Beyond ball-and-stick: Students' processing of novel STEM visualizations

Learning and Instruction

Volumn 26, Issue , 2013, Pages 12-21

  Hinze, Scott R ^a   Rapp, David N ^a   Williamson, Vickie M ^b   Shultz, Mary Jane ^c   Deslongchamps, Ghislain ^d   Williamson, Kenneth C ^b  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c TUFTS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK   (Canada)

Author keywords

Chemistry learning; Eye tracking; Prior knowledge; Visualization

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875105828     PISSN: 09594752     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.12.002     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Ainsworth S. DeFT: a conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction 2006, 16:183-198. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.03.001.
2. Bodner G.M., Guay R.B. The purdue visualization of rotations test. The Chemical Educator 1997, 2:1-18. 10.1333/s00897970138a.
3. Bruce B.C., Levin J.A. Educational technology: media for inquiry, communication, construction, and expression. Journal of Educational Computing Research 1997, 17:79-102. 10.2190/7HPQ-4F3X-8M8Y-TVCA.
4. Bunce D.M., Hutchinson K.D. The use of the GALT (group assessment of logical thinking) as a prediction of academic success in college chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education 1993, 70:183-187. 10.1021/ed070p183.
5. Cacioppo J.T., Petty R.E., Kao C.F. The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment 1984, 48:306-307. 10.1207/s15327752jpa4803_13.
6. Canham M., Hegarty M. Effects of knowledge and display design on comprehension of complex graphics. Learning and Instruction 2010, 20:155-166. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.014.
7. Carpenter P.A., Shah P. A model of the perceptual and conceptual processes in graph comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 1998, 4:75-100. 10.1037/1076-898X.4.2.75.
8. Chase W.G., Simon H.A. Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology 1973, 4:55-82. 10.1016/0010-0285(73)90004-2.
9. Chi M.T.H., Feltovich P., Glaser R. Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science 1981, 5:121-152. 10.1207/s15516709cog0502_2.
10. Cohen C.A., Hegarty M. Individual differences in use of external visualizations to perform an internal visualization task. Applied Cognitive Psychology 2007, 21:701-711. 10.1002/acp.1344.
11. Cook M.P. Visual representations in science education: the influence of prior knowledge and cognitive load theory on instructional design principles. Learning 2006, 60:1073-1091. 10.1002/sce.20164.
12. Ekstrom R.B., French J.W., Harman H.H., Dermen D. Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Educational testing service 1976, Princeton, New Jersey.
13. Ericsson K., Simon H.A. Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review 1980, 87:215-251. 10.1037/0033-295X.87.3.215.
14. Gegenfurtner A., Lehtinen E., Säljö R. Expertise differences in the comprehension of visualizations: a meta-analysis of eye-tracking research in professional domains. Educational Psychology Review 2011, 23:523-552. 10.1007/s10648-011-9174-7.
15. Gilbert J.K. Visualization in science education 2005, Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
16. Gilbert J.K., Reiner M., Nakhleh M. Visualization: Theory and practice in science education 2008, Springer, United Kingdom.
17. Guay R., McDaniels R.E. The visualization of viewpoints 1976, The Purdue Research Foundation, West Lafayette, IN.
18. Haider H., Frensch P.A. Eye movement during skill acquisition: more evidence for the information reduction hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1999, 25:172-190. 10.1037/0278-7393.25.1.172.
19. Hannus M., Hyona J. Utilization of illustrations during learning of science textbook passages among low and high ability children. Contemporary Educational Psychology 1999, 24:95-123. 10.1006/ceps.1998.0987.
20. Hegarty M. Components of spatial intelligence. The psychology of learning and motivation 2010, Vol. 52:265-297. Academic Press, San Diego.
21. Hegarty M., Canham M.S., Fabrikant S.I. Thinking about the weather: how display salience and knowledge affect performance in a graphic inference task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2010, 36:37-53. 10.1037/a0017683.
22. Hinze, S. R., Willamson, V. M., Shultz, M. J., Willamson, K. C., Deslongchamps, G., & Rapp, D. N. When do spatial abilities support student comprehension of STEM visualizations? Cognitive Processes, in press.
23. Huk T. Who benefits from learning with 3D models? The case of spatial ability. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2006, 22:392-404. 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00180.x.
24. Jarodzka H., Scheiter K., Gerjets P., van Gog T. In the eyes of the beholder: how experts and novices interpret dynamic stimuli. Learning and Instruction 2010, 20:146-154. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.019.
25. Johnstone A.H. The development of chemistry teaching: a changing response to changing demand. Journal of Chemical Education 1993, 70:701-705. 10.1021/ed070p701.
26. Just M.A., Carpenter P.A. Eye fixations and cognitive processes. Cognitive Psychology 1976, 8:441-480. 10.1016/0010-0285(76)90015-3.
27. Kalyuga S., Ayres P., Chandler P., Sweller J. The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist 2003, 38:23-31. 10.1207/S15326985EP3801_4.
28. Kendeou P., van den Broek The effects of readers' misconceptions on comprehension of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology 2005, 97:235-245. 10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.235.
29. Komogortsev O.V., Gobert D.V., Jayarathna S., Koh D., Gowda S. Standardization of automated analyses of oculomotor fixation and saccadic behaviors. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 2010, 57:2635-2645.
30. Kozma R.B., Chin E., Russell J., Marx N. The role of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences 2000, 9:105-143. 10.1207/s15327809jls0902_1.
31. Kozma R.B., Russell J. Multimedia and understanding: expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 1997, 34:949-968. AID-TEA7>3.0.CO;2-U. 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199711)34:9<949.
32. Kozma R.B., Russell J. Students becoming chemists: developing representational competence. Visualization in science education 2005, 121-146. Springer, United Kingdom. J.K. Gilbert (Ed.).
33. Lowe R.K. Selectivity in diagrams: reading beyond the lines. Educational Psychology 1994, 14:467-491. 10.1080/0144341940140408.
34. Lowe R.K. Extracting information from animation during complex visual learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education 1999, 14:225-244. 10.1007/BF03172967.
35. Mayer R.E. Multimedia learning 2001, Cambridge University Press, New York.
36. Mayer R.E., Sims V.K. For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology 1994, 86:389-401. 10.1037/0022-0663.86.3.389.
37. Newcombe, N. S., & Shipley, T. F. Thinking about spatial thinking: new typology, new assessments. In J. S. Gero (ed.), Studying visual and spatial reasoning for design creativity. United Kingdom: Springer, in press.
38. Rapp D.N., Kurby C.A. The 'ins' and 'outs' of learning: internal representations and external visualizations. Visualization: Theory and practice in science education 2008, 29-52. Springer, United Kingdom. J.K. Gilbert, M. Reiner, M. Nakhleh (Eds.).
39. Rapp D.N., van den Broek P. Dynamic text comprehension: an integrative view of reading. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2005, 14:276-279. 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00380.x.
40. Rapp D.N., van den Broek P., McMaster K.L., Kendeou P., Espin C.A. Higher-order comprehension processes in struggling readers: a perspective for research and intervention. Scientific Studies of Reading 2007, 11:289-312. 10.1080/10888430701530417.
41. Sanger M.J., Badger S.M. Using computer-based visualization strategies to improve students' understanding of molecular polarity and miscibility. Journal of Chemical Education 2001, 78:1412-1416. 10.1021/ed078p1412.
42. Schnotz W. Sign systems, technologies and the acquisition of knowledge. Multimedia learning: Cognitive and instructional issues 2001, 9-30. Pergamon, Amsterdam. J.-F. Rouet, J.J. Levonen, A. Biardeau (Eds.).
43. Schwonke R., Berthold K., Renkl A. How external representations are used and how they can be made more useful. Applied Cognitive Psychology 2009, 23:1227-1243. 10.1002/acp.1526.
44. Shusterman G.P., Shusterman A.J. Teaching chemistry with electron density models. Journal of Chemical Education 1997, 74:771-776. 10.1021/ed074p771.
45. Stieff M. Mental rotation and diagrammatic reasoning in science. Learning and Instruction 2007, 17:219-234. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.01.012.
46. Stieff M., Hegarty M., Deslongchamps G. Identifying representational competence with multi-representational displays. Cognition & Instruction 2011, 29:123-145. 10.1080/07370008.2010.507318.
47. Tobin K., Capie W. Development and validation of a group test of logical thinking. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1981, 41:413-424. 10.1177/001316448104100220.
48. Uttal D.H., Cohen C.A. Spatial thinking and STEM education: when, why, and how?. Psychology of Learning and Motivation 2012, 57:147-181.
49. Van Gog T., Paas F., Van Merrienboer J.J.G. Uncovering expertise-related differences in troubleshooting performance: combining eye movement and concurrent verbal protocol data. Applied Cognitive Psychology 2005, 19:205-221. 10.1002/acp.1112.
50. Vandenberg S.G., Kuse A.R. Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Perceptual and Motor Skills 1978, 47:599-601. 10.2466/pms.1978.47.2.599.
51. Williamson V.M., Jose T.J. Using visualization techniques in chemistry teaching. Chemists guide to effective teaching 2009, Vol. 2. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.
52. Wu H., Shah P. Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science Education 2004, 88:465-492. 10.1002/sce.10126.