Advertisement

User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction

, Volume 15, Issue 5, pp 459–495 | Cite as

Modeling Elementary Cognitive Abilities for Adaptive Hypermedia Presentation

  • Franck Tarpin-Bernard
  • Halima Habieb-Mammar
Article

Abstract

The adaptation of hypermedia can be carried out at three levels, namely the content, navigation and presentation level. The presentation level is the least studied of the three, apparently because it refers to user properties that are not easy to model. In this paper, we present a new approach to modeling cognitive abilities that relies on basic mental functionalities. We describe the Cognitive User Modeling for Adaptive Presentation of Hyper-Documents (CUMAPH) environment, which mainly provides an authoring tool and an adaptation engine. The aim of this environment is to adapt a hyper-document presentation by selecting the elements that best fit the user cognitive profile. Its architecture is based on four main components: a cognitive user model, a hyper-document builder, an adaptation engine and a generic style sheet. To validate our approach, we designed an innovative protocol and conducted an experimental study involving 39 students. The first results show that an adaptive presentation can significantly increase the efficiency of hypermedia presentations.

Keywords

adaptive hypermedia cognitive indicator document model empirical evaluation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Altmann, E.M., John, B.E. 1999Episodic indexing: A model of memory for attention eventsCognitive Science23117156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ariadne: (2002), <http://www.ariadne-eu.org>.Google Scholar
  3. Antonietti, A., Giorgetti, M. 1998The Verbalizer-Visualizer Questionnaire: a reviewPerceptual and Motor Skills Psychological Reports86227239Google Scholar
  4. Boyle, C., Encarnacion, A.O. 1994MetaDoc: An adaptive hypertext reading systemUser Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction4119Google Scholar
  5. Brusilovsky P., Su H.-D. (2002) Adaptive Visualization Component of a Distributed Web-based Adaptive Educational System. In: Intelligent Tutoring Systems’2002. Vol. 2363, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 229–238.Google Scholar
  6. Brusilovsky, P. 2001Adaptive hypermediaUser Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction1187110MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Brusilovsky, P. 1996Methods and techniques of adaptive hypermedia’User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction687129(Reprinted in Adaptive Hypertext and Hypermedia, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998, pp. 1–43).Google Scholar
  8. Byrne, M.D., Anderson, J.R. 1998Perception and actionAnderson, J.R.Lebiere, C. eds. The atomic components of thought HillsdaleErlbaumMahwah NJ167200Google Scholar
  9. Byrne, M.D. 2001ACT-R/PM and menu selection: Applying a cognitive architecture to HCIInternational Journal of Human-Computer Studies554184CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Byrne, M.D. 2003Cognitive ArchitectureJacko, J.Sears, A. eds. The Human-computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies and Emerging ApplicationsMahwah, NJLawrence Erlbaum97117Google Scholar
  11. Chin, D.N. 2001Empirical Evaluation of User Models and User-Adapted SystemsUser Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction11181194MATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Coffield, F., Moseley D., Hall, E. and Ecclestone, K.: 2004, Should we be Using Learning Styles? What Research has to Say to Practice, London: Learning and Skills Research Centre (LSRC).Google Scholar
  13. Conklin, J. 1987Hypertext: An introduction and surveyIEEE Computer201741Google Scholar
  14. Crampes M., Ranwez S., Plantier M. (2000) Ontology-supported and ontology-driven conceptual navigation on the World Wide Web. In: 11th ACM Hypertext Conference. ACM Press: San Antonio, Texas, pp. 191–199.Google Scholar
  15. Daniels, H.L. 1996Interaction of Cognitive Styles and Learner Control of Presentation Mode in a Hypermedia Environment, Doctoral dissertationPolytechnic Institute and State UniversityBlacksburg VAGoogle Scholar
  16. Danchak, M. M.: 2004, Using Adaptive Hypernedia to Match Web Presentation to Learning Styles. In: Bourne, J. and Moore, J. C. (eds): Elements of Quality Online Education: Into the Mainstream, Needham, MA: Sloan Consortium, Vol. 3 (2), ISSN 1541–2806, pp 93–108.Google Scholar
  17. De Bra, P., Aerts, A., Berden, B., De Lange, B., Rousseau, B., Santic, T., Smits, D. and Stash, N.: 2003, AHA! The Adaptive Hypermedia Architecture, In: 14th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, Nottingham, UK, pp. 81–84.Google Scholar
  18. De Bra, P. and Calvi, L.: 1998, AHA! an open adaptive hypermedia architecture. In: Brusilovsky, P. and Milosavljevic, M. (eds): The New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia 4, Special Issue on Adaptivity and User Modeling in Hypermedia Systems, pp. 115–139.Google Scholar
  19. De Bra, P., Brusilovsky, P. and Houben, G. J.: 1999, Adaptive Hypermedia: From Systems to Framework, ACM Computing Surveys, Symposium Issue on Hypertext and Hypermedia, 31 (4).Google Scholar
  20. Del Corso, D., Ovcin, E., Morrone, G. and Gianesini, D.: 2002, The 3DE Custom Course Compiler: An Engine to Assemble Custom Web Courses, In: F2E-2, FIE 2002 Electronic Proceedings, Boston, 6–9 November 2002.Google Scholar
  21. Dufresne, A., Turcotte, S. 1997Cognitive style and its implications for navigation strategiesBoulay, B.D.Mizoguchi, R. eds. Artificial Intelligence in Education: Knowledge and Media in Learning SystemsAmsterdam: IOS PressKobe, Japan287293AI-ED’97 ConferenceGoogle Scholar
  22. Felder, R.M. 1996Matters of stylesPRISM, ASEE61823Google Scholar
  23. Fink, J., Kobsa, A., Nill, A. 1997Adaptable and adaptive information access for all users, including the disabled and elderlyJameson, A.Paris, C.Tasso, C. eds. 6th International Conference on User ModellingSpringer-VerlagNew York171173(UM ’97, Sardinia, Italy)Google Scholar
  24. Fowler, C. J. H., Macaulay, L. A. and Fowler, J. F.: 1985, The relationship between cognitive style and dialogue style: An explorative study. In: Johnson, Peter, Cook, Stephen (eds): Proceedings of the Conference of the British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Specialist Group - People and Computers - Designing the Interface. University of East Anglia. pp. 186–198.Google Scholar
  25. Gray, W.D., Young, R.M., Kirschenbaum, S.S. 1997Introduction to a special issue on cognitive architectures and human-computer interactionHuman–Computer Interaction12301309Google Scholar
  26. Habieb-Mammar, , Tarpin-Bernard, F. 2002Cognitive styles and adaptive multimodal interfacesGray, W.D.Schunn, C.D. eds. CogSci’2002, the 24th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science SocietyErlbaum Fairfax Virginia (USA)Hillsdale NJ626630Google Scholar
  27. Habieb-Mammar, H., Tarpin-Bernard, F., Prévot, P. 2003Adaptive presentation of multimedia interface case study: “Brain Story” CourseBrusilovsky, P.Corbett, A.T.Rosis, F. eds. User Modeling UM’03Springer VerlagCarnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh1524Google Scholar
  28. Habieb-Mammar and Tarpin-Bernard, F.: 2004, CUMAPH: Cognitive user modeling for adaptive presentation of hyper-documents, Adaptive Hypermedia 2004, In: de Bra, P. and Nejdl, W. (eds): Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS 3137) Series, Springer Verlag, pp. 136–145.Google Scholar
  29. Höök, K.: 1997, Evaluating the utility and usability of an adaptive hypermedia system. In: Moore, J., Edmonds, E. and Puerta, A. (eds): International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, Orlando, Florida, ACM, pp. 179–186.Google Scholar
  30. Jameson, A. 2003Adaptive interfaces and agentsJacko, J.A.Sears, A. eds. The Human Computer Interaction HandbookErlbaumMahwah, NJ305330Google Scholar
  31. Louise, K.M., Jones, M.W., McDonald, S.A., Shillcock, R. 2004‘Dyslexics’ eye fixations may accommodate to hemispheric desynchronizationNeuroreport1526292632Google Scholar
  32. Kieras, D.E., Meyer, D.E. 1997An overview of the EPIC architecture for cognition and performance with application to human-computer interactionHuman–Computer Interaction12391438Google Scholar
  33. Kobsa, A.: 1994, Conceptual hierarchies: Approaches from artificial intelligence and connectionism. In: Best, H., Endres-Niggemeyer, B., Herfurth, M. und Ohly, P. P. Hrsg. (eds): Informations- und Wissensverarbeitung in den Sozialwissenschaften: Beiträge zur Umsetzung neuer Informationstechnologien. Opladen, Westdt. Verlag.Google Scholar
  34. Language XML-W3C Recommandation http://www.w3.org/xml/.Google Scholar
  35. Lemaire, P. eds. 1999‘Psychologie cognitive’De Boeck UniversitéBruxellesGoogle Scholar
  36. Lohman, D.F., Bosma, A. 2002Using cognitive measurement models in the assessment of cognitive stylesBraun, H.Wiley, D.Jackson, D. eds. Under construction: The role of constructs in psychological and educational measurementErlbaumHillsdale, NJ127146Google Scholar
  37. Liu Y. and Ginther D.: 1999, Cognitive styles and distance education, Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration 2(3), State University of West Georgia, Distance Education. http://www.westga.edu/~distance/liu23.html.Google Scholar
  38. Miller, G.A. 1956The magical number seven, plus or minus two.The Psychological Review638197Google Scholar
  39. Monaghan, P., Shillcock, R.C. 2004Hemispheric asymmetries in cognitive modelling: Connectionist modelling of unilateral visual neglect.Psychological Review111283308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Muylwijk, B.V., Van Der Veer, G., Waern, Y. 1983On the implications of user variability in open systemsAn overview of the little we know and the lot we have to find out. Behaviour & Information Technology3313326Google Scholar
  41. Newell, A. 1990Unified Theories of CognitionHarvard University PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  42. Ritter, F.E., Baxter, G.D., Jones, G., Young, R.M. 2000Cognitive models as usersACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction7133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rossi G., Schwabe D., Guimarães R. (2001) Designing personalized web applications. In: 10th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW10), Hong Kong, ACM Press, pp. 275–284.Google Scholar
  44. Smith, D.M., Kolb, D.A. 1986The User’s Guide for the Learning-Style Inventory: A Manual for Teachers and TrainersMA: McBer & CompanyBostonGoogle Scholar
  45. St. Amant, R., Freed A. and Ritter, F. E.: 2004, Specifying ACT-R models of user interaction with a GOMS language. In: Cognitive Systems Research 6 (1), pp. 71–88.Google Scholar
  46. Stephanidis, C., Paramythis, A., Sfyrakis, M., Stergiou, A., Maou, N., Leventis, A., Paparoulis, G., Karagiandidis, C. 1998Adaptable and adaptive user interfaces for disabled users in AVANTI ProjectTriglia, S.Mullery, A.Campolargo, M.Vanderstraeten, H.Mampaey, M. eds. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Intelligence in Services and Networks (IS&N’98), Technology for Ubiquitous Telecom Services, Antwerp, Belgium, LNCS 1430Springer-VerlagGermany153166Google Scholar
  47. Tarpin-Bernard, F., Habieb Mammar, H., Croisile, B. and Noir, M.: 2001, A supervised Program for Cognitive e-Training, WebNet’2001, World conference on Web Technologies, Orlando, USA.Google Scholar
  48. Tsandilas T. and Schraefel, M. C.: 2003, Adaptive presentation supporting focus and context’. In: De Bra, P. (eds.): Proceedings ofAadaptive Hypermedia AH 2003, Nottingham, UK, pp. 193–200.Google Scholar
  49. Witkin, H.A., Goodenough, D.R. 1981Cognitive Styles: Essence and Origins, IntUniversities PressNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  50. XSL Transformations (XSLT) http://www.w3.org/Style/xsl/.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Interaction Collaborative Télé-activités Téléenseignement (ICTT)INSA de LyonVilleurbanne CedexFrance
  2. 2.Scientific Brain Training Batiment CEIVilleurbanne Cedex
  3. 3.Human-Centered Software Engineering GroupConcordia UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations