:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:以眼球追蹤技術探討不同後設認知能力護生在圖文表徵的辨識歷程之研究
作者:曾文彥
作者(外文):Tseng, Wenyen
校院名稱:國立彰化師範大學
系所名稱:科學教育研究所
指導教授:溫媺純
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2019
主題關鍵詞:後設認知能力眼球追蹤技術圖文表徵辨識歷程學習表現護生後設認知量表Metacognitive-abilityEye-TrackingRecognition Processes of Diagram and Text RepresentationsLearning performanceNursing Metacognition Scale
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:12
護理科學生(簡稱護生)在教科書學習或未來臨床工作,都需觀看和判斷病患的診斷訊息,例如生命徵象圖,但教科書常缺少這類圖形。後設認知對於學習過程具有重要的影響。後設認知可以幫助護生在課室中有系統的分析各種複雜的模擬情境和整合知識運用於臨床實踐。然而,在護理教育中對於後設認知的研究較少。本研究包含研究一和研究二;研究一之目的為發展適用於醫護專科學校的後設認知量表,可有助於了解護生在學習或實踐過程中的後設認知能力。研究二之目的為探討觀看不同圖文表徵(分別為傳統教科書發燒類型教材融入生命徵象圖形[簡稱綜合圖文表徵]和傳統教科書發燒類型圖形教材[簡稱傳統圖文表徵])時,不同後設認知能力護生的圖文表徵辨識歷程。
研究一使用問卷調查法,收集有效樣本為854位來自4所醫護專科學校的護生。資料進行探索性和驗證性因素分析,探索性因素分析獲得六個因素:陳述性知識(declarative knowledge)、程序性和條件性知識(procedural and conditional knowledge)、計畫(planning)、訊息管理策略(information management strategies)、調整策略(debugging strategies)和監控與評鑑(monitoring and evaluation),共33題。總量表Cronbach’s α係數為.939,而六個分量表的內部一致性介於.706至 .896。驗證性因素分析結果顯示本量表具有良好的適配度。研究結果顯示護生後設認知量表為具有信效度的工具,可以測量護生後設認知能力並適用於護理教育的教與學。
研究二共有83位專科學校護生參與,研究分成三個階段。首先參與者完成先備知識測驗與護生後設認知量表,接著在電腦上觀看圖文表徵,並使用眼動儀記錄眼球運動,最後收集學習判斷、信心判別、學習表現測驗和晤談(策略)。研究結果顯示高後設認知能力護生相較於低後設認知能力護生於綜合圖文表徵的文字區花費較長的平均凝視時間和總凝視時間;而於傳統教科書發燒類型圖形與生命徵象圖形之間的掃視次數較多;從晤談質性資料分析也顯示高後設認知能力學生觀看綜合圖文表徵傾向以文字為導向和並進行傳統教科書發燒類型圖形與生命徵象圖形之間的比對。因為高後設認知能力護生有效處理注意力關注的文字和整合傳統教科書發燒類型圖形與生命徵象圖形訊息,因此學習表現也較好;後設認知與眼球運動和學習表現具有意義的相關。本研究提供不同後設認知能力護生在觀看綜合圖文表徵會有不同的眼球運動行為、策略和學習表現的證據。未來研究可以探究不同後設認知能力的護生在觀看學習材料的視覺模式。
Nursing students need to view and judge the patient's diagnostic information both in textbook learning and in future clinical work. These information, such as vital sign diagrams, are usally missing in the textbooks. Metacognition is a critical element that correlates to the learning process. Utilizing metacognition, nursing students ought to be able to systematically analyze complex situations in a classroom and to integrate the knowledge into their clinical practice. Nevertheless, there is a lack of research on metacognition in nursing education. There are two study in this research.The first study aimed to develop a Nursing Metacognition Scale of junior college students in Taiwan in order to easily and quickly understand nursing students’ metacognition ability for learning and practicing. The purpose of the second study was to use two different diagram and text representations, “comprehensive diagram and text representations” inluding traditional fever type texts and diagrams in the textbook plus vital sign and “traditional diagram and text representations” with traditional fever type texts and diagrams in the textbook only, to explore recognition processes of different metacognitive-ability nursing students.
In first study, using a survey method, a total of 854 valid samples were collected from four junior colleges. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed to determine the best factor structure to represent the Nursing Metacognition Scale. The exploratory factor analysis resulted in 33 items and six factors, namely “Declarative Knowledge,” “Procedural and Conditional Knowledge,” “Planning,” “Information Management Strategies,” “Debugging Strategies,” and “Monitoring and Evaluation.” The Cronbach’s α was .939 for the full scale and .706 ~ .896 for the six subscales. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis verified that the Nursing Metacognition Scale had a good fit. The findings support that the Nursing Metacognition Scale is an appropriate tool for measuring nursing students’ metacognitive ability, and can be used for learning and teaching in nursing education.
In second study, the study recruited 83 nursing students from junior colleges in Taiwan to participate and the study included three phases. Firstly, participants were asked to complete prior knowledge test and Nursing Metacognition Scale for nursing students. Secondly, they viewed the diagram and text representations on the computer screen while eye movement behaviors were collected by an eye tracker. In the last phase, each participant was asked to complete judgment of learning, confidence judgment, a learning performance test and interview(strategies). The results revealed that high metacognitive-ability participants spent longer mean fixation duration and total fixation durations on the text of comprehensive diagram and text representations, and more inter-scanning counts between traditional fever diagrams and vital sign diagrams in comprehensive diagram and text representations. The qualitative data analysis of the interviews also displayed that high metacognitive-ability students were text-directed viewer on the comprehensive diagram and text representations and compared between traditional fever diagrams and vital sign diagrams. They performed better in learning performance because they were more efficient in cognitive processing to pay attention on text and to integrate information between traditional fever diagrams and vital sign diagrams. Metacognition was significantly related to eye movement and learning performance. This study provided evidence that participants with different levels of metacognition had different eye-movement behaviors, strategies and learning performance while viewing comprehensive diagram and text representations. Future studies may explore the students’ visualization patterns in viewing learning materials for students with different levels of metacognitive-ability.
中文部分
王靜琳、李小璐、呂桂雲(2010)。影響護專學生初次實習憂鬱及其相關因素之探討。護理暨健康照護研究,6(1),65-75。
王子華、王國華、王瑋龍、黃世傑(2002)。大學普通生物學後設認知量表的發展。測驗統計年刊,10,75-99。
余玉眉(2005)。台灣護理政策白皮書。臺北:行政院衛生署國家衛生研究院。
吳明隆(2007)。SPSS操作與應用:問卷統計分析實務。臺北市:五南。
吳裕豐(2019)。調查問卷改進之研析-以國民生活狀況意向調查為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北大學,臺北市。
李素卿(譯)(2004)。認知心理學(原作者:M.W. Eysenck, & M. T. Keane)。臺北市:五南。
李玉琇、蔣文祁(譯)(2010)。認知心理學(原作者:R. J. Sternberg)。臺北市:雙葉。
邱浩政(2011)。量化研究與統計分析:SPSS(PASW)資料分析與範例。臺北市:五南。
周佳慧、陳淑齡(2011)。探討護理能力-從護理系畢業生的觀點。中山醫學雜誌,22(3),307-317。
林玉雯(2011)。生物概念學習圖形表徵辨識歷程之研究(未出版之博士論文)。國立高雄師範大學,高雄市。
林玉雯、黃台珠、劉嘉茹(2010)。探討圖形表徵與視知覺學習偏好對生物辨識學習之影響。科學教育學刊,18(6),521-546。
林正源、溫媺純(2013)。大學生後設認知量表效化研究。第29屆科學教育國際研討會發表之論文。國立彰化師範大學。
林祝君、楊嬿、李芸茹、王淑芳(2005)。不同教學方法對護生的血壓認知及技能表現。慈濟護理雜誌,4(1),51-58。
林銘煌、王靜儀(2012)。以眼動路徑探討多義圖形的辨識歷程。設計學報,17(2),49-72。
林慧珍、林季宜、簡翠薇、劉桂芬、陳妙言、林文絹(2013)。選擇方法、等待成長—基本護理學實習教師之教學經驗。護理雜誌,60(1),38-47。
凃金堂(2015)。數學後設認知量表之發展與信效度考驗。教育心理學報,47(1),109-131。
施俊名、吳裕益(2008)。「大學生身心健康量表」構念效度驗證之研究。教育研究與發展期刊,4(4),201-230。
胡瑞萍、林陳涌(2002)。寫作與科學學習。科學教育月刊,253,2-18。
高琦玲、黃明月和陳學志(2007)。後設認知的監測判斷。德霖學報,21,427-434。
高毓秀、游竹薇、郭淑宜、廣怡秀(2013)。不同背景因素之護生自我導向學習之探討。護理雜誌,60(4),53-64。
陳一平(2011)。視覺心理學。臺北市:雙葉。
陳密桃(1990)。國民中小學生的後設認知及其與閱讀理解之相關研究(未出版之博士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。

陳銹陵、陳明溥、韓宜娣(2011)。鷹架類型與先備知識對高職電腦軟體應用課程之成效探討。數位學習科技期刊,3(1),101-120。
陳學志(1991)。幽默理解的認知歷程(未出版之博士論文)。國立臺灣大學,臺北市。
陳學志、賴惠德、邱發忠(2010)。眼球追蹤技術在學習與教育上的應用。教育科學研究期刊,55(4),39-48。
許麗齡、吳靈宜、史麗珠(2009)。自我調整學習策略介入對護理大學生自我調整學習能力及實習成績之成效。護理暨健康照護研究,5,273-282。
張春興(2006)。教育心理學。臺北市:東華。
張昇鵬(2003)。資賦優異學生與普通學生後設認知能力與創造思考能力之比較。特殊教育學報,17,95-120。
張昇鵬(2004)。資賦優異學生與普通學生後設認知能力與批判思考能力之比較。特殊教育學報,20,57-102。
張俊杰(2008)。平面圖形特徵與呈現因素對圖形辨識和眼動影響之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。銘傳大學,臺北市。
張偉豪、鄭時宜(2012)。與結構方程模型共舞:曙光初現。新北市:前程文化。
張靜文、張麗芬(2014)。幼兒幾何圖形辨識之研究。教育研究學報,48(2),101-126。
程炳林(2001)。動機、目標設定、行動控制、後設認知之關係:自我調整學習歷程模式知建構及驗證。師大學報,46(1),67-92。
溫媺純、張書綺(2009)。科學學習後設認知量表效化研究。第25屆科學教育國際研討會發表之論文。國立臺灣師範大學。
鄭昭明(2004)。認知心理學-理論與實踐。臺北市:桂冠。
鄭海蓮、吳慧詩(2016)。看得不同等於表現得不同嗎?線上空間能力遊戲的眼蹤與測驗表驗。數位學習科技期刊,8(3),1-28。
鄭麗玉(2009)。認知心理學-理論與應用(第三版)。臺北市:五南
蔡介立、顏妙璇、汪勁安(2005)。眼球移動測量在中文閱讀研究之應用。應用心理學,28,91-104。
歐雅萍(2002)。國小學童設計實驗能力與後設認知能力之相關研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北師範學院,臺北市。
謝朝宗(2013)。以眼動儀探討大學生辨識複雜生物圖形之歷程-以植物組織為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立彰化師範大學,彰化縣。


英文部分
Abedi, G, Rostami, F. & Nadi, A. (2015). Analyzing the dimensions of the quality of life in hepatitis b patientsusing confirmatory factoranalysis. Global Journal of Health Science, 7(7), 22-31.
Ahmad, G., Ohsawa, Y., & Nishihara, Y. (2011). Cognitive impact of eye movement in picture viewing. International Journal of Intelligent Information Processing, 2, 1-8. doi:10.4156/ijiile.vol2.issue1.1.
Alamrani, M. H., Alamrani, K. A., Alqahtani, S. S., & Salem, O. A. (2018). Comparing the effects of simulation-based and traditional teaching methods on the critical thinking abilities and self-confidence of nursing students. The Journal of Nursing Research, 26(3), 152-157. doi: 10.1097/jnr.0000000000000231
Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (1999). Amos 4.0 user guide. Chicago,IL: SmallWaters Corporation.
August-Brady, M. M. (2005). The effect of a metacognitive intervention on approach to and self-regulation of learning in baccalaureate nursing student. Journal of Nursing Education, 44, 279-304.
Ayres, P. (2006). Using subiective measures to detect variations of intrinsic cognitive load within problems. Learning and Instruction, 16, 389-400.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94.
Beyer, B. K. (1988). Developing a thinking skills program. Boston,MA : Allyn & Bacon.
Bloom, B., Englehart, M. Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. NY, Toronto: Longmans, Green.
Broadbent, M., Horsley, M., Birks M., & Persaud, N. (2014). Comparing novice and expert nurses in analysing electrocardiographs (ECGs) containing critical diagnostic information: An eye tracking study of the development of complex nursing visual cognitive skills. In M. Horsley, B. A. Knight, & R. Reilly (Eds), Current Trends in Eye Tracking Research (pp.297-316). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer
Brown, A. L. (1978). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem of metacognition. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (pp. 77-165). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert and R. H. Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65-116). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
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. doi:10.1037/1076-898x.4.2.75
Carney, R. N., & Levin, J. R. (2002). Pictorial illustrations still improve students' learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 5-26.
Chang, H. P., Chen, C. C., Guo, G. J., Cheng, Y. J., Lin, C. Y., & Jen, T. H. (2011). The development of a competence scale for learning science: Inquiry and communication. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(5), 1213-1233. doi: 10.1007/s10763-010-9256-x
Chen, C. H., & Chiu, C. H. (2016). Collaboration scripts for enhancing metacognitive self-regulation and mathematics literacy. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14, 263-280. doi: 10.1007/s10763-015-9681-y
Cheng, M. M. W., & Gilbert, J. K. (2015). Students’ visualization of diagrams representing the human circulatory system: The use of spatial isomorphism and representational conventions. International Journal of Science Education, 37, 136-161.
Chen, S., Huang, C. C., & Chou, T. L. A. (2016). The effect of metacognitive scaffolds on low achievers’ laboratory learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14, 281-296. doi: 10.1007/s10763-015-9691-9
Chen, S. Y., Lai, C. C., Chang, H. M., Hsu, H. C., & Pai, H. C. (2016). Chinese version of psychometric evaluation of self-reflection and insight scale on taiwanese nursing students. The Journal of Nursing Research, 24(4), 337-346. doi:10.1097/jnr.0000000000000132
Chen, Y. C., & Yang, F. T.(2014). Probing the relationship between process of spatial problems solving and science learning: An eye tracking approach. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10763-013-9504-y . doi :10.1007/s10763-013-9504-y
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233-255.
Cook, M. P., Wiebe, E. N, & Carter, G. (2008). The influence of prior knowledge on viewing and interpreting graphics with macroscopic and molecular representations. Science Education, 92, 848-867.
Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. G. (1988). Developmental and instructional analyses of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational psychology, 80, 131-142.
Çubukçu, F. (2008). How to enhance reading comprehension through metacognitive strategies. Journal of International Social Research, 1, 83-93.
Doll, W., Xia, W., & Torkzadeh, G. (1994). A confirmatory factor analysis of end-user computing satisfaction instrument. Management Information Systems Quarter, 18(4), 453-461.
Dutra, D. K. (2013). Implementation of case studies in undergraduate didactic nursing courses: A qualitative study. Biomedical Central Nursing, 12(1), 15-23. Retrieved from http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6955/12/15
Duchowski, A. T. (2007). Eye tracking methodology(2nd ed.). London, England: Spriner-Verlag.
Eitel, A., & Scheiter, K. (2015). Picture or text first? Explaining sequence effects when learning with pictures and text. Educational Psychology Review, 27, 153-180.
El-Gilany, A. H., & Abusaad, F. E. S. (2012). Self-directed learning readiness and learning styles among saudi undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 2, 1-5. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2012.05.003
Flavell, J. H. (1981). Cognitive monitoring. In W. P. Dickson (Ed.), Children's oral communication skills (pp. 35­60). New York, NY: Academic.
Flavell, J. H. (1971). First discussant's comments: What is memory development the development of? Human Development, 14, 272-278.
Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. In Weinert, F., and Kluwe, R. (Eds.), Metacognition, Motivation, and Understanding (pp. 21-29), Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Folk, C. L., Remington, R., and Johnston, J. C. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human perception and performance, 18(4), 1030-1044.

Ford, C. L., & Yore, L. D. (2012). Toward Convergence of Critical Thinking, Metacognition, and Reflection: Illustrations from Natural and Social Sciences, Teacher Education, and Classroom Practice. In A. Zohar, & Y. J. Dori (Eds), Metacognition in science education (pp.257-271). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer
Fornell, C. R., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. doi: 10.2307/3151312
Garner, R., & Alexander, P. A. (1989). Metacognition: Answered and unanswered questions. Educational Psychologist, 24(2), 143-158.
Gholami, M., Moghadam, P. K., Mohammadipoor, F. Tarahi, M. J., Sak, M. Toulabi, T., & Pour, A. H. H. (2016). Comparing the effects of problem-based learning and traditional lecture method on critical thinking skills and metacognitive awareness in nursing students in a critical care nursing course. Nurse Education Today, 45, 16-21. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2016.06.007
Hayashi, Y., & Hirashima, T. (2015). Analysis of the relationship between metacognitive ability and learning activity with kit-build concept map. Human Interface and the Management of Information. Information and Knowledge in Context - 17th International Conference, HCI International 2015, Los Angeles, CA, USA, August 2-7, 2015, Proceedings, Part II.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Babin, B. J., & Black, W. C. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective. Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Hegarty, M. (2011). The cognitive science of visual-spatial displays: Implications for design. Topic in Cognitive Science, 3, 446-474.
Hegarty, M., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1991). Diagrams in the comprehension of scientific texts. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal & P. D. Person (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 641-668). New York, NY: Longman.
Ho, H. N. J., Tsai, M.-J., Wang, C.-Y., & Tsai, C.-C. (2014). Prior knowledge and online inquiry-based science reading: Evidence from eye tracking. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12, 525-554.
Hsu, L. L. (2010). Metacognitive inventory for nursing students in Taiwan: Instrument development and testing. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 66(11), 2573-2581. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05427.x
Hsu, Y. S., Iannone, P. She, H. C., & Hadwin, A. (2016). Preface for IJSME special issue: Metacognition for science and mathematics learning in technology-infused learning environments. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14, 243-248. doi: 10.1007/s10763-016-9727-9
Hu, Y., Wu, B., & Gu, X. (2017). An eye tracking study of high- and low- performing students in solving interactive and analytical problems. Educational Technology & Society, 20 (4), 300-311.
Hung, Y. N. (2014).”What are you looking at? ” An eye movement exploration in science text reading. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(2), 241-260. doi: 10.1007/s10763-013-9406-z
Jarodzka H., Scheiter K., Gerjets P., & Van Gog T. (2010). In the eyes of the beholder : How experts and novices interpret dynamic stimuli. Learning & Instruction, 20, 146-154.


Jensen, S. S., & Pedersen, T. O. (2011). Eye tracking deaf people's metacognitive comprehension strategies on the internet. Retrieved 1 May, 2012, from http://projekter.aau.dk/projekter/files/52662579/SamletProjekt.pdf
Jian, Y. C., & Wu, C. J. (2015). Using eye tracking to investigate semantic spatial representations of scientific diagrams during text-diagram. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(1), 43-55.
Josephsen, J. M. (2017). A qualitative analysis of metacognition in simulation. Journal of nursing education, 56(11), 675-678. doi: 10.3928/01484834-20171020-07
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1976). Eye fixations and cognitive processes. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 441-480.
Kaiser, H. F. (1970). A second-generation little jiffy. Psychometrika, 35, 401-415.
Kelly, T. L. (1939). The selection of upper and lower groups for the validation of test items. Journal of eductional psychology, 30, 17-24.
Kirby, N. F., & Downs, C. T. (2007). Self-assessment and the disadvantaged students: Potential for encouraging self-regulated learning? Assessment & evaluation in higher education, 32, 475-494.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Ku, K. Y. L., & Ho, I. T. (2010). Metacognitive strategies that enhance critical thinking. Metacognition and Learning, 5, 251-267. doi: 10.1007/s11409-010-9060-6
Lin, J. J. H., & Lin, S. S. J. (2014). Cognitive load for configuration comprehension in computer-supported geometry problem solving: A eye movement perspective. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(3), 605-627. doi: 10.1007/s10763-013-9479-8.
Lai, M.-L., Tsai, M.-J., Yang, F.-Y., Hsu, C.-Y., Liu, T.-C., Lee, W.-Y., Lee, M.-H., Chiou, G.-L., Liang, J.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). A review of using eye-tracking technology in exploring learning from 2000 to 2012. Educational Research Review, 10, 90-115.
Larkin, S. (2010). Metacognition in young children. New York, NY: Routledge.
Liliana, C., & Lavinia H. (2011). Gender difference in metacognitive skills: A study of the 8th grade pupils in Romania. Procedia-Social and Behavioral, 29, 396-401. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.255
Lin, C. C., Han, C. Y., Pan, I. J., & Lin, P. L. (2016). Exploring the perceptions of core values of nursing in Taiwanese nursing students at the baccalaureate level. The Journal of Nursing Research, 24(2), 126-136. doi: 10.1097/jnr.0000000000000108
McComas, W. F. (2014). Metacognition. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The language of science education: An expanded glossary of key terms and concepts in science teaching and learning (pp. 63). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
McCrudden, M. T., & Rapp, D. N. (2015).How visual displays affect cognitive processing. Educational Psychology Review. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-015-9342-2. doi :10.1007/s10648-015-9342-2
McKendree, J., Small, C., & Stenning, K (2002). The role of representation in teaching and learning critical thinking. Educational Review, 54(1), 57-67.
Mason, L., Pluchino, P., & Tornatora, M., C. (2013). Effects of picture labeling on science text processing and learning: Evidence from eye movements. Reading Research Quarterly, 48, 199-214. doi:10.1002/rrq.41

Mayer, R. E. (2005).The cambridge hanbook of multimedia learning . New York,NY: Cambridge University Press.
Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and some new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed). The psychology of learning and motivation (pp.125-173). New York,NY: Academic Press.
Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224-240. doi:10.1002/sce.10066.
Ozcelik, E., Karakus, T., Kursun, E., & Cagiltay, K. (2009). An eye-tracking study of how color coding affects multimedia learning. Computer & Education, 53, 445-453.
Paivio, A. (1975). Coding distinctions and repetition effects in memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and heory (pp.179-214). London, England: Academic Press.
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York,NY: Oxford University Press.
Patrick, M. D., Carter, G., & Wiebe, E. N. (2005). Visual representations of DNA replication: Middle grades students’ perceptions and interpretations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14, 353-365.
Pozzer, L. L., & Roth, W. M. (2003). Prevalence, function, and structure of photographs in high school biology textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 1089-1114.
Pozzer-Ardenghi, L., & Roth, W.-M. (2005). Making sense of photographs. Science Education, 89, 219-241.
Prokop, P., Fančovičová, J., & Krajčovičová, A. (2016). Alternative conceptions about micro-organisms are influenced by experiences with disease in children. Journal of Biological Education, 50(1), 61-72.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.
Rayner, K., Chace, K. H., Slattery, T. J., & Ashby, J. (2006). Eye movements as reflections of comprehension processes in reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10, 241-255.
Renkl, A., & Scheiter, K. (2015). Studying visual display: How to instructionally support learning. Educational Psychology Review. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-015-9340-4. doi :10.1007/s10648-015-9340-4
Roderer, T., & Roebers, C. (2010). Explicit and implicit confidence judgments and developmental differences in metamemory: An eye-tracking approach. Metacognition and Learning, 5, 229-250.
Roderer, T., & Rober, C. M. (2014). Can you see me thinking(about my answers)? Using eye trackers to illuminate differences in monitoring and control skills and their relation to performance. Metacognition and Learning, 9, 1-23. doi: 10.1007/s11409-013-9109-4
Rozencwajg, P. (2003). Metacognitive factors in scientific problem-solving strategies. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 18, 281-294.
Schnotz, W. (2002). Towards an integrated view of learning from text and visual displays. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 101-120.
Schooler, J., Ohlson, S., & Brooks, K. (1993). Thoughts beyond words: When language overshadows insight. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 122, 166-183.

Schmidmaied, R., Eiber, S., Ebersbach, R., Schiller M., Hege, I., Holzer, M., & Fischer, M. R. (2013). Learning the facts in medical school is not enough: Which factors predict successful application of procedural knowledge in a laboratory. Biomedical Central Nursing, Retrieved from http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/13/28
Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26, 113-125. doi: 10.1023/a:1003044231033
Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460-475. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Smul, T. M., Lange, M., Redel, A., Stumpner, J., Lotz, C. A., Roewer, N., Kehl, F. (2009). Desflurane-induced cardioprotection against ischemia-reperfusion injury depends on timing. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, 23(5), 600-606. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2008.11.004.
Spector, P. (1992). Summated rating scale construction: A introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Spence, D. J., Yore, L. D., & Williams, R. L. (1999). The effects of explicit science reading instruction on selected grade 7 students’ metacognition and comprehension of specific science text. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 11, 15-30.
Sternberg, S.(1969). Memory-scanning: Mental processes revealed by reaction-time experiment. American scientist, 57, 421-457.
Siswati, B. H., & Corebima, A. D. (2017). The effect of education level and gender on students’ metacognititive skills in Malang, Indonesia. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 4(4), 163-168. Doi: 10.14738/assrj.44.2813
Topsakal, U. U., & Oversby, J. (2013). What do scientist and non-scientist teachers notice about biology diagrams? Journal of Biological Education, 47, 21-28.
Van Gog, T., & Scheiter, K. (2010). Eye tracking as a tool to study and enhance multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20(2), 95-99.
Van Velzen, J. H. (2016). Eleventh-grade high school students’ accounts of mathematical metacognitive knowledge: Explicitness and systematicity. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14, 319-333. doi: 10.1007/s10763-015-9689-3
Veenman, M. V. J. (2005). The assessment of metacognitive skills: What can be learned from multimethod designs? In C. Artelt & B. Moschner (Eds.), Lernstrategien und Metakognition: Implikationen für forschung und praxis (pp. 75-97). Berlin, Germany: Waxmann .
Veenman, M. V. J., Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and Learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1, 3-14.
Wang, H. S., Chen, Y. T., & Lin, H. C. (2013). The learning benefits of using eye trackers to enhance the geospatial abilities of elementary school students. British Journal of Educatuinal Technology. Advance online publication. doi:10.1111/bjet.12011
Wang, J. R., Chen, S. F., Fang, I., & Chou, C. T. (2014). Comparison of Taiwanese and Canadian students’ metacognition awareness of science reading, text, and strategies. International Journal of Science Education, 36, 693-71.
Weldon, M. S., & Roediger, H. L.(1987). Altering retrieval demands reverses the picture superiority effect. Memory & Cognition, 15(4), 269-280.

Wolfe, J. M. (1994). Guided search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1(2), 202-238.
Zohar, A., & Barzilai, S. (2013). A review of research on metacognition in science education: Current and future directions. Studies in Science Education, 49(2), 121–169. doi:10.1080/03057267.2013.847261.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE