Xia Zheng
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
In the context of online text–picture relic exhibitions, two exploratory experiments were conducted to investigate the role of integrated/separate display, background information, and annotation type in learning tangible heritage. Using ceramics as an example, we tracked the eye movement of subjects under different display forms and tested whether they obtained the relevant information. Experiment 1 (N = 48) adopted a 2 (integrated/separate display) × 2 (with/without background information) design and Experiment 2 (N = 93) investigated distinct types of annotation (no annotation, indicative/direct/picture/contour shape annotation). We found that the following. (1) In the segmented relic display, the usage time, fixation count, and total fixation duration of relic names were lower than those in the integrated case. The probability that subjects would learn comparatively was also lower in the separate display. However, the performance on retention or transfer tests did not differ depending on the integrated/separate display. After reading the background information, subjects paid less attention to relic names but had better knowledge transfer performance. (2) The viewers’ attention allocation to the materials was not significantly influenced by the annotations. Mere visual annotations did not provide an advantage for information acquisition. By contrast, indicative verbal annotation required relatively more time for better target information memory, and the direct verbal cue consumed the least time. Based on the results, we discussed the application scenario of multimedia learning principles and potential recommendations for designing online relic displays.
- [1] . 2017. Ubiquitous access to digital cultural heritage. ACM J. Comput. Cult. Herit. 10, 1 (
April 2017), 1–27. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- [2] . 2016. Personalized multimedia content delivery on an interactive table by passive observation of museum visitors. Multimed. Tools Appl. 75 (
April 2016), 3787–3811. Google ScholarDigital Library - [3] . 2020. Museums Around the World in the Face of COVID-19. (2020). https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373530Google Scholar
- [4] . 2009. Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarCross Ref
- [5] (Ed.). 2014. The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [6] . 2008. Revising the redundancy principle in multimedia learning. J. Educ. Psychol. 100, 2 (
May 2008), 380–386. Google ScholarCross Ref - [7] . 2019. Role of subjective and objective measures of cognitive processing during learning in explaining the spatial contiguity effect. Learn Instr. 61 (
June 2019), 23–34. Google ScholarCross Ref - [8] . 2013. Effects of picture labeling on science text processing and learning: Evidence from eye movements. Read. Res. Q. 48, 2 (
April 2013), 199–214. Google ScholarCross Ref - [9] . 2020. Impacts of cues on learning: Using eye-tracking technologies to examine the functions and designs of added cues in short instructional videos. Comput. Hum. Behav. 107 (
June 2020), 106279. Google ScholarDigital Library - [10] . 2020. A meta-analysis of signaling principle in multimedia learning environments. ETR&D-Educ. Tech. Res. Dev. 68 (
Oct. 2020), 2095–2119. Google ScholarCross Ref - [11] . 2018. A meta-analysis of how signaling affects learning with media. Educ. Res. Rev. 23 (
Feb. 2018), 1–24. Google ScholarCross Ref - [12] . 2021. Impact of contextualizing information on aesthetic experience and psychophysiological responses to art in a museum: A naturalistic randomized controlled trial. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 15, 3 (2021), 505–516. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [13] . 1986. The things of science: Assessing the learning potential of science museums. Sci. Educ. 70, 5 (
Oct. 1986), 503–508. Google ScholarCross Ref - [14] . 2021. Design and implementation of virtual museum learning environment from the perspective of multimedia learning theory. In 2021 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET). 266–269. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [15] . 2019. The effect of virtual museum on students’ cognitive and non-cognitive abilities: From the perspective of multimedia learning theory. In 2019 International Joint Conference on Information, Media and Engineering (IJCIME). 378–382. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [16] . 2014. Augmented reality in informal learning environments: A field experiment in a mathematics exhibition. Comput. Educ. 79 (
Oct. 2014), 59–68. Google ScholarDigital Library - [17] . 2018. Multimedia in the wild: Testing the validity of multimedia learning principles in an art exhibition. Learn Instr. 55 (
June 2018), 148–157. Google ScholarCross Ref - [18] . 2020. Contextualizing information enhances the experience of environmental art. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 14, 3 (2020), 264–275. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [19] . 2022. The role of digital interactive technology in cultural heritage learning: Evaluating a mid-air gesture-based interactive media of Ruihetu. Comput. Animat. Virtual Worlds 33, 3–4 (2022), e2085. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [20] . 2020. Aesthetic evaluation of digitally reproduced art images. Front. Psychol. 11 (
Dec. 2020), 615575. Google ScholarCross Ref - [21] . 2015. Visual exploration patterns of human figures in action: An eye tracker study with art paintings. Front. Psychol. 6 (
Oct. 2015), 1636. Google ScholarCross Ref - [22] . 2012. When art moves the eyes: A behavioral and eye-tracking study. PLoS ONE 7, 5 (
May 2012), e37285. Google ScholarCross Ref - [23] . 2018. The impact of accompanying text on visual processing and hedonic evaluation of art. Empir. Stud. Arts 36, 2 (
July 2018), 180–198. Google ScholarCross Ref - [24] . 2015. Picture or text first? Explaining sequence effects when learning with pictures and text. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 27 (
March 2015), 153–180. Google ScholarCross Ref - [25] . 2020. Measuring visitor learning outcomes from showcases, video installations, and interactive tablets: An empirical investigation. Mus. Manag. Curatorship 35, 3 (2020), 281–305. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [26] . 2019. What do luthiers look at? An eye tracking study on the identification of meaningful areas in historical violins. Multimed. Tools Appl. 78 (
July 2019), 19115–19139. Google ScholarDigital Library - [27] . 2019. Egocentric visitors localization in cultural sites. ACM J. Comput. Cult. Herit. 12, 2 (
Apr 2019), 1–19. Google ScholarDigital Library - [28] . 2017. Looking at paintings in the Vincent Van Gogh Museum: Eye movement patterns of children and adults. PloS One 12, 6 (
June 2017), e0178912. Google ScholarCross Ref - [29] . 1993. Measuring learning with the knowledge hierarchy. Visit. Stud. 6, 1 (1993), 73–77.Google ScholarCross Ref
- [30] . 2012. Understanding web enjoyment experiences and informal learning: A study in a museum context. Decis. Support Syst. 53 (
Nov. 2012), 846–858. Google ScholarDigital Library - [31] . 2014. An effective mode of information dissemination and learning—Communication strategy of digital museum. In 2014 9th International Conference on Computer Science & Education. IEEE, 807–811. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [32] . 2017. Interactive learning units on museum websites. J. Museum Education 42, 2 (2017), 169–178. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [33] . 2022. Effects of different types of digital exhibits on children’s experiences in science museums. The Design Journal 25, 1 (2022), 126–135. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [34] . 2021. Does touching real objects affect learning? Educ. Psychol. Rev. 33 (
June 2021), 637–665. Google ScholarCross Ref - [35] . 2021. Integrating eye-movement analysis and the semantic differential method to analyze the visual effect of a traditional commercial block in Hefei, China. Front. Archit. Res. 10, 2 (
June 2021), 317–331. Google ScholarCross Ref - [36] . 1996. Learning strategies for making sense out of expository text: The SOI model for guiding three cognitive processes in knowledge construction. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 8, 4 (
Dec. 1996), 357–371. Google ScholarCross Ref - [37] . 1997. Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educ. Psychol. 32, 1 (1997), 1–19. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [38] . 2009. The science research on multimedia learning —— discussion on academic ideas of Richard E. Mayer. Modern Educational Technology 19, 11 (2009), 5–9.Google Scholar
- [39] . 2008. External and internal representations in the acquisition and use of knowledge: Visualization effects on mental model construction. Instr. Sci. 36 (
May 2008), 175–190. Google ScholarCross Ref - [40] . 2003. Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educ. Psychol. 38, 1 (2003), 43–52. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [41] . 2013. Guided self-management of transient information in animations through pacing and sequencing strategies. ETR&D-Educ. Tech. Res. Dev. 61 (
Feb. 2013), 91–105. Google ScholarCross Ref - [42] . 2011. Cognitive consequences of segmentation and modality methods in learning from instructional animations. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 30 (2011), 1481–1487. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [43] . 2016. Signaling text-picture relations in multimedia learning: A comprehensive meta-analysis. Educ. Res. Rev. 17 (
Feb. 2016), 19–36. Google ScholarCross Ref - [44] . 2012. Paired graphics: An exploratory study of graphicacy. In Staging Knowledge and Experience: How to Take Advantage of Representational Technologies in Education and Training?, and (Eds.). Universite Pierre-Mendes-France, Grenoble, France, 43–45. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/43369Google Scholar
- [45] . 2014. Simultaneously presented animations facilitate the learning of higher-order relationships. Comput. Hum. Behav. 34 (
May 2014), 12–22. Google ScholarCross Ref - [46] . 1992. Frameworks for understanding art: The function of comparative art contexts and verbal cues. Stud. Art Educ. 33, 3 (1992), 154–164. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [47] . 2001. Signaling as a cognitive guide in multimedia learning. J. Educ. Psychol. 93, 2 (2001), 377–389. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [48] . 1999. Textual and pictorial glosses: Effectiveness on incidental vocabulary growth when reading in a foreign language. Foreign Lang. Ann. 32, 1 (
March 1999), 89–97. Google ScholarCross Ref - [49] . 2006. L1 and L2 glosses: Their effects on incidental vocabulary learning. Lang. Learn. Technol. 10, 3 (
Sept. 2006), 85–101.Google Scholar - [50] . 2013. Lessons learned: Evaluating the Whitney’s multimedia guide. In The Annual Conference of Museums and the Web 2013. https://mw2013.museumsandtheweb.com/paper/lessons-learned-evaluating-the-whitneys-multimedia-guide/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
- [51] . 1998. Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychol. Bull. 124, 3 (
Nov. 1998), 372–422. Google ScholarCross Ref - [52] . 2022. How information presentation formats influence usage behaviour of course management systems: Flow diagram navigation versus menu navigation. Behav. Inf. Technol. 41, 2 (2022), 383–400. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [53] . 2015. Sustainability labels on coffee: Consumer preferences, willingness-to-pay and visual attention to attributes. Ecol. Econ. 118 (
Oct. 2015), 215–225. Google ScholarCross Ref - [54] . 2018. A systematic review of eye tracking research on multimedia learning. Comput. Educ. 125 (
Oct. 2018), 413–428. Google ScholarDigital Library - [55] . 2021. Visual memorability in the absence of semantic content. Cognition 212 (
July 2021), 104714. Google ScholarCross Ref - [56] . 2014. An eye movement analysis of highlighting and graphic organizer study aids for learning from expository text. Comput. Hum. Behav. 41 (
Dec. 2014), 21–32. Google ScholarDigital Library - [57] . 2007. G*power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav. Res. Methods 39, 2 (
May 2007), 175–191. Google ScholarCross Ref - [58] . 2018. Applying the segmenting principle to online geography slideshow lessons. ETR&D-Educ. Tech. Res. Dev. 66 (
June 2018), 563–577. Google ScholarCross Ref - [59] . 2020. On the mutual relation between art experience and viewing time. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 14, 2 (2020), 197–208. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [60] . 2013. Support for self-regulation in learning complex topics from multimedia explanations: Do learners need extensive or minimal support? Instr. Sci. 41, 3 (2013), 539–553. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [61] . 1999. The relation between assessment practices and outcomes of studies: The case of research on prior knowledge. Rev. Educ. Res. 69, 2 (1999), 145–186. Google ScholarCross Ref
- [62] . 2004. How including prior knowledge as a subject variable may change outcomes of learning research. Am. Educ. Res. J. 41, 1 (2004), 159–189. Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- How to Arrange Texts and Pictures for Online Visitors — Comparing Basic Ceramic Display Forms with Eye Tracking
Recommendations
Eye and gaze tracking for interactive graphic display
This paper describes a computer vision system based on active IR illumination for real-time gaze tracking for interactive graphic display. Unlike most of the existing gaze tracking techniques, which often require assuming a static head to work well and ...
6th international workshop on pervasive eye tracking and mobile eye-based interaction
UbiComp '16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: AdjunctPrevious work on eye tracking and eye-based human-computer interfaces mainly concentrated on making use of the eyes in traditional desktop settings. With the recent growth of interest in wearable computers, such as smartwatches, smart eyewears and low-...
Eye and gaze tracking for interactive graphic display
SMARTGRAPH '02: Proceedings of the 2nd international symposium on Smart graphicsThis paper describes preliminary results we have obtained in developing a computer vision system based on active IR illumination for real time gaze tracking for interactive graphic display. Unlike most of the existing gaze tracking techniques, which ...
Comments