跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.215.79.68) 您好!臺灣時間:2022/07/04 04:06
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:王博彥
研究生(外文):Bo-Yen Wang
論文名稱:以視覺 -言語認知類型為導向探討線上數位內容對於閱讀動機之影響
論文名稱(外文):The Impact of Online Digital Content on Reading Motivation: An Approach with Visualizer-Verbalizer Cognitive Styles
指導教授:游寶達游寶達引用關係
指導教授(外文):Pao-Ta Yu
口試委員:游寶達朱威達羅習五蔡鴻旭許政穆
口試委員(外文):Pao-Ta YuWei-Ta ChuShi-Wu LoHung-Hsu TsaiJenq-Muh Hsu
口試日期:2016-03-28
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立中正大學
系所名稱:資訊工程研究所
學門:工程學門
學類:電資工程學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2016
畢業學年度:104
語文別:英文
論文頁數:74
中文關鍵詞:數位閱讀數位內容認知類型閱讀動機
外文關鍵詞:digital readingdigital contentcognitive stylesreading motivation
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:785
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:102
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
資訊與通訊科技的進步,除了提供豐富的資訊內容外更讓資訊的取得不受時間空間的限制。也同時影響了「數位世代」或「數位移民」在閱讀行為上的改變。線上閱讀逐漸成為在閱讀紙本書籍外的另一種獲取知識的方式。雖然線上閱讀的受歡迎程度刺激了數位內容的成長,但是這些數位內容具備的片段性結構往往限制了閱讀能力的發展,尤其在閱讀理解力方面。因此,線上數位內容之呈現方式對於閱讀行為的影響成為本研究的一項探索重點。
既然多媒體是一種網際網路上傳遞訊影像與聲音的方式,把閱讀內容以多媒體方式呈現將可以促進線上閱讀的發展。但是,就個別差異的觀點,學習者使用視覺導向或言語導向來處理資訊的偏好方式,仍需要深入的探索。因此本研究設計了三個實驗來比較閱讀動機與視覺-言語等認知風格的差異性。實驗一利用影音式及網頁式的書籍介紹來比較閱讀動機上的差異。實驗二應用「翻轉教室」概念設計線上學習單元,其所提供課程錄影內容主要以英文來呈現基本微積分概念,課堂活動則以促進基本微積分英文單字記憶為主。本實驗探討視覺-言語等風格之學習者在觀看課程錄影後反映在閱讀讀機上的差異。實驗三透過線上鷹架的導引模式來訓練選取文章中之關鍵字及主要概念,並探索不同認知風格與閱讀動機之差異。本研究的主要目的在於探討數位內容形式呈現模式對於閱讀動機之影響並尋求符合個別差異來提升閱讀動機的方法。

The advent of information and communication technology does not only provide the richness of information but the unlimited accessibility of information. It profoundly affects the reading behavior of people who born as digital natives or digital migrates. Online Reading is evitable that people gradually accept it as a source of acquiring knowledge other than printed reading. However, the popularity of online reading encourages the growth of electronic resources. These materials that possess the characteristic of the fragmental structure will hinder the development of reading skills, especially reading comprehension. Thus, the survey of online reading materials, usually presented as digital contents, is the principal objective of the present study.
Since multimedia has become an important media to convey visual and audio information over the internet, the reading material that presented in multimedia form will benefit the progress of online reading. With the perspective of individual difference, the individuals who prefer processing information in verbal orientation or visual orientation still need further exploration. Thus, the present study provides a different presentation of online digital contents that based on the comparison of reading motivation and the verbal and visual cognitive styles. Experiment one provides book information with introductory videos and web pages to observe the difference in readers’ reading motivation. The second experiment employees a “flipped classroom” that students are asked to finish watching the videos that introduce Calculus in English before classes begin then attend the classroom activities for improving the retention of core Calculus keywords. This experiment mainly explores the impact of reading motivation on two different styles- visualizers and verbalizers. The last experiment proposes a website system that support students to practice text summary though online highlighting policy which based on the concept of scaffolding theory. The observation of pupils’ reading motivation also applied with visual and verbal cognitive, but additional comparisons were made based on different form in digital contents presentation. The goal of this study focuses on the display types of digital contents and the impact of reading motivation on these various cognitive styles.

摘要 1
Abstract 2
Chapter 1 Introduction 6
Chapter 2 Literature Review 7
2.1 The Reading behavior in the digital era 7
2.2 The Digital Contents for Online Reading Activities 10
2.2.1 The contents of the website 11
2.2.2 The “e-book.” 11
2.2.3 The lecture capture 12
2.3 The primary of multimedia learning 17
2.3.1 Cognitive Load Theory 17
2.3.2 The cognitive theory of multimedia learning 18
2.4 The cognitive style of learning 19
2.5 The Reading Motivation 21
Chapter 3 Research Questions and Frameworks 23
3.1 Research Questions 23
3.2 Research Framework 24
Chapter 4 Methodology 25
4.1 Study One: Using videos to promote reading motivation 25
4.1.1 Experimental environment 25
4.1.2 Participants 30
4.1.3 Experimental procedure 30
4.1.4 Data collection and analysis 30
4.2 Study Two: The difference between visualizer’s and verbalizer’s reading motivation when watching lecture videos 31
4.2.1 Experimental environment 31
4.2.2 Participants 32
4.2.3 Experimental procedure 33
4.2.4 Data collection and analysis 33
4.3 Study Three: The difference between visualizers’ and verbalizers’ reading motivation when exposed to web-based textual environment 34
4.3.1 Experimental environment 35
4.3.2 Participants 38
4.3.3 Experimental procedure 39
4.3.4 Data collection and analysis 40
Chapter 5 Results 40
5.1 The results of study One 40
5.2 The results of study two 44
5.3 The results of study three 48
Chapter 6 Conclusions and Discussions 52
6.1 The study one 52
6.2 The study two 53
6.3 The study three 54
6.4 The general conclusion 55
References 57
Appendix 65

Aarnoutse, C., & Schellings, G. (2003). Learning reading strategies by triggering reading motivation. Educational Studies, 29(4), 387-409.
Abdullah, N., & Gibb, F. (2008). Students' attitudes towards e-books in a scottish higher education institute: Part 1. Library review, 57(8), 593-605.
Academy, K. (Producer). (2015, November 30, 2015). Relating addition and subtraction. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVLjWIftX_o
Ainsworth, S. (2014). The multiple representation principle in multimedia learning. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 464.
Albrecht, J. E., & O'Brien, E. J. (1993). Updating a mental model: Maintaining both local and global coherence. Journal of experimental psychology: Learning, memory, and cognition, 19(5), 1061.
Allen, M., Mabry, E., Mattrey, M., Bourhis, J., Titsworth, S., & Burrell, N. (2004). Evaluating the effectiveness of distance learning: A comparison using meta‐analysis. Journal of Communication, 54(3), 402-420.
Amadieu, F., Lemarié, J., & Tricot, A. (2015). How may multimedia and hypertext documents support deep processing for learning? Psychologie Française.
Anderson, R. C., Wilson, P. T., & Fielding, L. G. (1988). Growth in reading and how children spend their time outside of school. Reading Research Quarterly, 285-303.
Antonenko, P. D., & Niederhauser, D. S. (2010). The influence of leads on cognitive load and learning in a hypertext environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 140-150.
Applegate, A. J., & Applegate, M. D. (2010). A study of thoughtful literacy and the motivation to read. The Reading Teacher, 64(4), 226-234.
Arbaugh, J., Godfrey, M. R., Johnson, M., Pollack, B. L., Niendorf, B., & Wresch, W. (2009). Research in online and blended learning in the business disciplines: Key findings and possible future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(2), 71-87.
Armitage, U., Wilson, S., & Sharp, H. (2004). Navigation and ownership for learning in electronic texts: An experimental study. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 2(2), 19-29.
Bailey, T. P. (2006). Electronic book usage at a master's level i university: A longitudinal study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32(1), 52-59.
Baker, L., & Scher, D. (2002). Beginning readers'motivation for reading in relation to parental beliefs and home reading experiences. Reading Psychology, 23(4), 239-269.
Baker, L., & Wigfield, A. (1999). Dimensions of children's motivation for reading and their relations to reading activity and reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 34(4), 452-477.
Balfour, J. A., & Campus, R. (2006). Audio recordings of lectures as an e-learning resource. Paper presented at the built environment education annual conference (BEECON 2006).
Barker, P. (1991). Interactive electronic books. Interactive Multimedia, 2(1), 11-28.
Barker, P. (1996). Living books and dynamic electronic libraries. The Electronic Library, 14(6), 491-501.
Ben-Yehudah, G., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2014). The influence of text annotation tools on print and digital reading comprehension.
Bierman, J., Ortega, L., & Rupp-Serrano, K. (2010). E-book usage in pure and applied sciences. Science & technology libraries, 29(1-2), 69-91.
BigDSol (Producer). (2013, November 30, 2015). Introduction to big data, hadoop, hadoop components and microsoft hdinsight. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yX5rLNnGyU
Birkerts, S. (2006). The gutenberg elegies: The fate of reading in an electronic age: Macmillan.
Blanchard, J. S., & Farstrup, A. E. (2011). Technologies, digital media, and reading instruction. What research has to say about reading instruction, 286-314.
Blanco, C. F., Sarasa, R. G., & Sanclemente, C. O. (2010). Effects of visual and textual information in online product presentations: Looking for the best combination in website design. European Journal of Information Systems, 19(6), 668-686.
Blazhenkova, O., & Kozhevnikov, M. (2010). Visual-object ability: A new dimension of non-verbal intelligence. Cognition, 117(3), 276-301.
Bollmeier, S. G., Wenger, P. J., & Forinash, A. B. (2010). Impact of online lecture-capture on student outcomes in a therapeutics course. American journal of pharmaceutical education, 74(7).
Brecht, H., & Ogilby, S. (2008). Enabling a comprehensive teaching strategy: Video lectures. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 7(1), 71-86.
Brown, B. W., & Liedholm, C. E. (2002). Can web courses replace the classroom in principles of microeconomics? American Economic Review, 444-448.
Brown, G. J. (2001). Beyond print: Reading digitally. Library Hi Tech, 19(4), 390-399.
Brunken, R., Plass, J., & Leutner, D. (2003). Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 53-61.
Burke, A., & Rowsell, J. (2008). Screen pedagogy: Challenging perceptions of digital reading practice. Changing English, 15(4), 445-456.
Butler, J. B., & Mautz, R. (1996). Multimedia presentations and learning: A laboratory experiment. Issues in Accounting Education, 11, 259-280.
Butt, A. (2014). Student views on the use of a flipped classroom approach: Evidence from australia. Business Education & Accreditation, 6(1), 33-43.
Carr, N. (2010). The shallows: How the internet is changing the way we think, read and remember: Atlantic Books Ltd.
Cascaval, R. C., Fogler, K. A., Abrams, G. D., & Durham, R. L. (2008). Evaluating the benefits of providing archived online lectures to in-class math students. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12, 61-70.
Ceaparu, J., & Shneiderman, J. R. B. (2003). Help! Im lost: User frustration in web navigation. IT and Society, 1(3), 18-26.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4), 293-332.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1992). The split‐attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62(2), 233-246.
Chang, S. L., & Ley, K. (2006). A learning strategy to compensate for cognitive overload in online learning: Learner use of printed online materials. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 5(1), 104-117.
Chen, C.-M., & Wu, C.-H. (2014). Effects of different video lecture types on sustained attention, emotion, cognitive load, and learning performance. Computers & Education.
Chen, Y.-F. (2008). Herd behavior in purchasing books online. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1977-1992.
Childers, T. L., Houston, M. J., & Heckler, S. E. (1985). Measurement of individual differences in visual versus verbal information processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 125-134.
Chorianopoulos, K., & Giannakos, M. N. (2013). Usability design for video lectures. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 11th european conference on Interactive TV and video.
Christianson, M., & Aucoin, M. (2005). Electronic or print books: Which are used? Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services, 29(1), 71-81.
Cipielewski, J., & Stanovich, K. E. (1992). Predicting growth in reading ability from children's exposure to print. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 54(1), 74-89.
Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C., & Leu, D. J. (2008). Central issues in new literacies and new literacies research. Handbook of research on new literacies, 1-21.
Cooper, G. (1998). Research into cognitive load theory and instructional design at unsw. Retrieved August, 8, 2003.
Courses, H. C. O. (Producer). (2014, November 30, 2015). Econ 101 in 22 minutes from hillsdale college. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNeL6Cmq_Kg
Cox, A., & Mohammed, H. (2001). 'E-books,'. FreePint 80. http://www.freepint.co.uk/issues/010201.htm#feature
Critz, C. M., & Knight, D. (2013). Using the flipped classroom in graduate nursing education. Nurse educator, 38(5), 210-213.
Cull, B. W. (2011). Reading revolutions: Online digital text and implications for reading in academe. First Monday, 16(6).
de Jong, T. (2010). Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: Some food for thought. Instructional Science, 38(2), 105-134. doi: 10.1007/s11251-009-9110-0
Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26(3-4), 325-346.
DeStefano, D., & LeFevre, J.-A. (2007). Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1616-1641.
Dey, E. L., Burn, H. E., & Gerdes, D. (2009). Bringing the classroom to the web: Effects of using new technologies to capture and deliver lectures. Research in Higher Education, 50(4), 377-393.
Eden, S., & Eshet‐Alkalai, Y. (2013). The effect of format on performance: Editing text in print versus digital formats. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(5), 846-856.
Eklundh, K. S. (1992). Problems in achieving a global perspective of the text in computer-based writing Computers and writing (pp. 73-84): Springer.
Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Geri, N. (2007). Does the medium affect the message? The influence of text representation format on critical thinking. Human Systems Management, 26(4), 269-279.
Eshet, Y., & Chajut, E. (2007). Living books: The incidental bonus of playing with multimedia. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16(4), 377-388.
Euzent, P., Martin, T., Moskal, P., & Moskal, P. (2011). Assessing student performance and perceptions in lecture capture vs. Face-to-face course delivery. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 10(1), 295-307.
Garland, K. J., & Noyes, J. M. (2004). Crt monitors: Do they interfere with learning? Behaviour & Information Technology, 23(1), 43-52.
Gottfried, A. E. (1985). Academic intrinsic motivation in elementary and junior high school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(6), 631.
Gould, J. D., Alfaro, L., Barnes, V., Finn, R., Grischkowsky, N., & Minuto, A. (1987). Reading is slower from crt displays than from paper: Attempts to isolate a single-variable explanation. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 29(3), 269-299.
Griffin, D. K., Mitchell, D., & Thompson, S. J. (2009). Podcasting by synchronising powerpoint and voice: What are the pedagogical benefits? Computers & Education, 53(2), 532-539.
Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014). How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of mooc videos. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference.
Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading.
Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Humenick, N. M., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., & Barbosa, P. (2006). Influences of stimulating tasks on reading motivation and comprehension. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(4), 232-246.
Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Metsala, J. L., & Cox, K. E. (1999). Motivational and cognitive predictors of text comprehension and reading amount. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3(3), 231-256.
Höppner, M., Horstmann, W., Rahmsdorf, S., van der Velde, W., & Ernst, O. (2009). The future of ebooks? Will print disappear? An end-user perspective. Library Hi Tech, 27(4), 570-583.
Harpp, D. N., Fenster, A. E., Schwarcz, J. A., Zorychta, E., Goodyer, N., Hsiao, W., & Parente, J. (2004). Lecture retrieval via the web: Better than being there? Journal of Chemical Education, 81(5), 688.
Hayes, J., & Allinson, C. W. (1998). Cognitive style and the theory and practice of individual and collective learning in organizations. Human relations, 51(7), 847-871.
Hayles, N. K. (2003). Translating media: Why we should rethink textuality. The Yale Journal of Criticism, 16(2), 263-290.
Healy, J. M. (2011). Endangered minds: Why children dont think and what we can do about i: Simon and Schuster.
Hederich-Martínez, C., & Camargo-Uribe, A. (2015). Cognitive style and educational performance. The case of public schools in bogotá, colombia. Educational Psychology, 1-19.
Hidi, S. (2000). An interest researcher's perspective: The effects of extrinsic and intrinsic factors on motivation.
Holzman, P. S., & Klein, G. S. (1954). Cognitive system-principles of leveling and sharpening: Individual differences in assimilation effects in visual time-error. The Journal of Psychology, 37(1), 105-122.
Hove, M. C., & Corcoran, K. J. (2008). If you post it, will they come? Lecture availability in introductory psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 35(2), 91-95.
Hua, X.-S., Mei, T., & Li, S. (2008). When multimedia advertising meets the new internet era. Paper presented at the Multimedia Signal Processing, 2008 IEEE 10th Workshop on.
Ilioudi, C., Giannakos, M. N., & Chorianopoulos, K. (2013). Investigating differences among the commonly used video lecture styles.
Kagan, J., Rosman, B. L., Day, D., Albert, J., & Phillips, W. (1964). Information processing in the child: Significance of analytic and reflective attitudes. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 78(1), 1.
Kennedy, G. E., Judd, T. S., Churchward, A., Gray, K., & Krause, K.-L. (2008). First year students' experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1).
Kibar, P. N., & Akkoyunlu, B. (2016). University students' visual cognitive styles with respect to majors and years. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(2), 321-333.
Kim, J.-H., Kim, M., & Lennon, S. J. (2009). Effects of web site atmospherics on consumer responses: Music and product presentation. Direct Marketing: An International Journal, 3(1), 4-19.
Kim, J., & Forsythe, S. (2008). Sensory enabling technology acceptance model (se‐tam): A multiple‐group structural model comparison. Psychology & Marketing, 25(9), 901-922.
Kim, M., & Lennon, S. (2008). The effects of visual and verbal information on attitudes and purchase intentions in internet shopping. Psychology & Marketing, 25(2), 146-178.
Kirschner, P. (2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and instruction, 12(1), 1-10.
Klein, H. J., Noe, R. A., & Wang, C. (2006). Motivation to learn and course outcomes: The impact of delivery mode, learning goal orientation, and perceived barriers and enablers. Personnel Psychology, 59(3), 665-702.
Korat, O. (2010). Reading electronic books as a support for vocabulary, story comprehension and word reading in kindergarten and first grade. Computers & Education, 55(1), 24-31.
Korat, O., & Shamir, A. (2007). Electronic books versus adult readers: Effects on children's emergent literacy as a function of social class. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(3), 248-259.
Kozhevnikov, M. (2007). Cognitive styles in the context of modern psychology: Toward an integrated framework of cognitive style. Psychological bulletin, 133(3), 464.
Kozhevnikov, M., Hegarty, M., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Revising the visualizer-verbalizer dimension: Evidence for two types of visualizers. Cognition and Instruction, 20(1), 47-77.
Lam, P., Lam, S. L., Lam, J., & McNaught, C. (2009). Usability and usefulness of ebooks on ppcs: How students' opinions vary over time. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(1).
Landoni, M. (2003). Electronic books. Routledge International Encyclopaedia of Information and Library Science, 2, 168-171.
Last, D. A., O'Donnell, A. M., & Kelly, A. E. (1998). Using hypermedia: Effects of prior knowledge and goal strength.
Lau, K. L. (2009). Reading motivation, perceptions of reading instruction and reading amount: A comparison of junior and senior secondary students in hong kong. Journal of Research in Reading, 32(4), 366-382.
Lau*, K. l. (2004). Construction and initial validation of the chinese reading motivation questionnaire. Educational Psychology, 24(6), 845-865.
Lawless, K. A., Brown, S. W., Mills, R., & Mayall, H. J. (2003). Knowledge, interest, recall and navigation: A look at hypertext processing. Journal of Literacy Research, 35(3), 911-934.
Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., & Cammack, D. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the internet and other information and communication technologies. Theoretical models and processes of reading, 5(1), 1570-1613.
Liao, C., & Chuang, S.-H. (2007). Assessing the effect of cognitive styles with different learning modes on learning outcome. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 105(1), 184-190.
Liu, Z. (2005). Reading behavior in the digital environment: Changes in reading behavior over the past ten years. Journal of Documentation, 61(6), 700-712.
Lloyd‐Bostock, S. (1979). Convergent—divergent thinking and arts—science orientation. British Journal of Psychology, 70(1), 155-163.
Macedo-Rouet, M., Rouet, J.-F., Epstein, I., & Fayard, P. (2003). Effects of online reading on popular science comprehension. Science Communication, 25(2), 99-128.
Madrid, R. I., Van Oostendorp, H., & Melguizo, M. C. P. (2009). The effects of the number of links and navigation support on cognitive load and learning with hypertext: The mediating role of reading order. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(1), 66-75.
Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Brønnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 58, 61-68.
Mayer, R. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 31-48.
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning: Cambridge university press.
Mayer, R. E. (2014). The cambridge handbook of multimedia learning: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E., & Massa, L. J. (2003). Three facets of visual and verbal learners: Cognitive ability, cognitive style, and learning preference. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 833.
McElroy, J., & Blount, Y. (2006). You, me and ilecture. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 23rd annual ascilite conference.
McElroy, T., & Seta, J. J. (2003). Framing effects: An analytic–holistic perspective. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(6), 610-617.
McKnight, C., & Dearnley, J. (2003). Electronic book use in a public library. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 35(4), 235-242.
McLaren, C. H. (2004). A comparison of student persistence and performance in online and classroom business statistics experiences. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 2(1), 1-10.
McLaughlin, J. E., Roth, M. T., Glatt, D. M., Gharkholonarehe, N., Davidson, C. A., Griffin, L. M., . . . Mumper, R. J. (2014). The flipped classroom: A course redesign to foster learning and engagement in a health professions school. Academic Medicine, 89(2), 236-243.
McNamara, D. S. (2001). Reading both high-coherence and low-coherence texts: Effects of text sequence and prior knowledge. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 55(1), 51.
McNeill, M., Woo, K., Gosper, M., Phillips, R., Preston, G., & Green, D. (2007). Using web-based lecture technologies: Advice from students.
Mei, T., & Hua, X.-S. (2010). Contextual internet multimedia advertising. Proceedings of the IEEE, 98(8), 1416-1433.
Miller, A. (1987). Cognitive styles: An integrated model. Educational Psychology, 7(4), 251-268.
Mucherah, W., & Yoder, A. (2008). Motivation for reading and middle school students' performance on standardized testing in reading. Reading Psychology, 29(3), 214-235.
NetRead. (2000). "The e-book". from http://www.netread.com/howto/ebooks/index.cfm?article=the_ebook%2Ecfm#1
Neugebauer, S. R. (2014). Context-specific motivations to read for adolescent struggling readers: Does the motivation for reading questionnaire tell the full story? Reading Psychology, 35(2), 160-194.
Nicholas, D., Rowlands, I., Clark, D., Huntington, P., Jamali, H. R., & Ollé, C. (2008). Uk scholarly e-book usage: A landmark survey. Paper presented at the Aslib Proceedings.
Niederhauser, D. S., Reynolds, R. E., Salmen, D. J., & Skolmoski, P. (2000). The influence of cognitive load on learning from hypertext. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(3), 237-255.
Noyes, J. M., & Garland, K. J. (2003). Vdt versus paper-based text: Reply to mayes, sims and koonce. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 31(6), 411-423.
Oborne, D. J., & Holton, D. (1988). Reading from screen versus paper: There is no difference. International journal of man-machine studies, 28(1), 1-9.
Ohene-Djan, J., & Fernandes, A. A. (2006). Personalising electronic books. Journal of Digital Information, 3(4).
Ong, Y. W., & Millech, D. (2004). Comparison of the cognitive styles analysis and the style of processing scale Perceptual and Motor Skills, 99(1), 155-162.
OpenCourseWare, M. (Producer). (2010, November 30, 2015). Big picture of calculus. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcWsDwg1XwM
Ozuru, Y., Dempsey, K., & McNamara, D. S. (2009). Prior knowledge, reading skill, and text cohesion in the comprehension of science texts. Learning and instruction, 19(3), 228-242.
Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1-4.
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 63-71.
Paivio, A. (2013). Imagery and verbal processes: Psychology Press.
Park, J., Lennon, S. J., & Stoel, L. (2005). On‐line product presentation: Effects on mood, perceived risk, and purchase intention. Psychology & Marketing, 22(9), 695-719.
Pask, G. (1972). A fresh look at cognition and the individual. International journal of man-machine studies, 4(3), 211-216.
Pattuelli, M. C., & Rabina, D. (2010). Forms, effects, function: Lis students' attitudes towards portable e-book readers. Paper presented at the Aslib Proceedings.
Piolat, A., Roussey, J.-Y., & Thunin, O. (1997). Effects of screen presentation on text reading and revising. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 47(4), 565-589.
Pirayesh, R., & Ghaempanah, M. (2014). The effects of multimedia advertising on building brand equity. Management Science Letters, 4(8), 1761-1764.
Plass, J. L., Chun, D. M., Mayer, R. E., & Leutner, D. (1998). Supporting visual and verbal learning preferences in a second-language multimedia learning environment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(1), 25.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
Richardson, A. (1977). Verbalizer-visualizer: A cognitive style dimension. Journal of mental imagery.
Riding, R., & Buckle, C. (1990). Learning styles and training performance. Sheffield: Training Agency.
Riding, R., & Cheema, I. (1991). Cognitive styles—an overview and integration. Educational Psychology, 11(3-4), 193-215.
Riding, R. J., & Sadler‐Smith, E. (1997). Cognitive style and learning strategies: Some implications for training design. International Journal of Training and Development, 1(3), 199-208.
Roehl, A., Reddy, S. L., & Shannon, G. J. (2013). The flipped classroom: An opportunity to engage millennial students through active learning strategies. Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences, 105(2), 44-49.
Rouet, J. F. (2000). Guest editorial: Hypermedia and learning–cognitive perspectives. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16(2), 97-101.
Ruggieri, V., & Guarino, A. (1992). Relationship between cognitive style and emotional behavior. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 74(2), 355-359.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67. doi: DOI: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Sadoski, M., & Paivio, A. (2001). Imagery and text: A dual coding theory of reading and writing: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Sathe, N. A., Grady, J. L., & Giuse, N. B. (2002). Print versus electronic journals: A preliminary investigation into the effect of journal format on research processes. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 90(2), 235.
Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and instruction, 13(2), 141-156.
Schroeder, E. E. (1994). Navigating through hypertext: Navigational technique, individual differences, and learning.
Schutte, N. S., & Malouff, J. M. (2007). Dimensions of reading motivation: Development of an adult reading motivation scale. Reading Psychology, 28(5), 469-489.
Segal-Drori, O., Korat, O., Shamir, A., & Klein, P. S. (2010). Reading electronic and printed books with and without adult instruction: Effects on emergent reading. Reading and Writing, 23(8), 913-930.
Simpson, A., Walsh, M., & Rowsell, J. (2013). The digital reading path: Researching modes and multidirectionality with ipads. Literacy, 47(3), 123-130.
Sitzmann, T., Kraiger, K., Stewart, D., & Wisher, R. (2006). The comparative effectiveness of web‐based and classroom instruction: A meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 59(3), 623-664.
Spencer, C. (2006). Research on learners’ preferences for reading from a printed text or from a computer screen. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 21(1), 33-50.
Stephenson, J. E., Brown, C., & Griffin, D. K. (2008). Electronic delivery of lectures in the university environment: An empirical comparison of three delivery styles. Computers & Education, 50(3), 640-651.
Sweller, J. (2005). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 19-30.
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory (Vol. 1): Springer.
Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12(3), 185-233.
Thomson, K., Watt, A., & Liukkonen, J. (2015). Cognitive style and teaching style influences on the motor skill performance of 11 and 12 year old physical education students. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 15(3), 509.
Tinajero, C., & Páramo, M. F. (1997). Field dependence‐independence and academic achievement: A re‐examination of their relationship. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(2), 199-212.
Toppin, I. N. (2011). Video lecture capture (vlc) system: A comparison of student versus faculty perceptions. Education and Information Technologies, 16(4), 383-393.
Traphagan, T., Kucsera, J. V., & Kishi, K. (2010). Impact of class lecture webcasting on attendance and learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(1), 19-37.
Van Den Broek, P., Kendeou, P., & White, M. (2009). Cognitive processes during reading: Implications for the use of multimedia to foster reading comprehension. Multimedia and literacy development: Improving achievement for young learners, 57-73.
van der Voort, T. H. (1991). Television and the decline of reading. Poetics, 20(1), 73-89.
Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational psychology review, 17(2), 147-177.
Veeramani, R., & Bradley, S. (2008). Insights regarding undergraduate preference for lecture capture. University of Wisconsin-Madison online-learning study.: University of Wisconsin-Madison E-Business Institute URL: http://www. uwebi. org/news/uw-online-learning. pdf [accessed 2009-03-06][WebCite Cache].
Wang, J. H. Y., & Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Modeling the effects of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, amount of reading, and past reading achievement on text comprehension between us and chinese students. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(2), 162-186.
Watkins, M. W., & Coffey, D. Y. (2004). Reading motivation: Multidimensional and indeterminate. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 110.
Wigfield, A. (1996). A questionnaire measure of children's motivations for reading. Instructional resource no. 22.
Wigfield, A. (1997a). Children’s motivations for reading and reading engagement. Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction, 14, 33.
Wigfield, A. (1997b). Reading motivation: A domain-specific approach to motivation. Educational Psychologist, 32(2), 59-68.
Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1995). Dimensions of children's motivations for reading: An initial study. Reading research report no. 34.
Wigfield, A., & Guthrie, J. T. (1997). Relations of children's motivation for reading to the amount and breadth or their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 420.
Williams, J., & Fardon, M. (2005). On-demand internet-transmitted lecture recordings: Attempting to enhance and support the lecture experience. Proceedings of Alt-C 2005, 153-161.
Witkin, H. A. (1978). Cognitive styles in personal and cultural adaptation: Clark Univ Heinz Werner Inst.
Witkin, H. A., & Goodenough, D. R. (1980). Cognitive styles: Essence and origins. Field dependence and field independence. Psychological issues(51), 1-141.
Yoo, J., & Kim, M. (2012). Online product presentation: The effect of product coordination and a model's face. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 6(1), 59-72.
Zickuhr, K., & Rainie, L. (2014). E-reading rises as device ownership jumps. Pew Internet Research Project.
Ziming, L. (2012). Digital reading: An overview. Chinese Journal of Library and Information Science, 1, 006.

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊