Understanding the use of domain and task knowledge in the interpretation of graphical displays

European Journal of Psychology of Education

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 491-508

  Pillay, Hitendra ^a,b   Boles, Wageeh W ^a,b   McCrindle, Andrea R ^a,b  

^a School of Learning and Professional Studies   (Australia)

^b QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035650231     PISSN: 02562928     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF03173194     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Anzai, Y. (1987). Cognitive control of real-time Event-Driven Systems. Cognitive Science, 8, 221-254.
2. Anzai, Y. (1991). Learning and use of representations for physics expertise. In K.A. Ericsson & J. Smith (Eds.), Towards a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits (pp. 64-69). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. Anzai, Y., & Patel, V.L (1992). How one learns graph reading skills for solving biochemistry problems. In D.A. Evans & V.L. Patel (Eds.), Advanced models of cognition for medical training and practice (pp. 283-304). New York: Springer-Verlag.
4. Blois, M.S. (1990). Medicine and the nature of vertical reasoning. New England Journal of Medicine, 318, 847-851.
5. Chi, M., Bassok, M., Lewis, M.W., Reiman, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self explanation: How students study and use worked example in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182.
6. Chi, M., Glaser, R., & Rees, P. (1982) Expertise in problem solvi ig. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (vol. 1, pp. 1-75). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Cooper, L. (1988). The role of spatial representations in complex problem solving. In S. Schiffer & S. Steele (Eds.), Cognition and representations (pp. 53-86). Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.
8. Forbus, K.D. (1995). Qualitative spatial reasoning framework aid frontiers. In J. Glassgow, N.H. Narayanan, & B. Chandrasekaran (Eds.), Diagrammatic reasoning: Cognitive and computational perspectives. California: MIT Press.
9. Hall. E.P., Gott, S.P., & Pokorny, R.A. (1995). A procedural guide to cognitive task analysis: The PARI methodology. AL/HR-tr-1995-0108, US Air Force Material Command, Brooks Air Force Base, Texas.
10. Kaempf, G.L., & Klein, G. (1994). Aeronautical decision making: The next generation. In N. Johnston, N. McDonald, & R. Fuller (Eds.), Aviation Psychology in Action. UK: Avebury Technical Press.
11. Kaufman, D., & Patel, V.L. (1991). Problem solving in the clinical interview: A cognitive analysis of the performance of physicians, residents and students. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 13, 6-14.
12. Kaufman, D., Patel, V.L., & Magder, S. (1996). The explanation role in spontaneously generated analogies in reasoning about physiological concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 18, 369-386.
13. Koedinger, K., & Anderson, J. (1995). Abstract planning and perceptual chunks: Elements of expertise in geometry. In J. Glassgow, N.H. Narayanan, & B. Chandrasekaran (Eds.), Diagrammatic reasoning: Cognitive and computational perspectives (pp. 527-626). California: MIT Press.
14. Mayer, R.E., & Sims, V.K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 389-401.
15. Patel, V.L., & Groen, G.J. (1986). Knowledge based solution strategies in medical reasoning. Cognitive Science, 10, 91-116.
16. Patel, V.L., & Groen, G.J. (1991). Developmental accounts of the transition from student to physician: Some general problems and suggestions, Medical Education, 25, 527-535.
17. Pillay, H. (1994). Cognitive load and mental rotation: Structuring orthographic drawing worked examples to enhance learning. Instructional Science, 22, 91-113.
18. Pillay, H. (1997). Cognitive load and assembly tasks: Effect of instructional format on learning. Educational Psychology, 17, 285-299.
19. Pillay, H. (1998). Cognitive skills required in contemporary workplaces. Studies in Continuing Education, 20, 71-81.
20. Richards, T., & Richards, L. (1991). The transformation of qualitative method: Computational paradigms and research processes. In N.G. Fielding & R.M. Lee (Eds.), Using computers in qualitative research. London: Sage.
21. Schaffner, K.F. (1986). Exemplar reasoning about biological models and diseases: A relation between the philosophy of medicine and the philosophy of science. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 11, 63-102
22. Schunn, C.D., & Anderson, J.R. (1999). The generality/specificity of expertise in scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 23, 337-370.
23. Shraagen, J.M. (1993). How experts solve a novel problem in experimental design. Cognitive Science, 17, 285-309.
24. Simon, H.A. (1978). Information processing theory of human problem solving. In W.K. Estes (Eds.), Handbook of learning and cognitive processes (vol. 5, pp. 271-295). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. Simon, H.A. (1992). What is an "explanation" of behaviour? Psychological Science, 3, 150-161.
26. Treisman, A. (1988). Features and objects: The Fourteenth Bartlett Memorial Lecture. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 40A, 201-237.
27. VanLehn, K. (1991). Rule acquisition events in the discovery of problem-solving strategies. Cognitive Science, 15, 1-47.
28. Voss, J.F., Tyler, S.W., & Yengo, L.A. (1983). Individual differences in the solving of social science problems. In R.F. Dillon & R.R. Schmeck (Eds.), Individual differences in cognition (vol. 1, pp. 205-232). New York: Academic.
29. Wang, Lee, & Zeevat (1995). Reasoning with diagrammatic representations. In J. Glassgow, N.H. Narayanan, & B. Chandrasekaran (Eds.), Diagrammatic reasoning: Cognitive and computational perspectives (pp. 339-396). California: MIT Press.
30. Winn, W. (1993). An account of how readers search for information in diagrams. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 162-185.