## 4 Survey Findings and Results from and Through Discussion
### Interactive Radio-Themed Lessan--RO1
#### 4.2.2 Second Segment: Spatial Technical/Logistical Infrastructure  
The overall grouped responses regarding the degree of satisfaction from the second main segment of the evaluation form, related to the \"spatial technical/logistical infrastructure\", range mainly from Options 2 to 5 (i.e., \"poor\" to \"excellent\") on the five-point Likert scale (Table 10). Unquestionably, the highest overall percentage appears to be Option 4 (i.e., \"good\") in this segment and is observed in the parameter assessing the effectiveness of the \"period\" (i.e., 72 budding journalists with a percentage of 53.3%) (MEAN: 4.24 and SD: 0.660) (Table 10). Nevertheless, the parameter with the highest overall average value is the parameter of the \"educational tools and services\" (i.e., MEAN: 4.37 and SD: 0.780) (Table 10), highlighting the key role it plays in the implementation of a lesson or even a lecture [3; 23; 40; 110; 112]. Conversely, the parameter with the lowest overall average value in this segment is the parameter of the \"venue\" (MEAN: 3.68 and SD: 0.729) (Table 10). Admittedly, these are very interesting survey findings and results because they simultaneously confirm, again, corresponding survey findings and results of another related cross-cultural study of the research project MACE with Greek and Greek-Cypriot participants [110; 112]. In addition, after statistical analysis with respect to gender (Table 11) and generational cohort (Table 12), as well as for each respective experiment (Table 13), the same survey result is observed regarding the parameter of the \"educational tools and services\" (Tables 11-13), except with respect to the third experiment in which the highest average value is in the parameters of the \"time\" and \"period\" (Table 13). Furthermore, the parameter of the \"educational tools and services\" in relation to gender have the same highest average value \begin{tabular}{c} \({}^{1}\) Undergraduates students, AUTh’s SIMC 1. 2 Postgraduate students, AUTh’s SIMC 2. 3 Learers, IEK. 4 Undergraduates students, AUTh’s SIMC 3. 5 Postgraduate students, AUTh’s SIMC 4. 6 Undergraduates students, AUTh’s DCMM. [ENDFOOTNOTE] \\ **4.22** \\ \end{tabular}  \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
\end{table}
Table 9: Statistics and frequencies from the evaluation form per experiment based on “acquired knowledge organization”. (Table 11) with the highest overall average value (Table 10) (i.e., MEAN: 4.37). Moreover, it is noteworthy that during the statistical analysis, it is also observed that the parameter of the \"educational tools and services\" has the same corresponding same and highest average value with the parameter of the \"period\" in relation to fourth experiment (i.e., MEAN: 4.26) (Table 13). Regarding the lowest average value, it is noticed that during the statistical analysis, it is not the same in relation to the overall one, which highlighted the parameter of the \"venue\" (MEAN: 3.68 and SD: 0.729) (Table 10). In particular, it is observed in the statistical analysis for the genealogical cohort that the parameter of the \"venue\" in relation to Xers (i.e., MEAN: 3.75 and SD: 0.463) (Table 12) has the same lowest average value but different SD as the parameter of the \"period\" (i.e., MEAN: 3.75 and SD: 1.035) (Table 12). Similarly, the parameter of the \"venue\" in relation to Millennials (i.e., MEAN: 3.89 and SD: 0.782) (Table 12) has the same lowest average value but different SD as the parameter of the \"time\" (i.e., MEAN: 3.89 and SD: 1.054) (Table 12). Additionally, the lowest average value in the second experiment is also observed to be the parameter of the \"time\" (i.e., MEAN: 3.77 and SD: 0.973) (Table 13) instead of the overall parameter of the \"venue\" in the statistical analysis