Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cognitive styles and users’ responses to structured information representation

  • Regular contribution
  • Published:
International Journal on Digital Libraries Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Structured information repositories, such as digital libraries, Web directories, and subject gateways, require effective ways to organise and manage information. This paper focuses on Web directories and investigates the relationships between users’ cognitive styles and information representation. The results indicate that cognitive style influences participants’ reactions to the organisation of subject categories, presentation of the results, and screen layout. The findings are applied to develop a design framework that can support the improvement of Web directories and other structured digital information resources. Finally, implications for information representation are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ash B (1986) Identifying learning styles and matching strategies for teaching and learning. ERIC Document Reproduction Service, Massachusetts (Education Resources Information Center, ED 270142)

  2. Blandford A, Stelmaszewska H, Bryan-Kinns N (2001) Use of multiple digital libraries: a case study. In: Proceedings of JCDL 2001, pp 179–188

  3. ChanLin L (1998) Students’ cognitive styles and the need for visual control in animation. J Educ Comput Res 19(4):351–363

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chen Q, Norcio AF (1997) Modeling a user’s domain knowledge with neural networks. Int J Hum–Comput Interaction 9(1):25–40

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chen SY (2002) A cognitive model for non-linear learning in hypermedia programmes. Br J Educ Technol 33(4):453–464

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chen SY, Ford NJ (1998) Modelling user navigation behaviours in a hypermedia-based learning system: an individual differences approach. Int J Knowl Org 25(3):67–78

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chignell MH, Gwizdka J, Bodner RC (1999) Discriminating meta-search: a framework for evaluation. Inf Process Manage 35(3):337–362

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chou C, Lin H (1997) Navigation maps in a computer-networked hypertext learning system. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Albuquerque, NM

  9. Chuang Y-R (1999) Teaching in a multimedia computer environment: a study of effects of learning style, gender, and math achievement [online]. Available at: http://imej.wfu.edu./articles (1 March 2002)

  10. Davis JK, Cochran KF (1989) An information processing view of field dependence – independence. Early Child Dev Care 51:31–47

    Google Scholar 

  11. Despotopoulos I, Korinthios G, Nasios I, Reisis D (1999) Developing an efficient model for evaluating WWW search engines. In: Proceedings of the seventeenth IASTED international conference, pp 87–89

  12. Dufresne A, Turcotte S (1997) Cognitive style and its implications for navigation strategies. In: Boulay B, Mizoguchi R (eds) Artificial intelligence in education knowledge and media learning system, Kobe (Japan). IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 287–293

  13. Ford N, Chen SY (2000) Individual differences, hypermedia navigation and learning: an empirical study. J Educ Multimedia Hypermedia 9(4):281–311

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ford N, Chen SY (2001) Matching/mismatching revisited: an empirical study of learning and teaching styles. Br J Educ Technol 32(1):5–22

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ford N, Wood F, Walsh C (1994) Cognitive styles and online searching. Online CD-ROM Rev 18(2):79–86

  16. Goodenough D (1976) The role of individual differences in field dependence as a factor in learning and memory. Psychol Bull 83:675–694

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hix D, Hartson HR (1993) Developing user interfaces: ensuring usability through product and process. Wiley, New York

  18. Jonassen DH, Grabowski B (1993) Individual differences and instruction. Allen and Bacon, New York

  19. Kinshuk (1996) Effectiveness of intelligent tutoring tools interfaces in relation to student, learning topic and curriculum characteristics. PhD thesis, De Montfort University

  20. Kobsa A, Koenemann J, Pohl W (2001) Personalized hypermedia presentation techniques for improving online customer relationships. Knowl Eng Rev 16(2):111–155

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lee CH (1994) The effects of auditory cues in interactive multimedia and cognitive style on reading skills of third graders. Unpublished EdD dissertation, University Of Pittsburgh, PA

  22. Lewis BJ (2001) Computer screen readability of foreground/background color combinations and font types.[http://blewis.dyndns.org/psych/readability_study.pdf]

  23. Ling J, Schaik P (2002) The effect of text and background colour on visual search of Web pages. Displays 23:223–230

    Google Scholar 

  24. Marrison DL, Frick MJ (1994) The effect of agricultural students’ learning styles on academic achievement and their perceptions of two methods of instruction. J Agric Educ 35(1):26–30

    Google Scholar 

  25. Monopoli M, Nicholas D (2000) A user-centred approach to the evaluation of subject based information gateways: case study SOSIG. Aslib Proc: New Inf Perspect 52(6):218–231

    Google Scholar 

  26. Nahl D (1997) Information counselling inventory of affective and cognitive reactions while learning the Internet. Internet Ref Serv Q 2(2–3):11–33

    Google Scholar 

  27. Palmquist RA, Kim K-S (2000) Cognitive style and on-line database search experience as predictors of Web search performance. J Am Soc Inf Sci 51(6):558–566

    Google Scholar 

  28. Papanikolaou K, Grigoriadou M, Kornilakis H, Magoulas GD (2003) Personalising the interaction in a Web-based educational hypermedia system: the case of INSPIRE. User Modeling and User-adapted Interaction 13:213–267

    Google Scholar 

  29. Pask G (1976) Styles and strategies of learning. Br J Educ Psychol 46:128–148

    Google Scholar 

  30. Reed WM, Oughton JM (1997) Computer experience and interval-based hypermedia navigation. J Res Comput Educ 30:38–52

    Google Scholar 

  31. Reiff (1996) At-risk middle level or field dependent learners. Clearing House 69(4):231–234

  32. Riding RJ, Grimley M (1999) Cognitive style, gender, and learning from multimedia materials in 11 year-old children. Br J Educ Technol 30(1):43–56

    Google Scholar 

  33. Riding R, Rayner SG (1998) Cognitive styles and learning strategies. David Fulton, London

  34. Riding RJ (1991) Cognitive styles analysis. Learning and Training Technology, Birmingham

  35. Webb GI, Pazzani MJ, Billsus D (2001) Machine learning for user modeling. User Model User-adapted Interaction 11:19–29

    Google Scholar 

  36. Weller HG, Repman J, Rooze GE (1994) The relationship of learning, behavior, and cognitive styles in hypermedia-based instruction: implications for design of HBI. Comput Sch 10(3–4):401–420

    Google Scholar 

  37. Witkin HA, Moore CA, Goodenough DR, Cox PW (1977) Field-dependent and field independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Rev Educ Res 47(1):1–64

    Google Scholar 

  38. Witkin HA, Oltman PK, Raskin E, Karp SA (1971) A manual for the group embedded figures test. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA

  39. Wolfram D, Xie H (2002) Traditional IR for web users: a context for general audience digital libraries. Inf Process Manage 38(5):627–648

    Google Scholar 

  40. Zaiane OR (2001) Building virtual web views. Data Knowl Eng 39(2):143–163

    Google Scholar 

  41. Zoe LR, DiMartino D (2000) Cultural diversity and end-user searching: an analysis by gender and language background. Res Strategies 17(4):291–305

    Google Scholar 

  42. Zukerman I, Albrecht DW (2001) Predictive statistical models for user modeling. User Model User-adapted Interaction 11:5–18

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Systems and Computing, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, UK

    Sherry Y. Chen & Robert D. Macredie

  2. School of Computer Science and Information Systems, Birkbeck College, University of London, Malet Street, London, WC1E 7HX, UK

    George D. Magoulas

Authors
  1. Sherry Y. Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. George D. Magoulas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert D. Macredie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sherry Y. Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chen, S., Magoulas, G. & Macredie, R. Cognitive styles and users’ responses to structured information representation. Int J Digit Libr 4, 93–107 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-003-0073-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-003-0073-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation