Learning radiology from interactive videodiscs: bar-code book versus computer-assisted instruction.
OBJECTIVE
We compared an interactive videodisc with bar-code book with an interactive videodisc with computer-assisted instruction for learning radiology to determine whether there would be differences in instructional effectiveness, instruction time, or subjective preference.


METHODS
Two different videodisc modules were created. Each was presented in two formats with identical content: bar-code book and computer-assisted instruction. In a controlled crossover experimental design, 48 fourth-year medical students were assigned one bar-code book module and one computer module. Pre- and posttests were administered.


RESULTS
Mean scores improved from pretest to posttest after students used the modules in either format (p < .01). There were no significant differences between students who used the bar-code book and those who used the computer in pretest scores, posttest scores, gains in score from pretest to posttest, or instruction time for either module. Subjectively, 74% of the students preferred computer-assisted instruction, 20% preferred bar-code book, and 7% preferred neither.


CONCLUSIONS
Although bar-code book and computer versions of an interactive videodisc can be educationally equivalent, most students preferred the computer. When videodisc is being integrated into the curriculum, the choice between bar-code book and computer-assisted instruction can be made on the basis of noneducational factors such as cost and availability.
Chew
F S
FS
Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston 02114, USA.
Lanier
L
L
D019034:CD-I; D003194:Computer-Assisted Instruction; D003258:Consumer Behavior; D003365:Costs and Cost Analysis; D004504:Education, Medical, Undergraduate; D004521:Educational Measurement; D004526:Efficiency; D011871:Radiology / Q000193:education*; D013997:Time Factors