Analyzing learner-hypermedia interaction: An overview of online methods

In this paper we examine the potential of online methods for hypermedia research. Online methods allow the recording, analysis and interpretation of learner-hypermedia interaction. Online methods have been extensively used in cognitive research, and especially in the area of discourse processing. In the first part of the paper we examine several online methods used in discourse comprehension research. We discuss the benefits and limits of each method, and its applicability to hypermedia research. In the second part we focus on the analysis of learner-hypermedia interaction protocols. We introduce several possible approaches, as a function of the observation grain, or the precision of the events that the researcher needs to examine. We present qualitative and quantitative examples at the coarse, intermediate and fine grain and we discuss the research context in which each approach seems most appropriate. We conclude that the empirical study of learner-hypermedia interaction should comply with the general standards of empirical research, e.g., explicit hypotheses and controlled study conditions.

[1]  Gary Marchionini,et al.  Evaluating hypermedia-based learning , 1990 .

[2]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  13 – Processing Sentence Structure1 , 1983 .

[3]  Hsinchun Chen,et al.  Browsing in hypertext: a cognitive study , 1992, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[4]  Patricia Wright,et al.  Menus and memory load: navigation strategies in interactive search tasks , 1994, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[5]  Peter A. White,et al.  Limitations on verbal reports of internal events: A refutation of Nisbett and Wilson and of Bem. , 1980 .

[6]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Time course of priming for associate and inference words in a discourse context , 1988, Memory & cognition.

[7]  Charles R. Fletcher.  Short-term memory processes in text comprehension , 1981 .

[8]  R. Reynolds,et al.  Influence of questions on the allocation of attention during reading. , 1980, Journal of educational psychology.

[9]  Susan H. Gray,et al.  Using protocol analyses and drawings to study mental model construction during hypertext navigation , 1990, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[10]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Toward a model of text comprehension and production. , 1978 .

[11]  James F. Juola,et al.  The use of computer displays to improve reading comprehension , 1988 .

[12]  Peter Afflerbach,et al.  Verbal Protocols of Reading: The Nature of Constructively Responsive Reading , 1996 .

[13]  Mary C. Potter,et al.  Rapid serial visual presentation (rsvp): a method for studying language processing , 2018 .

[14]  Jean-François Rouet.  Interactive Text Processing by Inexperienced (Hyper-) Readers , 1990, ECHT.

[15]  Andrew Dillon,et al.  A Comparison of Linear and Hypertext Formats in Information Retrieval , 1989, UK Hypertext.

[16]  Martin Maguire,et al.  System monitoring: garbage generator or basis for comprehensive evaluation system? , 1990 .

[17]  P. H. Lindsay,et al.  Human Information Processing: An Introduction to Psychology , 1972 .

[18]  David E. Kieras,et al.  New methods in reading comprehension research , 1986 .

[19]  Jill H. Larkin,et al.  Learning From Electronic Texts: Effects of Interactive Overviews for Information Access , 1995 .

[20]  A. Graesser.  Prose Comprehension Beyond the Word , 1981 .

[21]  M. A. Britt,et al.  Using Hypertext to Study and Reason About Historical Evidence , 1996 .

[22]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data , 1984 .

[23]  Mark T. Keane,et al.  Cognitive Psychology: A Student's Handbook , 1990 .

[24]  E Donchin,et al.  P300 and the word frequency effect. , 1988, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[25]  Patricia Wright.  Cognitive overheads and prostheses: some issues in evaluating hypertexts , 1991, HYPERTEXT '91.

[26]  M A Just,et al.  A theory of reading: from eye fixations to comprehension. , 1980, Psychological review.

[27]  Kent L. Norman,et al.  Consulting On-Line Dictionary Information while Reading , 1993, Hypermedia.

[28]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Strategies of discourse comprehension , 1986 .

[29]  D. Aaronson,et al.  Performance theories for sentence coding: Some quantitative evidence. , 1976 .

[30]  Gary Marchionini,et al.  Finding facts vs. browsing knowledge in hypertext systems , 1988, Computer.

[31]  Bruce K. Britton,et al.  Effects of Text Organization on Memory: Test of a Cognitive Effort Hypothesis with Limited Exposure Time. , 1986 .

[32]  Charles R. Fletcher,et al.  Strategies for the allocation of short-term memory during comprehension , 1986 .

[33]  Charles A. Perfetti,et al.  Interactive Processes in Reading , 1981 .

[34]  Doris Aaronson,et al.  Performance theories for sentence coding: Some quantitative models , 1977 .

[35]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  The activation of antecedent information during the processing of anaphoric reference in reading. , 1983 .

[36]  Peter Afflerbach,et al.  The influence of prior knowledge on expert readers' main idea construction strategies. , 1990 .

[37]  Morton Ann Gernsbacher,et al.  Language Comprehension As Structure Building , 1990 .

[38]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. , 1977 .

[39]  Jean-François Rouet,et al.  Cognitive processing of hyperdocuments: when does nonlinearity help? , 1992, ECHT '92.

[40]  M. Kutas,et al.  Event-related brain potentials to grammatical errors and semantic anomalies , 1983, Memory & cognition.

[41]  J. Woolley,et al.  Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[42]  W. M. Reed,et al.  Cognitive capacity engagement during and following interspersed mathemagenic questions , 1986 .