Please wait a minute...
心理学报
  论文 本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
大学生问题发现过程的眼动研究
陈丽君;郑雪
(1广东技术师范学院教育学院, 广州 510665) (2华南师范大学心理学院, 广州 510631)
An Eye-movement Study on Problem Finding Process of Undergraduates
CHEN Lijun;ZHENG Xue
(1 Educational school, Guangdong Polytechnic Normal University, Guangzhou 510665, China) (2 Psychological school, South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510631, China)
全文: PDF(495 KB)   评审附件 (1 KB) 
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 

在潜藏式与矛盾式两类问题发现情境中, 以眼动仪为研究工具, 问题发现能力高与低的大学生各20名为被试, 探讨大学生在问题发现总体和4个兴趣区中的眼动特征及其与发现问题数量和质量之间的关系。研究表明:(1)不同能力大学生在不同情境及其兴趣区中的问题发现差异, 能够体现在眼动指标上。回视是反映问题发现能力的敏感指标。回视次数和发现问题数量与质量之间的正相关, 以及在高能力组学生上的优势, 体现了信息的联系和整合性加工在问题发现中具有积极意义。(2)潜藏式问题发现中, 个体平均注视时间更长, 反映其认知加工难度更大。在提供重要信息的区域, 被试会投入更多精力, 表现为在注视时间、注视次数和瞳孔直径大小等指标的上升。(3)眼睛注视区域与发现问题区域间存在对应关系, 显示出“眼随心动”现象。在问题发现的最初和最终阶段, 被试都会出现跨区信息搜寻行为, 分别代表了对问题线索的寻找和最后的检查评估。高能力被试在每个稳定注视阶段的注视时间更短, 这种信息转换的灵活性体现出其信息加工上的优势。动态眼动轨迹分析揭示了单个静态指标难以反映的新特点。

服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
陈丽君
郑雪
关键词 问题发现兴趣区眼动问题情境眼动轨迹    
Abstract

Using the eye tracker, the present study was conducted to explore the cognitive process of problem finding of undergraduates in the contradictory and potential conditions, which focused on the four eye-movement areas of interest. Based on our hypothesis, we expected the quality and quantity of problem finding of two groups (high ability group and low ability group) would show significant difference in the contradictory and potential problem finding conditions, which would be reflected in the eye movement model. Furthermore, the eye movement characteristics would be correlated with the quantity and quality of problem finding. We think the analysis of eye track can show the eye movement rules which could not be reflected by the static indicators. The mixed design with 2 (question situation: a contradictory situation, a potential situation) ×2 (subject category : high ability group, low ability group) × 4 (interest areas: the first to the fourth interest area) was conducted in the study. The question situation and interest area were within-group factors, while the subject category was a between-group factor. The dependent variable included the quantity and quality of problem finding and the eye movement indexes (e.g. the fixation duration, fixation frequency, regression frequency, pupil diameter and eye track in the overall and four areas of interest). In the experiment, subjects were required to find problems in the contradictory and potential situations. The eye tracker recorded eye movement parameters when subjects found problems. The results were as follows. First, the average fixation duration in the potential situation was significant longer than the time in the contradictory situation, which may reflect that the cognitive processing in the potential situation was much more difficult than it in the contradictory situation. The pupil diameter size in the contradictory situation was bigger than it in the potential situation. The regression frequency for high ability group was more than that for low ability group, which indicated the positive role of the relationship and integration of information in the problem finding. Second, the eye movement in problem finding was significant different in the four areas of interest. In the region with essential information, many eye movement indexes raised, such as fixation duration, fixation frequency, and pupil diameter, which indicated subjects would put more effort. Particularly, the total fixation duration and fixation frequency in the second, third and fourth areas were more than these in the first area. The average fixation duration and pupil diameter size of undergraduates in the rear area were more than these in the front area. The regression frequency in the second area was more than it in the first area. In the contradictory situation, the total fixation duration, fixation frequency and regression frequency were correlated significantly with the quantity of problems, while the regression frequency was correlated significantly with the quality of problems in the contradictory situation. The regression frequency was correlated significantly with the quantity of problems in the potential situation. The relationship between the eye movement indexes and the quantity or the quality of problems in the areas of interest was almost the same with in total. Third, the fixation area matched the problem finding area which indicated the eye movement followed the thinking in problem finding. Searching behavior across area was observed in the first and the last fixation area which means the search for clues and final inspection and evaluation. High ability group spent less time in a stable fixation phase, which reflected their superiority of the flexibility in information conversion. For problem finding, the factors of group category and situation were reflected in eye movement indexes. Because of the differences in material property and difficulty, there was a significant difference of eye movement in the situation between each area of interest. All kinds of static eye movement indexes could better reflect the quantity rather than the quality of problem finding. However, the regression frequency was a sensitive index of reflecting the problem-finding ability, and the analysis of the dynamic eye track revealed the rules that a single static index cannot. Overall, using the eye tracker to investigate the cognitive process of problem finding could not only improve the accuracy of the experimental research, but also conduce to deeply explore the internal information processing mechanism of problem finding.

Key wordsproblem finding    area of interest    eye movement    problem situation    eye track
收稿日期: 2012-05-28      出版日期: 2014-03-25
基金资助:

广东省哲社规划项目“问题发现思维研究” (GD11HXL01)。

通讯作者: 陈丽君   
引用本文:   
陈丽君;郑雪. 大学生问题发现过程的眼动研究[J]. 心理学报, 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2014.00367.
CHEN Lijun;ZHENG Xue. An Eye-movement Study on Problem Finding Process of Undergraduates. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2014, 46(3): 367-384.
链接本文:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2014.00367      或      http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/Y2014/V46/I3/367
[1] 白学军;高晓雷;高蕾;王永胜. 藏语阅读知觉广度的眼动研究[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(5): 569-576.
[2] 梁菲菲;王永胜;杨文;白学军. 阅读水平调节儿童阅读眼动注视模式的发展:基于9~11岁儿童的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(4): 450-459.
[3] 孙俊才; 石荣. 哭泣表情面孔的注意偏向:眼动的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(2): 155-163.
[4] 刘志方;张智君;杨桂芳. 中文阅读中的字词激活模式:来自提示词边界延时效应的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(9): 1082-1092.
[5] 苏衡;刘志方;曹立人. 中文阅读预视加工中的词频和预测性效应及其对词切分的启示:基于眼动的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(6): 625-636.
[6] 王福兴;侯秀娟;段朝辉;刘华山;李卉. 中国象棋经验棋手与新手的知觉差异:来自眼动的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(5): 457-471.
[7] 王福兴;李文静;颜志强;段朝辉;李卉. 幼儿对威胁性刺激蛇的注意觉察:来自眼动证据[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(6): 774-786.
[8] 闫国利;刘妮娜;梁菲菲;刘志方;白学军. 中文读者词汇视觉信息获取速度的发展 ——来自消失文本的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(3): 300-318.
[9] 王福兴;段朝辉;周宗奎;陈珺. 邻近效应对多媒体学习中图文整合的影响:线索的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(2): 224-233.
[10] 陈双;陈黎静;杨晓虹;杨玉芳. 语篇背景在语义整合中的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(2): 167-175.
[11] 陈洁彬;鲁忠义. 路径转弯对语篇空间情境模型建构的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(2): 176-189.
[12] 白学军;王永胜;郭志英;高晓雷;闫国利. 汉语阅读中词N+2的预视对高频词N+1 加工影响的眼动研究[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(2): 143-156.
[13] 徐建平;陈基越;张伟;李文雅;盛毓. 应聘者在人格测验中作假的反应过程:基于工作赞许性的眼动证据[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(11): 1395-1404.
[14] 寇慧;苏艳华;罗小春;陈红. 相貌负面身体自我女性对相貌词的注意偏向眼动的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(10): 1213-1222.
[15] 汪海彬;卢家楣;姚本先;桑青松;陈宁;唐晓晨. 职前教师情绪复杂性对情绪面孔加工的影响 ——来自行为、ERP和眼动的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(1): 50-65.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《心理学报》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发  技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn