Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The importance of design in learning from node-link diagrams

  • Published:
Instructional Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Diagrams organize by location. They give spatial cues for finding and recognizing information and for making inferences. In education, diagrams are often used to help students understand and recall information. This study assessed the influence of perceptual cues on reading behavior and subsequent retention. Eighty-two participants were assigned to one of four versions of a node-link diagram. The diagram consisted of header cells on the left and on top. These header cells organized the information in the body cells, which were connected by arrows. We used a between-subjects design with diagram orientation (header types on top or on the left) and cues orientation (arrows top–down or left–right) as independent variables. Reading process was measured through eye-tracking. Learning performance was assessed with a post test. The results showed that perceptual cues and header content had an additive effect on reading behavior. The reading patterns were strongest when the arrows and category headers both pointed in the same direction. This was reflected in recall. Participants performed better on post-test questions oriented on categories.

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

Notes

  1. We ran the Eye Movement Sequence model with C values from 1.0 to 5.0 and found the value of 2.0 to fit the manual observations of the eye-tracking data of 10 participants done by the second author. Values below would include too many sequences and values above 3.0 were found to be too restrictive.

References

  • Amadieu, F., van Gog, T., Paas, F., Tricot, A., & Mariné, C. (2009). Effects of prior knowledge and concept-map structure on disorientation, cognitive load, and learning. Learning and Instruction, 19, 376–386. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, P. (2002). Using argument map representations to make thinking visible for individuals and groups. In T. Koschmann, T. Hall, & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL2: Carrying forward the conversation (pp. 449–485). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corral, K., Schuff, D., & St Louis, R. (2006). The impact of alternative diagrams on the accuracy of recall: A comparison of star-schema diagrams and entity-relationship diagrams. Decision Support Systems, 42, 450–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R., & Sidio-Hall, M. (1994). The effect of color enhancement on knowledge map processing. The Journal of Experimental Educational, 62, 209–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, J., & Trueman, M. (1983). The effects of headings in text on recall, search and retrieval. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 53, 205–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heiser, J., & Tversky, B. (2006). Arrows in comprehending and producing mechanical diagrams. Cognitive Science, 30, 581–592. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0000_70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holsanova, J., Holmberg, N., & Holmqvist, K. (2008). Reading information graphics: The role of spatial contiguity and dual attentional guidance. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1215–1226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horn, R. E. (1998). Visual language. Bainbridge Island, WA: MacroVU, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyönä, J. (2010). The use of eye movements in the study of multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 172–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Just, M., & Carpenter, P. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, D., & Kiewra, K. (2010). What makes a matrix so effective? An empirical test of the relative benefits of signaling, extraction, and localization. Instructional Science, 38, 679–705. doi:10.1007/s11251-009-9095-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostelnick, C., & Roberts, D. D. (1998). Designing visual language: strategies for professional communicators. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lohse, G. L., Biolsi, K., Walker, N., & Rueter, H. H. (1994). A classification of visual representations. Communications of the ACM, 37, 36–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. (2010). Unique contributions of eye-tracking research to the study of learning with graphics. Learning and Instruction, 20, 167–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nesbit, J. C., Larios, H., & Adesope, O. O. (2007). How students read concept maps: A study of eye movements. Paper presented at the World conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia and telecommunications (Ed-Media), Vancouver, Canada.

  • O’Donnell, A., Dansereau, D., & Hall, R. (2002). Knowledge maps as scaffolds for cognitive processing. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 71–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozcelik, E., Karakus, T., Kursun, E., & Cagiltay, K. (2009). An eye-tracking study of how color coding affects multimedia learning. Computers & Education, 53, 445–453. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.03.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, S., & Rock, I. (1994). Rethinking perceptual organization: The role of uniform connectedness. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 29–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pander Maat, H., & van der Ploeg, I. (2006). Het effect van structuurmarkering in teksten en kennisschema’s. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 28, 125–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peebles, D., & Cheng, P. C. H. (2001). Graph-based reasoning: From task analysis to cognitive explanation. Paper presented at the Twenty-third Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Edinburgh.

  • Peebles, D., & Cheng, P. C. H. (2003). Modeling the effect of task and graphical representation on response latency in a graph reading task. Human Factors, 45, 28–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, B., Neuman, Y., Gil, J., & Ilya, M. (2003). Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 219–256. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1202_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sless, D. (1983). What should be happening in the art class? Journal of the Institute of Art Education, 7, 58–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stenning, K., & Oberlander, J. (1995). A cognitive theory of graphical and linguistic reasoning: Logic and implementation. Cognitive Science, 19, 97–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suthers, D. D. (2003). Representational guidance for collaborative inquiry. In J. E. B. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn. Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 27–46). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treisman, A., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, B. (2001). Spatial schemas in depictions. In M. Gattis (Ed.), Spatial schemas and abstract thought (pp. 79–111). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, B., Kugelmass, S., & Winter, A. (1991). Cross-cultural and developmental trends in graphic productions. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 515–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Waarde, K., & Westendorp, P. (2000). The functions of arrows in user instructions. Paper presented at the The IIID expert forum on manual design institute for information design, Wien, Austria.

  • Van Gog, T., & Scheiter, K. (2010). Eye tracking as a tool to study and enhance multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 95–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Wijk, C., Speessen, R., & Maes, A. (2010). Interpreting arrows in static pictures. Paper presented at the EARLI SIG 2 Meeting, Tübingen.

  • Ware, C. (2004). Information visualization: Perception for design. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ware, C. (2008). Visual thinking for design. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiegmann, D., Dansereau, D., McCagg, E., Rewey, K., & Pitre, U. (1992). Effects of knowledge map characteristics on information processing. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 17, 136–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilhite, S. C. (1989). Headings as memory facilitators: The importance of prior knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 115–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, T. R., & Spyridakis, J. H. (1992). Visual discriminability of headings in text. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 35, 64–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winn, W. (1993). An account of how readers search for information in diagrams. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 162–185. doi:10.1006/ceps.1993.1016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winn, W. D., & Holliday, W. G. (1982). Design principles for diagrams and charts. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), The technology of text (pp. 277–299). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Tilburg University, Warandelaan 2, P.O. Box 90153, 5000 LE, Tilburg, The Netherlands

    Marije van Amelsvoort

  2. University of Twente, Drienerlolaan 5, P.O. Box 217, 7500 AE, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Jan van der Meij, Anjo Anjewierden & Hans van der Meij

Authors
  1. Marije van Amelsvoort
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan van der Meij
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anjo Anjewierden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hans van der Meij
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marije van Amelsvoort.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van Amelsvoort, M., van der Meij, J., Anjewierden, A. et al. The importance of design in learning from node-link diagrams. Instr Sci 41, 833–847 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9258-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9258-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation