Effects of Different Multimedia Presentations on Viewers' Information-Processing Activities Measured by Eye-Tracking Technology

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 276-286

  Chuang, Hsueh Hua ^a   Liu, Han Chin ^b  

^a NATIONAL SUN YAT SEN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b NATIONAL CHIAYI UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Cognitive load; Eye tracking; Information processing; Multimedia learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 84858437561     PISSN: 10590145     EISSN: 15731839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10956-011-9316-1     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Ainsworth S (2006) DeFT: a conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learn Instr 16(3): 183-198.
2. Bera S, Liu M (2006) Cognitive tools, individual differences, and group processing as mediating factors in a hypermedia environment. Comput Human Behav 22(2): 295-319.
3. Clark RE (1994) Media will never influence learning. ETR& D-Educational Technology Research and Development 42(2): 21-29.
4. Dionisio DP, Granholm E, Hillix WA, Perrine WF (2001) Differentiation of deception using pupillary responses as an index of cognitive processing. Psychophysiology 38(2): 205-211.
5. Hegarty M, Just MA (1993) Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. J Mem Lang 32: 717-742.
6. Huber S, Krist H (2004) When is the ball going to hit the ground? Duration estimates, eye movements, and mental imagery of object motion. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 30(3): 431.
7. Jacob RJK, Karn KS (2003) Eye-tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research: ready to deliver the promises (Section commentary). In: Hyona JR, Radach HD (eds), The mind's eyes: cognitive and applied aspects of eye movements. Oxford: Elsevier Science (in press).
8. Just MA, Carpenter PA (1976) Eye fixations and cognitive processes. Cognit Psychol 8: 441-480.
9. Just MA, Carpenter PA (1993) The intensity dimension of thought: pupillometric indices of sentence processing. Can J Exp Psychol 47(2): 310-339.
10. Mayer RE (2001) Multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press, New York.
11. Mayer RE, Moreno R (2002) Aids to computer-based multimedia learning. Learn Instr 12(1): 107.
12. Mayer RE, Hegarty M, Mayer S, Campbell J (2005) When static media promote active learning: annotated illustrations versus narrated animations in multimedia instruction. J Exp Psychol Appl 11(4): 256-265.
13. Moreno R (2004) Decreasing cognitive load for novice students: effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery-based multimedia. Instr Sci 32(1-2): 99-113.
14. Moreno R (2006) Does the modality principle hold for different media? A test of the method-affects-learning hypothesis. JCAL 22(3): 149-158.
15. Paas FGWC, van Merrienboer JJG (1994) Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem-solving skills: a cognitive-load approach. J Edu Psychol 86(1): 122.
16. Rozenblit L, Spivey M, Wojslawowicz J (1998) Mechanical reasoning about gear-and-belt diagrams: do eye-movements predict performance? Paper presented at the mind III: the annual conference of the cognitive science society of Ireland.
17. Schnotz W, Lowe R (2003) External and internal representations in multimedia learning-introduction. Learn Instr 13(2): 117-123.
18. Schnotz W, Rasch T (2005) Enabling, facilitating, and inhibiting effects of animations in multimedia learning: why reduction of cognitive load can have negative results on learning. Educ Technol Res Dev 53(3): 47.
19. Stolk H, Boon K, Smulders M (1993) Visual information processing in a study task using text and pictures. In: d'Ydewalle G, van Rensbergen J (eds) Perception and cognition. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, pp 285-296.
20. Sweller J (2006) Discussion of 'emerging topics in cognitive load research: using learner and information characteristics in the design of powerful learning environments'. Appl Cognit Psychol 20(3): 353-357.
21. Sweller J, van Merrienboer JJG, Paas F (1998) Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educ Psychol Rev 10(3): 251-296.
22. Tabbers HK, Martens RL, van Merrienboer JJG (2004) Multimedia instructions and cognitive load theory: effects of modality and cueing. Br J Educ Psychol 74(1): 71-81.
23. Underwood G, Radach R (1998) Eye guidance and visual information processing: reading, visual search, picture perception and driving. In: Underwood G (ed) Eye guidance in reading and scene perception. Elsevier Science, Oxford, pp 1-28.
24. van Gerven PWM, Paas F, Tabbers HK (2006) Cognitive aging and computer-based instructional design: where do we go from here? Educ Psychol Rev 18(2): 141-157.