MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2267277910

The effects of navigation tools on student performance and recall in a hypermedia information search task

2003· article· en· W2267277910 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia Boechler, Michael R. W. Dawson

Bibliographic record

VenueE-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypermediaComputer scienceTask (project management)RecallInformation retrievalHuman–computer interactionPreferenceEmpirical researchMultimediaPsychologyEngineeringCognitive psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measures of performance were collected from a sample of 169 students during an information search task through a hypermedia document. Comparisons were made between four groups given navigation tools that contained different spatial cues for conveying conceptual information. All groups were required to revisit the navigation tool for all navigation choices to ensure equal exposure to the tool across groups. Results indicated no differences between the groups in speed, accuracy or economy. However, the addition of explicit spatial cues to hierarchical information did enhance the students’ recall of page titles. It has been suggested that providing spatial frameworks of document material can enhance aspects of hypermedia use but empirical evidence to date is inconsistent. Previous research indicates that spatial tools modeled after realworld navigational tools (maps or diagrams) appear to enhance performance on some measures (McDonald & Stevenson, 1998) but not on others (Stanton, Taylor & Tweedie, 1992). In order to better understand the influence of different spatial elements on hypermedia use, four different navigation tools were tested, each containing different visual devices for mapping spatial characteristics onto the conceptual characteristics of the document material. Performance in a hyperdocument as it relates to spatial information has been studied fairly extensively across several disciplines (for review see Boechler, 2001). Results of earlier studies on the influence of navigation tools on performance measures may have been clouded by the users’ preference for accessing a particular type of tool over another type of tool. The current study forced users to make all navigation decisions from the navigation tool only, thus the impact of each type of spatial cue on performance and memory should be more salient as all users experienced similar exposure to the navigation tool. The performance measures collected in this study included two efficiency measures (task time and number of pages accessed) and two effectiveness measures (accuracy of locating target information and recall of page titles).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.653
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher EducationSame topicSpatial Cognition and NavigationFrench-language works237,207