Search results

The attempt to establish a common European framework for core platforms' duties and responsibilities toward other actors in the digital environment is at the core of the recent scholarly debate surrounding the Digital Markets Act (DMA) proposal. In particular, the everlasting juxtaposition between the “data power” – as emerging from recent cases (Section 2) – that dominant tech companies enjoy and the concept of consumer sovereignty (Section 3) lies at the core of the proposal's attempt to identify digital core platforms as market gatekeepers. Accordingly, this chapter critically investigates the divide between power imbalance and consumer sovereignty in light of the architecture designed by the DMA, with a specific focus on its effectiveness in identifying gatekeepers' power drivers (Section 4). After highlighting the main critical aspects of the pertinent rules, opportunities for fruitful developments are then identified through the reframing of some of the notions considered in the proposal, and namely the role of “lock-in” effects and “data accumulation” (Section 5). Lastly, this chapter suggests that the DMA advancements – while desirable – are bound to be fragmentary in the absence of a wider appraisal of the nature of data power imbalance dynamics in the modern digital markets (Section 6).

The study aims to identify the key advantages/enablers and disadvantages/barriers of augmented reality (AR) implementation in education through existing reviews. It also examines whether these factors differ across educational domains.

This study conducted a systematic review of reviews to synthesize evidence on the barriers and enablers influencing AR adoption in education. Searches were performed across five databases, with 27 reviews meeting the inclusion criteria. Data extraction and quality assessment were completed. Content analysis was conducted using the AR adoption factor model and consolidated framework for implementation research.

The findings reveal several enablers such as pedagogical benefits, skill development and engagement. Equally, multiple barriers were identified, including high costs, technical issues, curriculum design challenges and negative attitudes. Interestingly, duality emerged, whereby some factors served as both barriers and enablers depending on the educational context.

This review contributes a novel synthesis of the complex individual, organizational and technological factors influencing AR adoption in education across diverse domains. The identification of duality factors provides nuanced understanding of the multifaceted dynamics shaping AR integration over time. The findings can assist educators in tailoring context-sensitive AR implementation strategies to maximize benefits and minimize drawbacks. Further research should explore duality factors and their interrelationships in AR adoption.