Parsing of algebraic expressions by experienced users of mathematics

European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 286-320

  Jansen, Anthony R ^a   Marriott, Kim ^a   Yelland, Greg W ^a  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; EYE TRACKING; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEARNING; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MATHEMATICS; MENTAL TASK; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; SPEECH; SYMBOLISM; TASK PERFORMANCE; VERBAL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 33847039976     PISSN: 09541446     EISSN: 14640635     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09541440600709955     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Akaike, H. (1973). Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In B. N. Petrov & F. Czaki (Eds.), Proceedings of the second international symposium on information theory (pp. 267-281). Budapest, Hungary: Akademiai Kiado.
2. Arnold, A., & Guessarian, I. (1996). Mathematics for computer science. New York: Prentice Hall.
3. Baldi, P., Chauvin, Y., Hunkapiller, T., & McClure, M. A. (1994). Hidden Markov models of biological primary sequence information. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 91, 1059 -1063.
4. Blackwell, A. F., Jansen, A. R., & Marriott, K. (2000). Restricted Focus Viewer: A tool for tracking visual attention. In M. Anderson, P. Cheng, & V. Haarslev (Eds.), Theory and application of diagrams: Lecture notes in artificial intelligence (LNAI) 1889 (pp. 162 -177). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
5. Borsley, R. (1999). Syntactic theory: A unified approach (2nd ed.). New York: Arnold.
6. Brandt, S. A., & Stark, L. W. (1997). Spontaneous eye movements during visual imagery reflect the content of the visual scene. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9(1), 27 -38.
7. Cajori, F. (1928). A history of mathematical notations (Vols. 1 and 2). Chicago: Open Court Publishing Company.
8. Durbin, R., Eddy, S. R., Krogh, A., & Mitchison, G. (1998). Biological sequence analysis: Probabilisitic models of proteins and nucleic acids. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9. Frederici, A., & Meyer, M. (2004). The brain knows the difference: Two types of grammatical violations. Brain Research, 1000, 72-77.
10. Ghosh, J. K., & Samanta, T. (2001). Model selection - an overview. Current Science, 80(9), 1135-1144.
11. Haskell, T., & MacDonald, M. (2005). Constituent structure and linear order in language production: Evidence from subject-verb agreement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(5), 891-904.
12. Henderson, J. M., McClure, K. K., Pierce, S., & Schrock, G. (1997). Object identification without foveal vision: Evidence from an artificial scotoma paradigm. Perception and Psychophysics, 59(3), 323-346.
13. Jansen, A. R. (2001). Restricted Focus Viewer (RFV) Version 2.1 User's manual and tutorial (Tech. Rep. No. 2001/87). School of Computer Science and Software Engineering, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.
14. Jansen, A. R., Blackwell, A. F., & Marriott, K. (2003). A tool for tracking visual attention: The Restricted Focus Viewer. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 35(1), 57-69.
15. Jansen, A. R., Marriott, K., & Yelland, G. W. (2003). Comprehension of algebraic expressions by experienced users of mathematics. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A(1), 3-30.
16. Johnson, N. F. (1968). The influence of grammatical units on learning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 7, 236 -240.
17. Johnson, N. F. (1970). Chunking and organization in the process of recall. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 4, pp. 171 -247). New York: Academic Press.
18. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329 -354.
19. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1987). The psychology of reading and language comprehension. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
20. Kirshner, D. (1989). The visual syntax of algebra. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(3), 274-287.
21. Mitchell, D. C., & Green, D. W. (1978). The effects of context and content on immediate processing in reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 30, 609-636.
22. Osaka, N., & Oda, K. (1994). Moving window generator for reading experiments. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 26(1), 49-53.
23. Rabiner, L. R. (1989). A tutorial on hidden Markov models and selected applications in speech recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE, 77(2), 257-285.
24. Ranney, M. (1987). The role of structural context in perception: Syntax in the recognition of algebraic expressions. Memory and Cognition, 15(1), 29-41.
25. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372-422.
26. Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1989). The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
27. Rosbergen, E., Wedel, M., & Pieters, R. (1997). Analyzing visual attention to repeated print advertising using scanpath theory (Tech. Rep. No. 97B32). Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organizations and Management), University of Groningen, The Netherlands.
28. Sakamoto, Y., Ishiguro, M., & Kitagawa, G. (1986). Akaike information criterion statistics. Tokyo, Japan: KTK Scientific Publishers.
29. Salvucci, D. D. (1999). Inferring intent in eye-movement interfaces: Tracing user actions with process models. In Human factors in computing systems: CHI '99 conference proceedings (pp. 254 -261). New York: ACM Press.
30. Salvucci, D. D., & Anderson, J. R. (1998). Tracing eye movement protocols with cognitive process models. In M. Gernsbacher & S. Derry (Eds.), Proceedings of the twentieth annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 923 -928). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
31. Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. The Annals of Statistics, 6(2), 461-464.
32. Stark, L., & Ellis, S. R. (1981). Scanpaths revisited: Cognitive models direct active looking. In D. F. Fisher, R. A. Monty, & J. W. Senders (Eds.), Eye movements: Cognition and visual perception (pp. 193 -226). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
33. Stark, L. W., Ezumi, K., Nguyen, T., Paul, R., Tharp, G., & Yamashita, H. I. (1992). Visual search in virtual environments. In B. E. Rogowitz (Ed.), Proceedings of the SPIE: Human Vision, Visual Processing, and Digital Display III, 1666 (pp. 577 -589). Bellingham, WA: SPIE.
34. Stone, M. (1974). Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological), 36(2), 111-147.
35. Ummelen, N. (1997). Procedural and declarative information in software manuals: Effects on information use, task performance and knowledge. Amsterdam: Rodopi.