, Volume 61, Issue 2, pp 147–154 | Cite as

TechTrends 2010–2015: A Content Analysis

  • Eric StaufferEmail author
Original Paper


This study is a content analysis of articles published within the journal TechTrends from 2000 to 2015. The study reveals that the publication TechTrends has increased the overall number of peer reviewed original papers over the last 6 years. The author describes the proportion of these original papers per volume and analyzes the content of these papers by author, author-provided key words, EBSCOHost assigned subject words, research method, and number of citations as reported by Google Scholar. The most frequent method of research within the 229 original articles is theoretical research and the most common keywords include learning, technology, and education. Content analysis was found to be the least frequently used research method and there has been only one original paper that has focused on corporate environments and no articles that have concentrated on military training within the 6 year period. The two most frequently sited articles focused on the use of iPads.


TechTrends 2010–2015 Research trends Content analysis 


  1. About this journal. (2015). Retrieved December 4, 2015, from
  2. Brown, A., & Boling, E. (2011). Editor’s notes. TechTrends, 55(1), 2–2. 10.1007/s11528-011-0455-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. EBSCO Support: What are Major Subject Headings and Minor Subject Headings? (2015). Retrieved December 16, 2015, from
  4. Fine, B. (2012). A corporate partnership to enhance teacher training. TechTrends, 56(6), 27–30. 10.1007/s11528-012-0610-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Green, L. S. (Ed.). (2015). School media and technology [Special edition]. TechTrends, 59(3).Google Scholar
  6. Green, T., & Donovan, L. (Eds.). (2013). California State University at Fullerton [Special issue]. TechTrends, 57(6).Google Scholar
  7. Kowch, E. W. (Ed.). (2013). Leadership [Special issue]. TechTrends, 57(5).Google Scholar
  8. Kumar, S., & Antonenko, P. D. (Eds.). (2014). Hybrid and online doctoral programs in educational technology [Special issue]. TechTrends, 58(4).Google Scholar
  9. Land, S. M., & Zimmerman, H. T. (Eds.). (2014). Augmented reality and mobile learning [Special issue]. TechTrends, 58(1).Google Scholar
  10. Luterbach, K. (Ed.). (2012). East Carolina University [Spotlight issue]. TechTrends, 56(6).Google Scholar
  11. McClanahan, B., Williams, K., Kennedy, E., & Tate, S. (2012). A breakthrough for josh: How use of an iPad facilitated reading improvement. TechTrends, 56(3), 20–28. 10.1007/s11528-012-0572-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mishra, P., Terry, L., & Henriksen, D. (Eds.). (2013). Michigan State University [Spotlight issue]. TechTrends, 57(3).Google Scholar
  13. Murray, O. T., & Olcese, N. R. (2011). Teaching and learning with iPads, ready or Not? TechTrends, 55(6), 42–48.  10.1007/s11528-011-0540-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ross, J., & Bayne, S. (Eds.). (2015). University of Scotland, Ediburgh [Spotlight issue]. TechTrends, 59(1).Google Scholar
  15. Rourke, L., & Szabo, M. (2002). A content analysis of the journal of distance education 1986–2001. Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 63–47.Google Scholar
  16. West, R. E. (2010). A Student’s guide to strengthening an online community. TechTrends, 54(5), 69–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. West, R. E. (2014). Communities of innovation: individual, group, and organizational characteristics leading to greater potential for innovation. TechTrends, 58(5), 53–61.  10.1007/s11528-014-0786-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Young, E. H., Griffiths, T., Luke, B., & West, R. E. (2014). Educational technology research journals: journal of distance education, 2003–2012. Educational Technology: The Magazine for Managers of Change in Education, 54(5), 45–49.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications & Technology 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Virginia TechBlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations