多媒體演講式課程重點處之動態模式對學習者認知負荷與注意力的影響

The Influence of Dynamic Effects for the Key Points of Multimedia Lectures on Learners’ Cognitive Load and Attention

唐曉玲(Hsiao-Ling Tang)

指導教授 ： 陳立杰

大同大學/設計學院/工業設計學系所/碩士(2007年)

摘要

『課程融入資訊技術』與『電腦多媒體發展』不論在教學或日常生活皆成趨勢，促使數位教材的開發設計在線上學習等應用得以提供更豐富多元的教學型態。尤其，多媒體演講式教材可整合視訊及投影片，透過同步化動態，讓授課內容、註記與重點處更明顯地被呈現，因而廣泛地運用於正式授課。然而，現今課程設計存在最大問題在於學者對動態成效看法不一，且設計師多憑直覺使用動態而未知對學習者的影響。因此，本研究以演講式教材為主，比較其不同動態模式的運用，探討何種動態能讓資訊接受者有效地接受所傳達的訊息或加深授課印象；何種又會對資訊接收者造成過重的認知負荷而減低其資訊溝通的效果；從認知負荷與注意力的觀點，探討多媒體演講式課程動態模式應用成效之重要議題。
本研究流程有三，首先從多媒體與多媒體呈現方式、多媒體教材設計原則進行分析；另一方面由心理學層次來探討認知負荷理論和注意力理論及其相關的應用面，做為教材製作之理論基礎。其次，透過現況調查與專家問卷，歸納出演講式教材常用的動態設計與組合方式；綜合設計師問卷與現有教材發現：課程常用動態模式有二，一是「進入動態」指物件從無到有出現於畫面；另一則是「強調動態」指物件原本即存在畫面，透過註記與動畫來加強重點。最後，將兩種動態模式應用於「行銷研究」產品創新單元之課程製作上，進行不同動態模式教材對學習成效之實徵研究並輔以測驗及問卷以得知學習者對不同教材呈現之感受。
研究結果顯示：教材以「進入」或「強調」兩種不同的動態模式呈現對學習者的再認能力與主觀認知負荷方面沒有顯著影響；但在回憶能力測驗方面：「強調」動態受測組明顯地較「進入」動態受測組表現為佳；在注意力的表現方面：「強調」動態受測組專注於教材的時間亦明顯地較「進入」動態受測組為久。因此教材設計上，建議以完整內容呈現讓學習者先有全貌及概觀，再利用強調的動畫或註記來突顯重點，如此能讓學習者集中注意力並得較佳之記憶效果。

關鍵字

演講式教材、動態模式、認知負荷、注意力

並列摘要

“Applying information technology to course contents” and “developing computer multimedia” had become the trends in education or our everyday life. The design of digital contents provides richer teaching styles on the applications such as e-learning. The course materials of multimedia lecture can integrate videos and slides. Especially, through synchronized dynamic effects, the key points can be presented more clearly. This is the reason why multimedia can be applied to education extensively. However, nowadays the critical problem of course design is that the researchers have different opinions on the effect of dynamic elements. Moreover, the course designers always use these dynamic elements based on individual preference and intuition, ignoring the influence of these dynamic elements on the learners. Therefore, the objective of this research is to study the influence of dynamic effects for the key points of multimedia lectures on learners’ cognitive load and attention.
This research included three steps. First, the author analyzed the presentation methods of multimedia, as well as the principles of multimedia content design. Meanwhile, the theories of cognitive load and attention were studied in order to establish the theoretical foundation while making the course content. Second, interviews and questionnaire surveys were conducted to collect current usage of dynamic effects and their combination from the designers of course contents. The results showed that two dynamic effects were frequently used: “Entering” and “Emphasizing” effects. “Entering” effect indicated that the element came into the course contents through some special effects. “Emphasizing” effect meant the element was already in the course contents and then been emphasized by notation or animation. At last, the author applied the above-mentioned dynamic effects to the design of the “New Product Development” lecture of “Marketing Management” course and conducted experiments to study the influence of dynamic effects for the key points of multimedia lectures on learners’ cognitive load and attention.
The result of experiments showed that the course contents presented in different dynamic effects, i.e., “Entering” or “Emphasizing,” did not influence learners’ recognition rate and subjective cognitive load. However, the recall rate of participants in the “Emphasizing” group was much better than that of “Entering” group. In addition, participants in “Emphasizing” group paid more attention to the course contents than that of “Entering” group.
Therefore, while making the course contents, we recommend introducing the complete course content to the learners first in order to provide them with the general information about the course, and then use the dynamic effect to emphasize the key points. In this way, the learners should be able to concentrate upon the course contents and have better learning performance.

並列關鍵字

lecture course materials ； dynamic effect ； cognitive load ； attention

參考文獻

(4)Mayer, R. E., 2001, Multimedia Learning, New York, Cambridge University press.

(5)Mayer, R. E., and Moreno, R., 2003, Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning, Educational psychologist, 38(1), pp.43-52.

(6)Paas, Fred G. W. C., 1992, Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach, Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, pp.429-434.

(7)Park, O., 1998, Visual Displays and contextual Presentations in Computer-Based Instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(3), pp. 37-50.

(10)Sweller, J., 1993, Some cognitive processes and their consequences for the organization and presentation of information, Australian Journal of Psychology, 45, pp.1-8.