Eye Movements in Integrating Geometric Text and Figure: Scanpaths and Given-New Effects

Article

Abstract

This study explored the processes in which adult readers integrate text-figure information when reading geometric descriptions. Because geometry conveys rich spatial information, we investigated the reading scanpaths as text- or figure-directed and the given-new effects. Eye movement data from 65 college student participants showed that approximately 1% inspected the figure-first, while the other displayed the text-first which included 86% displayed the text-directed. Although the descriptions that violated the given-new ordering did not affect the accuracy of the test, they did increase reaction time, figure-fixation duration, and the number of saccades from text to figure. The transition paths showed that the participants shifted their fixations to the figure to refer to corresponding elements when they encountered new geometric elements in the text. The descriptions that violated the given-new ordering influenced the reading processes and efficiency. These findings indicate that although the readers spent 40% fixation duration on figure, their reading pattern was text-directed, and the word ordering of description affects integration of geometric text and figure.

Keywords

Eye movement Geometric reading Given-new ordering Scanpath 

References

  1. Academia Sinica Taiwan. (1999). Chinese word segmentation system 1.0 (Chinese edition). Taipei, Taiwan: Author.Google Scholar
  2. Andrá, C., Lindström, P., Arzarello, F., Holmqvist, K., Robutti, O. & Sabena, C. (2015). Reading mathematics representations: An eye-tracking study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(2), 237–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carpenter, P. A. & Shah, P. (1998). A model of the perceptual and conceptual processes in graph comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 4(2), 75–100.Google Scholar
  4. Chen, C. Y., & Wu, C. J. (2012). Eye movements during geometry proof reading: Text contrasting with figure and the colored effects. Journal of Educational Practice and Research, 25(2), 35–66.Google Scholar
  5. Clark, H. H. & Haviland, S. E. (1977). Comprehension and the given-new contract. In R. O. Freedle (Ed.), Discourse production and comprehension (pp. 1–40). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  6. Duval, R. (1995). Geometrical pictures: Kinds of representation and specific processing. In R. Suttherland & J. Mason (Eds.), Exploiting mental imagery with computers in mathematics education (pp. 142–157). Berlin, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Duval, R. (1998). Geometry from a cognitive point of view. In C. Mammana & V. Villani (Eds.), Perspectives on the teaching of geometry for the 21th century (Vol. 5, pp. 37–52). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  8. Epelboim, J. & Suppes, P. (2001). A model of eye movement and visual working memory during problem solving in geometry. Vision Research, 41(12), 1561–1574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ferreira, V. S. & Yoshita, H. (2003). Given-new ordering effects on the production of scrambled sentences in Japanese. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32(6), 669–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gal, H. & Linchevski, L. (2010). To see or not to see: Analyzing difficulties in geometry from the perspective of visual perception. Educational Studies of Mathematics, 74, 163–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hannus, M. & Hyona, J. (1999). Utilization of illustrations during learning of science textbook passages among low- and high-ability children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 95–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Haviland, S. & Clark, H. (1974). What’s new? Acquiring new information as a process in comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 512–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hegarty, M. (1992). The mechanics of comprehension and comprehension of mechanics. In K. Rayner (Ed.), Eye movements and visual cognition: Scene perception and reading (pp. 428–443). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Hegarty, M., Carpenter, P. A. & Just, M. A. (1991). Diagrams in the comprehension of scientific text. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 641–668). New York, NY: Longman.Google Scholar
  15. Hegarty, M. & Just, M. A. (1993). Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 717–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Henderson, J. M., Falk, R., Minut, S., Dyer, F. C. & Mahadevan, S. (2001). Gaze control for face learning and recognition by humans and machines. In T. Shipley & P. Kellman (Eds.), From fragments to objects: Segmentation and grouping in vision (pp. 463–481). New York, NY: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  17. Hoover, W. A. & Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2(2), 127–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lin, J. J. & Lin, S. S. (2014). Tracking eye movements when solving geometry problems with handwriting devices. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 7(1), 1–15.Google Scholar
  19. Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ratwani, R. M., Trafton, J. G. & Boehm-Davis, D. A. (2008). Thinking graphically: Connecting vision and cognition during graph comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14(1), 36–49.Google Scholar
  21. Rayner, K., Rotello, C. M., Stewart, A. J., Keir, J. & Duffy, S. A. (2001). Integrating text and pictorial information: Eye movements when looking at print advertisements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 219–226.Google Scholar
  22. Schmidt-Weigand, F., Kohnert, A. & Glowalla, U. (2010). A closer look at split visual attention in system- and self-paced instruction in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20(2), 100–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schnotz, W. (2005). An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 49–69). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Schnotz, W. & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13, 141–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Susac, A. N. A., Bubic, A., Kaponja, J., Planinic, M. & Palmovic, M. (2014). Eye movements reveal students’ strategies in simple equation solving. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(3), 555–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tso, T. Y., Lu, F. L., Tzeng, S. C., Wu, H. M., Chen, M. J. & Tan, N. C. (2011). Impact of reducing task complexity by segmentation on experts’ and comprehension of novices’ reading geometric proof problems. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 43, 291–314.Google Scholar
  27. Vande Kopple, W. J. (1982). The given-new strategy of comprehension and some natural expository paragraphs. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 11, 501–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Yang, K. L., Lin, F. L. & Wang, Y. T. (2008). The effects of proof features and question probing on understanding geometry proof. Contemporary Educational Research Quarterly, 16(2), 77–100.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Taiwan Normal UniversityTaipeiRepublic of China

Personalised recommendations