Studying Eye Movements in Multimedia Learning

This paper discusses the usefulness of tools that enable the analysis of eye movement data in dynamic interfaces for investigating theoretical issues in the area of multimedia learning. One of these tools, GazeTracker TM, a program that links eye movement data to information about the internal computer processes and automatically combines the two for further analyses, is discussed. The functionality of the tool for studying the process of multimedia learning is illustrated with an experiment on the integration of text and pictures in a web-based lesson on instructional design. In the experiment, differences in fixation patterns between several presentation formats are investigated. It is concluded that tools like GazeTracker TM make it easier to study how people integrate text and pictures in dynamic interfaces like web browsers.

[1]  M. Just,et al.  Understanding Machines from Text and Diagrams. , 1989 .

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

[3]  Joseph H. Goldberg,et al.  Eye tracking in web search tasks: design implications , 2002, ETRA.

[4]  Joseph H. Goldberg,et al.  Identifying fixations and saccades in eye-tracking protocols , 2000, ETRA.

[5]  F. Paas,et al.  Measurement of Cognitive Load in Instructional Research , 1994, Perceptual and motor skills.

[6]  M. Hegarty.  Mental animation: inferring motion from static displays of mechanical systems. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[7]  R. Shillcock,et al.  Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society , 2001 .

[8]  J. Sweller,et al.  Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes , 1995 .

[9]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Incorporating Learner Experience into the Design of Multimedia Instruction. , 2000 .

[10]  R. Mayer,et al.  Cognitive Principles of Multimedia Learning: The Role of Modality and Contiguity , 1999 .

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

[12]  S. Dornič,et al.  ON THE PROBLEMS OF PERCEIVED DIFFICULTY , 1971 .

[13]  P. Carroll,et al.  Visual Analysis of Cartoons: A View from the Far Side , 1992 .

[14]  Géry d’Ydewalle,et al.  Attention Allocation with Overlapping Sound, Image, and Text , 1992 .

[15]  N. Hari Narayanan,et al.  On designing comprehensible interactive hypermedia manuals , 1998, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[16]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia learning in an interactive self-explaining environment: What works in the design of agent , 2003 .

[17]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction , 1999 .

[18]  P. Chandler,et al.  THE SPLIT‐ATTENTION EFFECT AS A FACTOR IN THE DESIGN OF INSTRUCTION , 1992 .

[19]  R. Mayer,et al.  A Split-Attention Effect in Multimedia Learning: Evidence for Dual Processing Systems in Working Memory , 1998 .

[20]  Scott Makeig,et al.  Eye Activity Correlates of Workload during a Visuospatial Memory Task , 2001, Hum. Factors.

[21]  Chris Lankford,et al.  Gazetracker: software designed to facilitate eye movement analysis , 2000, ETRA.

[22]  R. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning: The Promise of Multimedia Learning , 2001 .

[23]  H. Tabbers,et al.  Multimedia instructions and cognitive load theory: effects of modality and cueing. , 2004, The British journal of educational psychology.

[24]  R. Mayer,et al.  When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages? , 2001 .

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

[26]  N. Hari Narayanan,et al.  Multimedia design for communication of dynamic information , 2002, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[27]  Heinz Mandl,et al.  Knowledge Acquisition from Text and Pictures , 1989 .

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

[29]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design , 1998 .

[30]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning , 2001, Visible Learning Guide to Student Achievement.

[31]  H. Tabbers,et al.  The modality of text in multimedia instructions:Refining the design guidelines. , 2002 .

[32]  Joseph H. Goldberg,et al.  Computer interface evaluation using eye movements: methods and constructs , 1999 .

[33]  Andrew J. Stewart,et al.  Integrating text and pictorial information: eye movements when looking at print advertisements. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[34]  John Sweller,et al.  Instructional Design in Technical Areas , 1999 .

[35]  Mary Hegarty,et al.  The Mechanics of Comprehension and Comprehension of Mechanics , 1992 .

[36]  Geoffrey Underwood,et al.  Inspecting Pictures for Information to Verify a Sentence: Eye Movements in General Encoding and in Focused Search , 2004, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[37]  Susan A. Duffy,et al.  Eye Movements and Complex Comprehension Processes , 1992 .

[38]  Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer,et al.  Training Complex Cognitive Skills: A Four-Component Instructional Design Model for Technical Training , 1997 .

[39]  Chris Lankford.  Effective eye-gaze input into Windows , 2000, ETRA.

[40]  K. Rayner.  Eye movements and visual cognition : scene perception and reading , 1992 .

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

[42]  Sharon K Tindall-Ford,et al.  When two sensory modes are better than one , 1997 .

[43]  Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer,et al.  The modality effect in multimedia instructions , 2001 .

[44]  N. Hari Narayanan,et al.  Comparing interfaces based on what users watch and do , 2000, ETRA.

[45]  P. Chandler,et al.  The Role of Visual Indicators in Dual Sensory Mode Instruction , 1997 .

[46]  P. Chandler,et al.  When auditory presentations should and should not be a component of multimedia instruction , 2003 .