You are here

Home » Content

Dikkat üzerine Çalışma ve Multimedya Öğrenme Ortamlarda Akla Takip Göz kullanma: Tasarım Etkileri öğrenme

Using Eye Tracking to Study on Attention and Recall in Multimedia Learning Environments: The Effects of Design in Learning

Journal Name:

  • Journal of Education and Future

Publication Year:

  • 2012

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
In this study, the effect of multimedia learning environment prepared according to the attention types (focused -split) on recall performances of learners with attention level (high - low) was investigated by using eye movement measures. The participants were 37 undergraduate students who were presented with either focused attention or split attention multimedia learning environment. After attention levels of the learners were determined by d2 Test of Attention, they were separated to two groups as high and low. On the other hand, the instructional media were designed according to focused and split attention types. Multimedia in split attention type was applied to the half of the learners in groups determined with respect to attention level and multimedia in focused attention type was applied to the other half. Eye tracking (number of fixations, hetmap, dwell time) data were collected during the study. Their recall performances were measured with recall tasks. After that, the researchers evaluated recall performances of all learners and eye movement measures. According to Two Way ANOVA test results, it seems that application of different multimedia applications in terms of attention type on the learners having different attention capacities has no significant effect on number of fixations. The multimedia applications prepared in different attention types to the learners has significant effect on number of fixations. Attention capacities of learners have no significant effect on number of fixation. According to eye tracking measurements, in the focused attention multimedia application, it seems that the learners look at the parts where they are supposed to focus on and the most videos are shown. On the other hand, it seems that the learners look at the parts that video, text and picture are shown together in split attention multimedia application. According to Independent Samples t-test results, recall performances of the learners show a significant difference according to multimedia applications on behalf of focused attention multimedia application.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-dikkat-uzerine-calisma-multimedya-ogrenme-ortamlarda-akla-takip-goz-kullanma-tasarim-etkileri-ogrenme.pdf
  • 2
81-98
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Ayres, P. & Sweller, J. (2005). The Split-Attention Principle in Multimedia, The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, ed. Mayer, R. E.
Ayres, P & Pass, F. (2007). Making instructional animations more effective: a cognitive load approach. Applied Cognitive Psychology. Special Issue:A Cognitive Load Approachto the Learning Effectiveness of Instructional Animation, 21(6), 695-700.
Bayram, S. & Avcı, B. (2010). Eğitsel Yazılımların Giriş Ekranlarının Kullanışlılığının Göz İzleme Yöntemiyle İncelenmesi. 4th International Computer and Instructional Technologies Symposium. Konya, Turkey.
Brickenkamp, R., & Zillmer, E. A. (1998). d2 Test of Attention. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe & Huber.
Betrancourt, M. (2005). The animation and interactivity principles in multimedia learning. In Mayer (ed), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, pp. 287-296. New York: Cambridge.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1992). "The split-attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction". British Journal of Educational Psychology 62: 233-246.
Cierniak, G., Scheiter, K. & Gerjets, P. (2009) Explaining the split-attention effect: Is the reduction of extraneous cognitive load accompanied by an increase in germane cognitive load? Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 25 (2009) 315-324.
Clark, R. & Mayer, R. E. (2008). E-learning and the science of instruction (2nd ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Çağlar, E. & Koruç, Z. (2006). d2 Dikkat Testinin Sporcularda Güvenirliği ve Geçerliği, Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 17 (2), 58-80.
95
Servet Bayram & Duygu Mutlu Bayraktar / Worl Journal on Educational Technology (2012) 81-98
Dutke, S. & Rinck, M. (2006) Multimedia Learning: Working Memory and the Learning of Word and Picture Diagrams. Learning and Instruction, Vol.16, 526-537.
Faraday, P. (2001). Attending to web pages. New York: ACM Press.
Fletcher, J. D. & Tobias, S. (2005). The multimedia principle. In R.E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 117-134). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Freiman, V. , Beauchamp, J. B., Blain, S., Lirette-Pitre, N. P., Fournier, H. (2011). Problem-based scenarios with laptops: an effective combination for cross-curricular learning in mathematics, science and language, World Journal of Educational Technology, 3(3), 136-152.
Ginns, P. (2006). Integrating information: A meta-analysis of the spatial contiguity and temporal contiguity effects. Learning and Instruction, 16, 511-525.
Jamet, E., Gavota, M. & Quaireau, C. (2008) Attention guiding in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 18, 135-145.
Holotescu, C. & Grosseck. G. (2011). M3-learning - Exploring mobile multimedia microblogging learning. World Journal of Educational Technology, 3(3), 168-176.
Hussein, G. (2010). The Attitudes of Undergraduate Students Towards Motivation and Technology in a Foreign Language Classroom. International Journal of Learning and Teaching. Vol: 2, 14-24.
Kemp, J. E., Morrison, G. R. & Ross, S. M. (1998). Design effective instruction. New Jersey: Prentice-
Hall Inc.
Low, R. & Sweller J. (2005). The Modality Principle in Multimedia Learning. In: Mayer, R.E. (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Malinowski, P., Fuchs, S. & Müller, M. M. (2007). Sustained division of spatial attention to multiple locations within one hemifield. Neuroscience Letters, 414, 65-70.
Mautone, P. D. & Mayer, R. E. (2007). Cognitive aids for guiding graph comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 640-652.
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press, New York.
Mayer, R. E. (2005) Principles for managing essential processing in multimedia learning: Segmenting, pretraining, and modality principles. In R.E. Mayer (Ed.), Psychology, 91 , 358-368.
Mayer, R. E. & Moreno, R. (2002) Aids to computer-based multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 12, 107-119.
Mayer, R. E., & Anderson, R. B. (1992). The instructive animation: Helping students build connections between words and pictures in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology,
84(4), 444-452.
Mayer, R. E., Bove, W., Bryman, A., Mars, R., & Tapangco, L. (1996). When less is more: Meaningful learning from visual and verbal summaries of science textbook lessons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 64-73.
96
Servet Bayram & Duygu Mutlu Bayraktar / Worl Journal on Educational Technology (2012) 81-98
Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 319-334.
Mutlu, D. (2010). Farklı Dikkat Türlerine Göre Hazırlanmış Çoklu Ortam Öğretim Tasarımlarının Farklı Kısa Süreli Bellek Kapasitesine Sahip Öğrenenlerin Geri Getirme Performanslarına Etkisi. Master's Thesis, Hacettepe University, Ankara.
Nebel, K., Wiese, H., Stude, P., de Greiff, A., Diener, H. C. & Keidel, M. (2005) On the neural basis of focused and divided attention Cognitive Brain Research, 25 (3) (2005), pp. 760-766
Norhayati, A. M. & Siew, P. H. (2004). Malaysian Perspective: Designing Interactive Multimedia Learning for Moral Values Education. Educational Technology & Society, 7 (4), 143-152.
Oosterlaan, J., & Sergeant, J.A. (1996). Inhibition in ADHD, aggressive and anxious children: A biologically based model of child psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,
24, 19-36.
Ozcelik, E., Arslan-Ari, I., Cagiltay, K. (2010). Why Does Signaling Enhance Multimedia Learning? Evidence from Eye Movements. Computer in Human Behavior, 26, 110-117.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.
Russell, M. C. (2005). Hotspots and Hyperlinks: Using Eye-tracking to Supplement Usability Testing. Usability News, 7.
Schmidt-Weigand, F., Kohnert, A., & Glowalla, U. (2010). A closer look at split visual attention in system- and self-paced instruction in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20(2),
100-110.
Sanchez, E. & Garcia-Rodicio, H. (2008). The use of modality in the design of verbal aids in computer-based learning environments. Interacting with Computers, 20(6), 545-561.
Seufert, T. (2003). Supporting coherence formation in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13, 227-237.
Smeureanu, I. Isaila, N. (2011). New information technologies for an innovative education. World Journal of Educational Technology, 3(3), 177-189.
Spreen, O. & Strauss, E. (1998). A Compendium of neuropsychological tests: Administration, norms, and commentary. (2nd ed.). NY. Oxford University Press. 6-10.
Sweller, J. (2005). Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32, 9--31.
Sweller, J. (2004). Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32, 9-31.
97
Servet Bayram & Duygu Mutlu Bayraktar / Worl Journal on Educational Technology (2012) 81-98
Tavukcu, T., Gezer, F. & Ozdamli, F. (2009). Determination of the Views and Success Levels Towards Spreadsheets of University Students Studying With Blended Learning and E-Learning. International Journal of Learning and Teaching. Vol: 1, 10-15.
Toker, M.Z. (1988). Standardization of the Visual Attention Test d2 on a Turkish Sample. Master's Thesis. İstanbul: Boğaziçi University.
Toker, M.Z. (1990). D2
dikka
t testinin uyarlama çalışması. V. Ulusal Psikoloji Kongresi. İzmir: Psikoloji-Seminer Dergisi Özel Sayısı, 8, 627-635.
Underwood, G., Foulsham, T., Van Loon, E., Humphreys, L., & Bloyce, J. (2006). Eye movements during scene inspection: A test of the saliency map hypothesis. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 18, 321-343.
Van
Merrienboer
, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17, 147-177.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com