Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Gender Differences in Eye Movements in Solving Text-and-Diagram Science Problems

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The main purpose of this study was to examine possible gender differences in how junior high school students integrate printed texts and diagrams while solving science problems. We proposed the response style hypothesis and the spatial working memory hypothesis to explain possible gender differences in the integration process. Eye-tracking technique was used to explore these hypotheses. The results of eye-movement indices support the response style hypothesis. Compared to male students, female students spent more time and displayed more fixations in solving science problems. The female students took more time to read the print texts and compare the information between print-based texts and visual-based diagrams more frequently during the problem-solving process than the male students. However, no gender differences were found in the accuracy of their responses to the science problems or their performances in the spatial working memory task. Implications for psychological theory and educational practice are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ainsworth, S. & Loizou, A. T. (2003). The effects of self-explaining when learning with text or diagrams. Cognitive Science, 27, 669–681. doi:10.1016/S0364-0213(03)00033-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ariasi, N. & Mason, L. (2014). From covert processes to overt outcomes of refutation text reading: The interplay of science text structure and working memory capacity through eye fixations. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(3), 493–523. doi:10.1007/s10763-013-9494-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. (2002). Is working memory still working? European Psychologist, 7, 85–97. doi:10.1027//1016-9040.7.2.85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory and language: An overview. Journal of Communication Disorders, 36(3), 189–208. doi:10.1016/S0021-9924(03)00019-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, J. F. (2001). Investigating gender differences in the science performance of 16-year-old pupils in the UK. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 469–486. doi:10.1080/09500690120123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brünken, R., Plass, J. L. & Leutner, D. (2003). Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 53–61. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3801_7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carney, R. N. & Levin, J. R. (2002). Pictorial illustrations still improve students’ learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 5–26. doi:10.1023/A:1013176309260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, Y.-W., Lin, W.-Y. & Wang, J.-W. (2013). Is gender gap in science performance closer? Investigating data from International Science Study. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 44(Special Issue), 459–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H.-C., Lai, H.-D. & Chiu, F.-C. (2010). Eye tracking technology for learning and education. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 55(4), 39–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y. C. & Yang, F. Y. (2014). Probing the relationship between process of spatial problems solving and science learning: An eye tracking approach. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(3), 579–603. doi:10.1007/s10763-013-9504-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, M.-C., Chou, P.-I., Wang, Y.-T. & Lin, C.-H. (2015). Learning effects of a science textbook designed with adapted cognitive process principles on grade 5 students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 13(3), 467–488.

  • Chien, Y. C. & Wu, C. J. (2012). The effect of arrows in an illustration when reading scientific text: Evidence from eye movements and reading tests. Chinese Journal of Psychology, 54(3), 385–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chou, P.-I. & Cheng, M.-C. (2010, January).Content analysis on illustrations in science and technology textbooks used in Taiwan’s junior high schools. Paper presented at the 6th International Conference on Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, Hualien, Taiwan.

  • Clark, R. C. & Lyons, C. (2004). Graphics for learning. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collaer, M. L. & Nelson, J. D. (2002). Large visuospatial sex difference in line judgment: Possible role of attentional factors. Brain and Cognition, 49(1), 1–12. doi:10.1006/brcg.2001.1321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, M. P. (2006). Visual representations in science education: The influence of prior knowledge and cognitive load theory on instructional design principles. Science Education, 90(6), 1073–1091. doi:10.1002/sce.20164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danili, E. & Reid, N. (2004). Some strategies to improve performance in school chemistry, based on two cognitive factors. Research in Science and Technological Education, 22, 203–226. doi:10.1080/0263514042000290903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duchowski, A. T. (2007). Eye tracking methodology: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gathercole, S. E., Pickering, S. J., Knight, C. & Stegmann, Z. (2004). Working memory skills and educational attainment: Evidence from national curriculum assessments at 7 and 14 years of age. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 1–16. doi:10.1002/acp.934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, J. F. & Litwiller, R. M. (2005). Spatial working memory and gender differences in science. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 32, 49–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D. F. (2004). A cognitive-process taxonomy for sex differences in cognitive abilities. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(4), 135–139. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00292.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D. F. (2013). Sex differences in cognitive abilities (4th ed.). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D. F., Benbow, C. P., Geary, D. C., Gur, R. C., Hyde, J. S. & Gernsbacher, M. A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8(1), 1–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ho, H. N. J., Bubic, A., Kaponja, 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(3), 525–554. doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2007.00032.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, S. B. (2007). Sex differences in mental rotation and spatial visualization ability: Can they be accounted for by differences in working memory capacity? Intelligence, 35(3), 211–223. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.07.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kliese, T. & Over, R. (1993). Does supplementing text by illustrations enhance comprehension? Australian Journal of Adult and Community Education, 33, 180–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, V. R. (2010). Adaptations and continuities in the use and design of visual representations in US middle school science textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 32(8), 1099–1126. doi:10.1080/09500690903253916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewandowsky, S., Oberauer, K., Yang, L. X. & Ecker, U. K. (2010). A working memory test battery for MATLAB. Behavior Research Methods, 42(2), 571–585. doi:10.3758/BRM.42.2.571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Foy, P. & Stanco, G. M. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in science. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31–48). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., Hegarty, M., Mayer, S. & Campbell, J. (2005). When static media promote active learning: Annotated illustrations versus narrated animations in multimedia instruction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11(4), 256–265. doi:10.1037/1076-898X.11.4.256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pauls, F., Petermann, F. & Lepach, A. C. (2013). Gender differences in episodic memory and visual working memory including the effects of age. Memory, 21(7), 857–874. doi:10.1080/09658211.2013.765892.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, M. (2005). Sex differences and the factor of time in solving Vanderberg and Kuse mental rotation problems. Brain and Cognition, 57, 176–184. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2004.08.052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plass, J. L., Moreno, R. & Brünken, R. (2010). Cognitive load theory. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457–1506. doi:10.1080/17470210902816461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, C. (2002). The fundamental design variables of diagramming. In M. Anderson, B. Meyer & P. Olivier (Eds.), Diagrammatic representation and reasoning (pp. 85–102). London, England: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rohr, L. E. (2006a). Gender-specific movement strategies using a computer-pointing task. Journal of Motor Behavior, 38(6), 431–137. doi:10.3200/JMBR. 38.6.431-137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohr, L. E. (2006b). Upper and lower limb reciprocal tapping: Evidence for gender biases. Journal of Motor Behavior, 38(1), 15–17. doi:10.3200/JMBR.38.1.15–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez, C. A. & Wiley, J. (2010). Sex differences in science learning: Closing the gap through animations. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(3), 271–275. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2010.01.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnotz, W. & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 141–156. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00017-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staberg, E. (1994). Gender and science in the Swedish compulsory school. Gender and Education, 6(1), 35–45. doi:10.1080/0954025940060103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (2003). Evolution of human cognitive architecture. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 43, pp. 215–216). San Diego, CA: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (2005). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 19–30). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tippett, C. D. (2011).Exploring middle school students’ representational competence in science: Development and verification of a framework for learning with visual representations (Doctoral dissertation). University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1828/3250

  • Treagust, D. F. (2007). General instructional methods and strategies. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 373–391). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Tsaparlis, G. (2005). Non-algorithmic quantitative problem solving in university physical chemistry: A correlation study of the role of selective cognitive factors. Research in Science & Technological Education, 23, 125–148. doi:10.1080/02635140500266369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Gerven, P. W., Paas, F., Van Merriënboer, J. J. & Schmidt, H. G. (2004). Memory load and the cognitive pupillary response in aging. Psychophysiology, 41(2), 167–174. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2003.00148.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voyer, D. (2011). Time limits and gender differences on paper-and-pencil tests of mental rotation: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(2), 267–277. doi:10.3758/s13423-010-0042-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voyer, D. & Sullivan, A. (2003). The relation between spatial and mathematical abilities: Potential factors underlying suppression. International Journal of Psychology, 38(1), 11–23. doi:10.1080/00207590244000241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, E. M., Kemmler, G., Deisenhammer, E. A., Fleischhacker, W. W. & Delazer, M. (2003). Sex differences in cognitive functions. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(4), 863–875. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00288-X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Y.-C. (2012). A study on the relationship among the visuo-spatial working memory, spatial ability, and mathematical geometry performance of general students and learning disability students in junior high school (Master’s thesis). National University of Tainan, Tainan, Taiwan.

  • Yang, F. Y., Chang, C. Y., Chien, W. R., Chien, Y. T. & Tseng, Y. H. (2013). Tracking learners’ visual attention during a multimedia presentation in a real classroom. Computers & Education, 62, 208–220. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yore, L. D. & Tippett, C. D. (2014). Reading and science learning. In R. Gunstone (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of science education (pp. 821–828). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, P.-C. (2012). The relationship among working memory, number sense and mathematics achievement of junior high school students (Master’s thesis). National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research is partially supported by the “Aim for the Top University Project” and “Center of Learning Technology for Chinese” of National Taiwan Normal University (NTNU), sponsored by the Ministry of Education, Taiwan, R.O.C., and the “International Research-Intensive Center of Excellence Program” of NTNU and the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, R.O.C., under grant no. NSC 97-2511-S-003-035-MY2. The authors would like to express our deepest gratitude and appreciation to Prof. Larry Yore and Shari Yore for their assistance in the conceptual and technical revision of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hsuan Chuang University, Hsinchu City, Taiwan

    Po-Sheng Huang

  2. Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling, National Taiwan Normal University, No.162, Sec. 1, Heping East Road Da-an District, Taipei City, 10610, Taiwan, Republic of China

    Hsueh-Chih Chen

Authors
  1. Po-Sheng Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hsueh-Chih Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hsueh-Chih Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Huang, PS., Chen, HC. Gender Differences in Eye Movements in Solving Text-and-Diagram Science Problems. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 14 (Suppl 2), 327–346 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9644-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9644-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation