Here, you can find articles on studies that utilized (a version of) SAGA, along with selected publications from the literature that could give you a better picture of the audience response systems landscape. Audience response systems (aka personal response systems, student response systems, clickers, etc.) have been used in a myriad of different topics, supporting a range of pedagogical goals, from domain knowledge acquisition and critical thinking, to engagement and metacognition. As such, the literature abounds with articles on audience response systems. The list of selected publications aims at offering a starting point in the field.
• addSAGA Publications
  Papadopoulos, P. M., Natsis, A., Obwegeser, O., & Weinberger, A. (2018). Enriching Feedback in Audience Response Systems: Analysis and Implications of Objective and Subjective Metrics on Students’ Performance and Attitudes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(2), 305-316.
  Published version: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12332
  Pre-print:
  
  Papadopoulos, P. M., Natsis, A., & Obwegeser, N. (2018). Response Justifications as Feedback in Clicker Activities: A Case Study on Student Performance and Calibration. In T. Bastiaens, J. Van Braak, M. Brown, L. Cantoni, M. Castro, R. Christensen, G. Davidson-Shivers, K. DePryck, M. Ebner, M. Fominykh, C. Fulford, S. Hatzipanagos, G. Knezek, K. Kreijns, G. Marks, E. Sointu, E. Korsgaard Sorensen, J. Viteli, J. Voogt, P. Weber, E. Weippl & O. Zawacki-Richter (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia + Innovate Learning 2018, 408-413. Waynesville, NC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  Published version: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/184223/
  Pre-print:
  
  Papadopoulos P. M., Natsis A., & Obwegeser N. (2018) Using the Students’ Levels of Preparation and Confidence as Feedback Information in Quiz-Based Learning Activities. In: Escudeiro P., Costagliola G., Zvacek S., Uhomoibhi J., & McLaren B. (eds) Computers Supported Education. CSEDU 2017. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 865, 97-115, Springer, Cham.
  Published version:https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-94640-5_5
  Pre-print:
  
  Papadopoulos, P. M., Natsis, A. & Obwegeser, N. (2017). In Search of Helpful Group Awareness Metrics in Closed-Type Formative Assessment Tools. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning – CSCL 2017, (pp. 791-792), Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  Published version: https://cscl17.files.wordpress.com/2018/02/finalvol2cscl2017.pdf
  Pre-print:
  
  Papadopoulos, P. M., Natsis, A. & Obwegeser, N. (2017). Improving the Quiz : Student Preparation and Confidence as Feedback Metrics. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education – CSEDU 2017, (pp. 59-69), Porto, Portugal.
  Published version: https://www.scitepress.org/Papers/2017/62837/62837.pdf
  Pre-print:
• addSelected Publications
  Anderson, L. S., Healy, A. F., Kole, J. A., & Bourne, L. E., Jr. (2013). The clicker technique: cultivating efficient teaching and successful learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(2), 222-234.
  
  Barr, M. L. (2017). Encouraging college student active engagement in learning: Student response methods and anonymity. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(6), 621-632.
  
  Blasco-Arcas, L., Buil, I., Hernández-Ortega, B., & Sese, F. S. (2013). Using clickers in class. The role of interactivity, active collaborative learning and engagement in learning performance. Computers & Education, 62, 102-110.
  
  Bojinova, E., & Oigara, J. (2013). Teaching and learning with clickers in higher education. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 25(2), 154-165.
  
  Brady, M., Seli, H., & Rosenthal, J. (2013). “Clickers” and metacognition: a quasi-experimental comparative study about metacognitive self-regulation and use of electronic feedback devices. Computers & Education, 65, 56-63.
  
  Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: current research and best-practice tips. Life Sciences Education, 6(1), 9-20. Chen, J. C., Whittinghill, D. C., & Kadlowec, J. A. (2010). Classes that click: Fast, rich feedback to enhance students’ learning and satisfaction. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(2), 158-169.
  
  Chien, Y.-T., Chang, Y.-H., & Chang, C.-Y. (2016). Do we click in the right way? A meta-analytic review of clicker-integrated instruction. Educational Research Review, 17, 1-18.
  
  Crouch, C. H., Watkins, J., Fagen, A. P., & Mazur, E. (2007). Peer Instruction: engaging students one-on-one, all at once. Reviews in Physics Education Research, 1(1), 40-95.
  
  Crouch, C., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69, 970-977.
  
  Fies, C., & Marshall, J. (2006). Classroom response systems: a review of the literature. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 100-109.
  
  Fortner-Wood, C., Armistead, L., Marchand, A., & Morris, F. B. (2013). The effects of student response systems on student learning and attitudes in undergraduate psychology courses. Teaching of Psychology, 40(1), 26-30.
  
  Griffiths, L., & Higham, P. A. (2018). Beyond hypercorrection: remembering corrective feedback for low-confidence errors. Memory, 26(2), 201-218. Han, J. H. (2014). Closing the missing links and opening the relationships among the factors: a literature review on the use of clicker technology using the 3P model. Educational Technology and Society, 17(4), 150-168.
  
  Hoekstra, A. & Mollborn, S. (2012). How clicker use facilitates existing pedagogical practices in higher education: data from interdisciplinary research on student response systems. Learning, Media and Technology, 37(3), 303-320.
  
  Hunsu, N. J., Adesope, O., & Bayly, D. J. (2016). A meta-analysis of the effects of audience response systems (clicker-based technologies) on cognition and affect. Computers & Education, 94, 102-119.
  
  Ioannou, A., & Artino, A. R. (2010). Using a classroom response system to support active learning in an educational psychology course: A case study. International Journal of Instructional Media, 37, 315-325.
  
  Kay, R. H., & LeSage, A. (2009). Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: a review of the literature. Computer & Education, 53(3), 819-827.
  
  Koenig, K. (2010). Building acceptance for pedagogical reform through wide-scale implementation of clickers. Journal of College Science Teaching, 39(3), 46- 50.
  
  MacGeorge, E., Homan, E., Dunning, S., Elmore, D., Bodie, D., Evans, G., et al. (2008). Student evaluation of audience response technology in large lecture classes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(2), 125-145.
  
  Marshall, L., Valdosta, G., & Varnon, A. (2012). An empirical investigation of clicker technology in financial accounting principles. Learning in Higher Education, 8(1), 7-17.
  
  Mayer, R. E., Stull, A., DeLeeuw, K., Almeroth, K., Bimber, B., Chun, D., et al. (2009). Clickers in college classrooms: fostering learning with questioning methods in large lecture classes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 51-57.
  
  Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user's manual series in educational innovation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  
  Mazur, E. (2009). Farewell, lecture? Science, 323, 50-51.
  
  McDonough, K., & Foote, J. (2015). The impact of individual and shared clicker use on students' collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 86, 236-249.
  
  Michinov, N., Morice, J., & Ferrières, V. (2015). A step further in Peer Instruction: Using the Stepladder technique to improve learning, Computers & Education, 91, 1-13.
  
  Mollborn, S., & Hoekstra, A. (2010). “A meeting of minds”: Using clickers for critical thinking and discussion in large sociology classes. Teaching Sociology, 38, 18-27.
  
  Perez, K.E., Strauss, E.A., Downey, N., Galbraith, A., Jeanne, R., Cooper, S., & Madison, W. (2010). Does displaying the class results affect student discussion during peer instruction? CBE Life Science Education, 9, 133–140.
  
  Poirier, C. R., & Feldman, R. S. (2007). Promoting active learning using individual response technology in large introductory psychology classes. Teaching of Psychology, 34(3), 194-196.
  
  Shapiro, A. M. (2009). An empirical study of personal response technology for improving attendance and learning in a large class. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(1), 13-26.
  
  Shapiro, A. M., & Gordon, L. (2013). Classroom clickers offer more than repetition: Converging evidence for the testing effect and confirmatory feedback in clicker-assisted learning. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, 2(1), 15-30.
  
  Shapiro, A. M., & Gordon, L. T. (2012). A controlled study of clicker-assisted memory enhancement in college classrooms. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 635-643.
  
  Shapiro, A. M., Sims-Knight, J., O'Rielly, G. V., Capaldo, P., Pedlow, T., Gordon, L., & Monteiro, K. (2017). Clickers can promote fact retention but impede conceptual understanding: The effect of the interaction between clicker use and pedagogy on learning. Computers & Education, 111, 44-59.
  
  Siau, K., Sheng, H., & Nah, F. F. (2006). Use of a classroom response system to enhance classroom interactivity. IEEE Transactions on Education, 49, 398-403.
  
  Stowell, J., Oldham, T., & Bennett, D. (2010). Using student response systems (“clickers”) to combat conformity and shyness. Teaching of Psychology, 37(2), 135-140.
  
  Strasser, N. (2010). Who wants to pass math? Using clickers in calculus. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 7(3), 49-52.
  
  Sutherlin, A. L., Sutherlin, G. R., & Akpanudo, U. (2013). The effect of clickers in university science courses. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(5), 651-666.
  
  Vickrey, T, Rosploch, K., Rahmanian, R., Pilarz, M., & Stains, M. (2015) Research-based implementation of Peer Instruction: A literature review, CBE Life Sciences Education, 14(1).