Haptic feedback and students' learning about levers: Unraveling the effect of simulated touch

Computers and Education

Volumn 53, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 667-676

  Wiebe, Eric N ^a   Minogue, James ^a   Gail Jones, M ^a   Cowley, Jennifer ^a   Krebs, Denise ^a  

^a NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Elementary education; Human computer interface; Interactive learning environments; Multimedia hypermedia systems; Virtual reality

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE ARCHITECTURES; CROSS-MODAL; CROSS-MODAL INTERACTION; ELEMENTARY EDUCATION; EMBEDDED ASSESSMENT; EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH; EYE-TRACKING; HAPTIC FEEDBACKS; HAPTIC PERCEPTION; HAPTICS; HUMAN-COMPUTER INTERFACE; INTERACTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS; MULTIMEDIA/HYPERMEDIA SYSTEMS; SIMILAR PATTERN; VIDEO ANALYSIS; VISUAL ATTENTION; VISUAL FEEDBACK;

INTERFACES (COMPUTER); VIRTUAL REALITY; VISUAL COMMUNICATION;

EDUCATION;

EID: 67650229803     PISSN: 03601315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.04.004     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Baddeley A.D. Working memory. Science 255 (1992) 556-559
2. Bayraktar S. A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in science education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 34 (2002) 173-188
3. In: Bransford J.D., Brown A.L., and Cocking R.R. (Eds). How people learn: brain, mind, experience, and school (2000), National Research Council, Washington, DC
4. Burdea G.C. Force and touch feedback for virtual reality (1996), John Wiley, New York
5. de Jong T., and van Joolingen W.R. Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research 68 (1998) 179-201
6. Driver J., and Spence C. Attention and the crossmodal construction of space. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2 (1998) 254-262
7. Doerr H.M. Experiment, simulation and analysis: An integrated instructional approach to the concept of force. International Journal of Science Education 19 (1997) 265-282
8. Duchowski A.T. Eye tracking methodology: Theory and practice (2003), Springer Verlag, Berlin
9. Florence B., Gentaz E., Pascale C., and Sprenger-Charolles L. The visuo-haptic and haptic exploration of letters increases the kindergarten-children's understanding of the alphabetic principle. Cognitive Development 19 (2004) 433-449
10. Gottman J.M., and Roy A.K. Sequential analysis: A guide for behavioral researchers (1990), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
11. Heller M.A. The psychology of touch. In: Heller M.A., and Schiff W. (Eds). Hillside (1991), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, NJ
12. Henderson J.M. Visual attention and eye movement control during reading and picture viewing. In: Rayner K. (Ed). Eye movements and visual cognition: Scene perception and reading (1992), Springer-Verlag, New York, NY 260-283
13. Hennessy S., Wishart J., Whitelock D., Deaney R., Brawn R., Velle L., et al. Pedagogical approaches for technology-integrated science teaching. Computers and Education 48 (2007) 137-152
14. Hsu Y., and Thomas R. The impacts of a web-aided instructional simulation on science learning. International Journal of Science Education 24 (2002) 955-979
15. Jacobson, R. D., Kitchen, R., & Golledge, R. (2002). Multimodal virtual reality for presenting geographic information. In P. Fisher & D. Unwin (Eds.), Virtual reality in geography (pp. 382-401). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis, Inc.
16. Jones M.G., Andre T., Superfine R., and Taylor R. Learning at the nanoscale: The impact of students' use of remote microscopy on concepts of viruses, scale, and microscopy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 40 3 (2003) 303-322
17. Jones M.G., Minogue J., Tretter T.R., Negishi A., and Taylor R. Haptic augmentation of science instruction: Does touch matter?. Science Education 90 1 (2006) 111-123
18. Just M.A., and Carpenter P.A. Eye fixations and cognitive processes. Cognitive Psychology 8 (1976) 441-480
19. Kátai Z., Juhász K., and Adorjáni A.K. On the role of senses in education. Computers and Education 51 (2008) 1707-1717
20. Klatzky R.L., and Lederman S.J. Toward a computational model of constraint driven exploration and haptic object recognition. Perception 22 (1993) 597-621
21. Klatzky R.L., and Lederman S.J. Touch. In: Healy A.F., and Proctor R.W. (Eds). Experimental psychology (2002), Wiley, New York 147-176
22. Lalanne C., and Lorenceau J. Crossmodal integration for perception and action. Journal of Physiology - Paris 98 (2004) 265-279
23. Lederman S.J., and Klatzky R.L. Haptic identification of common objects: Effects of constraining the manual exploration process. Perception and Psychophysics 66 (2004) 618-628
24. Linn M.C. Technology and science education: Starting points, research programs, and trends. International Journal of Science Education 26 (2003) 727-758
25. Linn M.C. Using ICT to teach and learn science. In: Holliman R., and Scanlon E. (Eds). Mediating science learning through information and communications technology (2004), RoutledgeFalmer, London, UK 9-26
26. Loomis J.M., and Lederman S.J. Tactual perception. In: Boff K.R., Kaufman L., and Thomas J.P. (Eds). Handbook of perception and human performances Vol. 2 (1986), Wiley, New York
27. Minogue J., and Jones M.G. Haptics in education: Exploring an untapped sensory modality. Review of Educational Research 76 3 (2006) 317-348
28. Reiner M. Conceptual construction of fields through tactile interface. Interactive Learning Environments 7 (1999) 31-55
29. Revesz G. The psychology and art of the blind (1950), Longmans Green, London
30. Robles-De-La-Torre G. The importance of the sense of touch in virtual and real environments. IEEE Multimedia, Special issue on Haptic User Interfaces for Multimedia Systems 13 (2006) 24-30
31. Rorden C., Green K., Sasine G.M., and Baylis G.C. Enhanced tactile performance at the destination of an upcoming saccade. Current Biology 12 (2002) 1429-1434
32. Sathian K. Perceptual learning. Current Science 75 (1998) 451-456
33. SensAble Technologies (n.d.). Phantom Omni desktop haptic device. Retrieved 22.09.07.
34. Steinberg R.N. Computers in teaching science. To simulate or not to simulate?. Physics Education Research, American Journal of Physics Supplement 68 (2000) 16-24
35. Stokes D.E. Pasteur's quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation (1997), Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC
36. Sweller J. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science 12 (1988) 257-285
37. Sweller J., Merrienboer J.J.G.v., and Paas F.G.W.C. Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review 10 (1998) 251-296
38. Wickens C.D. Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 3 (2002) 159-177
39. Wiebe E.N., and Annetta L.A. Influences on visual attentional distribution in multimedia instruction. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia 17 (2008) 259-277
40. Williams R.L., Chen M., and Seaton J.M. Haptics-augmented simple-machine educational tools. Journal of Science Education and Technology 12 (2003) 1-12
41. Winn W. Current trends in educational technology research: The study of learning environments. Educational Psychology Review 14 (2002) 331-351
42. Yarbus, A. L. (1967). Eye Movements and Vision: Plenum Press.
43. Zacharia Z. Beliefs, attitudes, and intentions of science teachers regarding the educational use of computer simulations and inquiry-based experiments in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 40 (2003) 792-823