透過您的圖書館登入
IP:52.90.40.84
  • 學位論文

從圖文閱讀的眼動型態建構與驗證機械動態表徵的認知模式

Constructing and confirming a cognitive model of mechanical kinematic representation by recording eye movement during the reading of texts and diagrams

指導教授 : 吳昭容
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


解析動態表徵形成的歷程有助於了解人類高層次的認知行為。本文旨在建立機械動態表徵的認知模式,並設計兩個閱讀的眼動實驗驗證之。針對機械系統特有的主張,本模式著眼於圖、文在形成空間結構與動力訊息的功能探討,以及這兩種訊息之間的相互影響關係。實驗一設計先讀圖再讀圖文的二階段程序,操弄圖示箭頭與標號的有無,探討讀者能否從讀「圖」形成「動力訊息」的心智表徵。研究結果顯示:一、在測驗題方面:箭頭組在讀圖後所做的步驟題,表現顯著優於無箭頭組,但兩組人在讀圖文文章後,二修步驟題的表現就沒有顯著差異;然而,箭頭組閱讀圖文文章後,疑難排解題的測驗表現仍優於無箭頭組。二、在眼動資料方面:箭頭組在讀圖階段有較多依循箭頭閱讀的行為,以致於在圖上的平均跳視距離較短、在第一張圖的連續凝視時間較長、連續凝視次數也較多;無箭頭組則多採用比對兩張圖差異的策略,以致於在兩張圖之間的跳視次數顯著高於箭頭組。實驗一驗證了設計得宜的圖能提供動力訊息的歷程關係,但與文所能提供的不完全相同。實驗二同樣採二階段閱讀程序,操弄空間結構訊息的有無,以及圖或文的閱讀媒介,以探討讀者能否從「文」形成「空間結構」表徵、和圖的差別為何,且空間結構和動力訊息是否有相互影響的關係。研究結果顯示:一、在測驗題方面:空間組在閱讀以文字表述空間結構的文本後,在所有空間結構的測驗都顯著優於非空間組,且兩組讀者閱讀動力訊息文本後,二修空間結構測驗題都有顯著進步。另外,空間組在此測驗的局部向度表現顯著優於讀圖組,但在整體向度的表現則是讀圖組優於空間組。二、在眼動資料方面:空間組在動力訊息文本的總凝視時間顯著短於非空間組,且空間組在句子和重要部件的兩種分析單位,回視時間都顯著短於非空間組。另外,空間組在閱讀有關動力訊息的出水系統句子、重要部件,總凝視時間和回視時間都顯著短於讀圖組。實驗二驗證了讀者能從文字描述空間關係形成心像表徵,但文字和圖片表述空間結構各有優勢,文字的優勢是表達細部的接續關係,圖片則是整體的類比關係;此外,形成動力訊息必須以空間結構為基礎,但動力訊息也能修正與調整空間表徵。整體而言,本文藉由兩個實驗驗證本論文所提出之機械動態表徵的認知模式;文末將從實徵研究和理論模式兩個層次分別與文獻進行綜合討論。

並列摘要


The process of forming kinematic representations contributes to high-order cognitive behavior in humans. The purpose of this study was to construct a cognitive model of kinematic representations within a machine. Two experiments were designed to confirm this model. This model examined the function of text and diagrams for forming internal representations of configurations and kinematic information. Moreover, this model also examined how configuration and kinematic information interact with each other during reading. Readers’ eye movements and comprehension were monitored as they read a piece of text. Experiment 1 consisted of a two-stage procedure: readers first read diagrams and then read a text-and-diagram article about a flushing cistern. We investigated whether readers could construct kinematic representations of diagrams with or without arrows (arrow group versus non-arrow group). Results showed that step-by-step question scores were higher for the arrow group than for the non-arrow group after reading the mechanical diagrams; however, this difference disappeared when both groups read the text-and-diagram article and then revised the step-by-step questions. In addition, scores on troubleshooting questions were higher for the arrow group than for the non-arrow group after reading the text-and-diagram article. In our analysis of eye movements, the arrow group had shorter mean saccade lengths on the diagrams and had longer gaze durations toward the first diagram than the non-arrow group. As for the non-arrow group, the strategy they seemed to use was comparing the status between the two diagrams. Therefore, there were more saccades between the two diagrams for the non-arrow group than for the arrow group. Experiment 1 confirmed that diagrams with arrows conveyed kinematic information, but the kinematic information conveyed was not the same as what could be conveyed by words. In Experiment 2, we investigated whether readers have the ability to form internal representations of mechanical configurations described via written text. The relationship between a mechanical configuration and kinematic information was also of interest. Readers first read the mechanical configurations, which consisted of text or a diagram, and then read text describing kinematic information of the same system. Participants were assigned to one of three groups (configuration group, non-configuration group, or diagram group). Results showed that the configuration group had higher configuration tests scores than the non-configuration group. However, both groups made progress on the revised configuration tests after reading the kinematic text. In addition, the configuration test scores regarding local connective relations were higher for the configuration group than for the diagram group. However, on the global dimension of the same test, the diagram group did better than the configuration group. In our analysis of eye movements, the configuration group displayed shorter total fixation durations and rereading times of the kinematic text than did the non-configuration and diagram groups. Experiment 2 confirmed that readers were able to form a mental representation of the mechanical configuration described by written words. However, both text and diagrams have their advantages for describing configurations; the former’s advantage is on the level of describing local connective relations, while the latter’s advantage is on the level of global analogic relations within the mechanical system. Readers can utilize mechanical configurations to form kinematic information. Conversely, kinematic information could also be used to revise and adjust readers’ mental representations of mechanical configurations. In sum, the model of the current study has been confirmed through the results of two experiments. We discuss relevant empirical research and theoretical underpinnings as they pertain to the current study.

參考文獻


陳琪瑤、吳昭容(已接受):幾何證明文本閱讀的眼動研究:圖文比重及圖示著色效果。教育實踐與研究。
簡郁芩、吳昭容(2012):以眼動型態和閱讀測驗表現探討箭頭在科學圖文閱讀中的圖示效果。中華心理學刊,54,385-402。
柯華葳、陳明蕾、廖家寧(2005):詞頻、詞彙類型與眼球運動型態:來自篇章閱讀的證據。中華心理學刊,47,381-398。
Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers and Education, 33, 131-152.
Ainsworth, S., & VanLabeke, N. (2004). Multiple forms of dynamic representation. Learning and Instruction, 14, 241-255.

被引用紀錄


王靜儀(2016)。圖示複雜度與圖文呈現次序對八年級學生學習成效之研究-以「四行程引擎運作原理圖示為例」〔碩士論文,國立中正大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0033-2110201614055147

延伸閱讀