communication technologies," Cities, vol. 98, p. 102574, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.102574
[15] G. Nurzhanova, A. Nurgaliyeva, S. Kaidarova, S. Zhanuzakova, Z. Smagulova, and S. Niyazbekova, "Efficiency of utilising the
labour potential of rural areas in Kazakhstan," Journal of Entrepreneurship & Sustainability Issues, vol. 12, no. 1, 2024.
[16] A. Zhakupova, U. Kyakbaeva, R. Karimova, and D. Omarova, "Opportunities for the development of ecological competence of
the future preschool teachers," Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 228-239, 2022.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i1.6703
[17] T. Flew, F. Martin, and N. Suzor, "Internet regulation as media policy: Rethinking the question of digital communication platform
governance," Journal of Digital Media & Policy, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 33-50, 2019.
[18] C. M. Rochefort, M.-E. Beauchamp, L.-A. Audet, M. Abrahamowicz, and P. Bourgault, "Associations of 4 nurse staffing
practices with hospital mortality," Medical Care, vol. 58, no. 10, pp. 912-918, 2020.
[19] B. Gezmen, "Digital activist movements for energy resources: The case of Greenpeace Turkey in sustainability in energy business
and finance: Approaches and developments in the energy market." Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022, pp. 145-158.
[20] S. Edirippulige et al., "Medical students’ perceptions and expectations regarding digital health education and training: A
qualitative study," Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 258-265, 2022.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633x20932436
[21] G. Falloon, "From digital literacy to digital competence: The teacher digital competency (TDC) framework," Educational
Technology Research and Development, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 2449-2472, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09767-4
[22] M. Koponen, M. A. Asikainen, A. Viholainen, and P. E. Hirvonen, "Using network analysis methods to investigate how future
teachers conceptualize the links between the domains of teacher knowledge," Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 79, pp. 137-
152, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.12.010
[23] A. Morgan, R. Sibson, and D. Jackson, "Digital demand and digital deficit: Conceptualising digital literacy and gauging
proficiency among higher education students," Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 258-
275, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080x.2022.2030275
[24] G. Öncül, "Defining the need: Digital literacy skills for first-year university students," Journal of Applied Research in Higher
Education, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 925-943, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1108/jarhe-06-2020-0179
[25] M. Sakdiyakorn, M. Golubovskaya, and D. Solnet, "Understanding generation Z through collective consciousness: Impacts for
hospitality work and employment," International Journal of Hospitality Management, vol. 94, p. 102822, 2021.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102822
[26] L. Blaj-Ward and K. Winter, "Engaging students as digital citizens," Higher Education Research & Development, vol. 38, no. 5,
pp. 879-892, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1607829
[27] K. Martzoukou, C. Fulton, P. Kostagiolas, and C. Lavranos, "A study of higher education students' self-perceived digital
competences for learning and everyday life online participation," Journal of Documentation, vol. 76, no. 6, pp. 1413-1458, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1108/jd-03-2020-0041
[28] N. Komninos, C. Kakderi, L. Mora, A. Panori, and E. Sefertzi, "Towards high impact smart cities: A universal architecture based
on connected intelligence spaces," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1169-1197, 2022.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00767-0
[29] K. Taylor‐Wesselink and F. Teulon, "The interaction and influence of digital and non‐digital structures, cultures and social norms
on entrepreneurship," Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration, vol. 39,
no. 3, pp. 244-258, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.1639
[30] S. Qiao, S. S. s. Yeung, Z. Zainuddin, D. T. K. Ng, and S. K. W. Chu, "Examining the effects of mixed and non‐digital
gamification on students' learning performance, cognitive engagement and course satisfaction," British Journal of Educational
Technology, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 394-413, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13249
[31] M. Ribble, "Digital citizenship in the frame of global change," International Journal of Studies in Education and Science, vol.
2, no. 2, pp. 74-86, 2021.
[32] U. Akcil and M. Bastas, "Examination of university students' attitudes towards e-learning during the covid-19 pandemic process
and the relationship of digital citizenship," Contemporary Educational Technology, vol. 13, no. 1, p. ep291, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/9341
[33] H. Pratiwi, N. I. Hasanah, S. Purnama, M. Ulfah, and A. Saripudin, "Adaptation to digital parenting in a pandemic: A case study
of parents within higher education," South African Journal of Childhood Education, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1-12, 2022.
https://doi.org/10.4102/sajce.v12i1.1166
[34] S. Çöteli, "The impact of new media on the forms of culture: Digital identity and digital culture," Journal of Communication and
Media Technologies, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 1-12, 2019. https://doi.org/10.29333/ojcmt/5765
[35] B. Valtysson, Digital cultural politics: From policy to practice. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35234-9_2,
2020.
[36] J. Li, "Grounded theory-based model of the influence of digital communication on handicraft intangible cultural heritage,"
Heritage Science, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 126, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-022-00760-z
[37] Y. Zhou, J. Sun, and Y. Huang, "The digital preservation of intangible cultural heritage in China: A survey," Preservation, Digital
Technology & Culture, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 95-103, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1515/pdtc-2019-0004
[38] Y. Liu, "Application of digital technology in intangible cultural heritage protection," Mobile Information Systems, vol. 2022, pp.
1-8, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7471121
[39] D. Ocón, "Digitalising endangered cultural heritage in Southeast Asian cities: Preserving or replacing?," International Journal
of Heritage Studies, vol. 27, no. 10, pp. 975-990, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2021.1883711
[40] N. Hong, "Digital-media-based interaction and dissemination of traditional culture integrating using social media data analytics,"
Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, p. 5846451, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5846451
[41] W. Baker, "From intercultural to transcultural communication," Language and Intercultural Communication, vol. 22, no. 3, pp.
280-293, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2021.2001477
[42] B. Szkudlarek, J. S. Osland, L. Nardon, and L. Zander, "Communication and culture in international business–moving the field
forward," Journal of World Business, vol. 55, no. 6, p. 101126, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2020.101126
International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 8(1) 2025, pages: 2121-2132
2132
[43] M. Davis, "The “culture” in cultural competence," Cultural Competence and the Higher Education Sector: Australian
Perspectives, Policies and Practice, pp. 15-29, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5362-2_2
[44] T. Puckett, "The importance of developing cultural competence. In Cultural competence in higher education," vol. 28: Emerald
Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2055-364120200000028004, 2020, pp. 7-22.
[45] S. D. Kruse, S. Rakha, and S. Calderone, "Developing cultural competency in higher education: An agenda for practice,"
Teaching in Higher Education, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 733-750, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1414790
[46] B. Van Ruler, "Communication theory: An underrated pillar on which strategic communication rests," International Journal of
Strategic Communication, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 367-381, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2018.1452240
[47] A. L. Guzman and S. C. Lewis, "Artificial intelligence and communication: A human–machine communication research agenda,"
New Media & Society, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 70-86, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819858691
[48] M. M. Musheke and J. Phiri, "The effects of effective communication on organizational performance based on the systems
theory," Open Journal of Business and Management, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 659-671, 2021. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2021.92034
[49] L. Bentahila, R. Fontaine, and V. Pennequin, "Universality and cultural diversity in moral reasoning and judgment," Frontiers
in Psychology, vol. 12, p. 764360, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.764360
[50] E. Gutiérrez-Santiuste and M. Ritacco-Real, "Intercultural communicative competence in higher education through
telecollaboration: Typology and development," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 28, no. 11, pp. 13885-13912, 2023.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11751-3
[51] M. Akdere, K. Acheson, and Y. Jiang, "An examination of the effectiveness of virtual reality technology for intercultural
competence development," International Journal of Intercultural Relations, vol. 82, no. C, pp. 109-120, 2021.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2021.03.009
[52] X. Chen and W. K. Gabrenya Jr, "In search of cross-cultural competence: A comprehensive review of five measurement
instruments," International Journal of Intercultural Relations, vol. 82, pp. 37-55, 2021.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2021.02.003
[53] J. F. Tansey and E. S. Parks, "Privileged professionalisms: Using co-cultural communication to strengthen inclusivity in
professionalism education and community formation," Ethics & Behavior, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 431-448, 2022.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2021.1925118
[54] C. Simonsson and M. Heide, "Developing a communicative logic–the key to communication professionalism," International
Journal of Strategic Communication, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 253-273, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118x.2021.1906682
[55] S. Iseminger, K. Acheson-Clair, C. Kelly, and P. Morris, "The effects of social identities on student learning outcome attainment,"
International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, vol. 14, no. 1, p. 12, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2020.140112
[56] Q. Shi, M. Lan, and X. Wan, "The implementation mechanism and effectiveness of a national plan of a digital competence
training program for Chinese primary and secondary school teachers," Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 24, p. 16944, 2023.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su152416944
[57] K. C. Davis and K. A. Murza, "Disciplinary literacy: Virginia school-based speech-language pathologists’ knowledge and
confidence," Communication Disorders Quarterly, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 77-87, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525740118771905
[58] K. J. Marble-Flint, W. Schneider-Cline, K. M. Brumbaugh, J. C. Chavira, and D. F. Parham, "A survey of midwestern school-
based speech-language pathologists' knowledge and confidence in providing literacy services," Perspectives of the ASHA Special
Interest Groups, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 2051-2066, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1044/2022_persp-21-00184
[59] U. Noor, M. Younas, H. Saleh Aldayel, R. Menhas, and X. Qingyu, "Learning behavior, digital platforms for learning and its
impact on university student’s motivations and knowledge development," Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 13, p. 933974, 2022.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.933974
[60] Z. Yu, M. Gao, and L. Wang, "The effect of educational games on learning outcomes, student motivation, engagement and
satisfaction," Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 522-546, 2021.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120969214
[61] R. B. King and J. Chen, "Emotions in education: Asian insights on the role of emotions in learning and teaching," The Asia-
Pacific Education Researcher, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 279-281, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00469-x
[62] A. Rodríguez-Muñoz, M. Antino, P. Ruiz-Zorrilla, and E. Ortega, "Positive emotions, engagement, and objective academic
performance: A weekly diary study," Learning and Individual Differences, vol. 92, p. 102087, 2021.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102087
