COGNITIVE LOAD FOR CONFIGURATION COMPREHENSION IN COMPUTER-SUPPORTED GEOMETRY PROBLEM SOLVING: AN EYE MOVEMENT PERSPECTIVE

The present study investigated (a) whether the perceived cognitive load was different when geometry problems with various levels of configuration comprehension were solved and (b) whether eye movements in comprehending geometry problems showed sources of cognitive loads. In the first investigation, three characteristics of geometry configurations involving the number of informational elements, the number of element interactivities and the level of mental operations were assumed to account for the increasing difficulty. A sample of 311 9th grade students solved five geometry problems that required knowledge of similar triangles in a computer-supported environment. In the second experiment, 63 participants solved the same problems and eye movements were recorded. The results indicated that (1) the five problems differed in pass rate and in self-reported cognitive load; (2) because the successful solvers were very swift in pattern recognition and visual integration, their fixation did not clearly show valuable information; (3) more attention and more time (shown by the heat maps, dwell time and fixation counts) were given to read the more difficult configurations than to the intermediate or easier configurations; and (4) in addition to number of elements and element interactivities, the level of mental operations accounts for the major cognitive load sources of configuration comprehension. The results derived some implications for design principles of geometry diagrams in secondary school mathematics textbooks.

[1]  Wolfgang Schnotz,et al.  Effects of animation's speed of presentation on perceptual processing and learning , 2010 .

[2]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Unique Contributions of Eye-Tracking Research to the Study of Learning with Graphics , 2010 .

[3]  O. Kempthorne,et al.  Design and Analysis of Experiments , 2006, Handbook of statistics.

[4]  Michael J. Spivey,et al.  Eye Movements and Problem Solving , 2003, Psychological science.

[5]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Load Measurement as a Means to Advance Cognitive Load Theory , 2003 .

[6]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[7]  John Sweller,et al.  Demands Imposed on Primary-School Students by Geometric Models , 1994 .

[8]  F. Paas Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. , 1992 .

[9]  Raj M Ratwani,et al.  Thinking graphically: Connecting vision and cognition during graph comprehension. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[10]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  Effects of different ratios of worked solution steps and problem solving opportunities on cognitive load and learning outcomes , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[11]  John Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[12]  P. Chandler,et al.  Evidence for Cognitive Load Theory , 1991 .

[13]  M. Just,et al.  Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. , 1993 .

[14]  A. Weale The Essential Guide to Doing Research , 2005 .

[15]  M. Hegarty,et al.  Comprehension of arithmetic word problems: A comparison of successful and unsuccessful problem solvers. , 1995 .

[16]  Roland Brünken,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory: Frontmatter , 2010 .

[17]  Colette Laborde,et al.  The Hidden Role of Diagrams in Students’ Construction of Meaning in Geometry , 2005 .

[18]  K. Rayner Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. , 1998, Psychological bulletin.

[19]  M. Hegarty,et al.  Comprehension of Arithmetic Word Problems: Evidence from Students' Eye Fixations. , 1992 .

[20]  T. Gog,et al.  Optimising worked example instruction: Different ways to increase germane cognitive load. , 2006 .

[21]  Paul D. Allison,et al.  Logistic Regression Using the SAS System : Theory and Application , 1999 .

[22]  N. Leech,et al.  SPSS for Intermediate Statistics : Use and Interpretation, Second Edition , 2004 .

[23]  Hongquan Xu Design and Analysis of Experiments, Volume 2: Advanced Experimental Design , 2006, Technometrics.

[24]  Erol Özçelik,et al.  Why does signaling enhance multimedia learning? Evidence from eye movements , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[25]  P. Chandler,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction , 1991 .

[26]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design: Recent Developments , 2003 .

[27]  Kristian Lukander,et al.  Estimating Brain Load from the EEG , 2009, TheScientificWorldJournal.

[28]  Richard K. Lowe,et al.  An Eye Tracking Comparison of External Pointing Cues and Internal Continuous Cues in Learning with Complex Animations , 2010 .

[29]  Priti Shah,et al.  A Model of the Perceptual and Conceptual Processes in Graph Comprehension , 1998 .

[30]  M. Just,et al.  Cognitive coordinate systems: accounts of mental rotation and individual differences in spatial ability. , 1985, Psychological review.

[31]  F. Paas,et al.  Variability of Worked Examples and Transfer of Geometrical Problem-Solving Skills: A Cognitive-Load Approach , 1994 .

[32]  J. Sweller,et al.  Development of expertise in mathematical problem solving. , 1983 .

[33]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[34]  Roland Brünken,et al.  Does cognitive load moderate the seductive details effect? A multimedia study , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[35]  P. Suppes,et al.  A model of eye movements and visual working memory during problem solving in geometry , 2001, Vision Research.

[36]  Douglas J. Gillan Visual Arithmetic, Computational Graphics, and the Spatial Metaphor , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[37]  Jukka Hyönä,et al.  The Use of Eye Movements in the Study of Multimedia Learning. , 2010 .

[38]  Nancy L. Leech,et al.  IBM SPSS for Intermediate Statistics: Use and Interpretation, Fifth Edition , 2014 .