Visual Context and Relevance in Life Cycle Diagrams

Matthew Wood; Susan Stocklmayer

doi:10.29333/ijese/9154

Full Text (PDF)

Matthew Wood ¹ ² ^* , Susan Stocklmayer ²

More Detail

¹ University of Tsukuba, JAPAN² Australian National University, AUSTRALIA^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

Graphics, graphs, diagrams, and visual representations of information play an integral role in science education and communication settings. The production of such graphics involves hundreds of design decisions, from content and layout to colour and illustration style, and any of these decisions has the potential to influence viewer’s experience and interpretation. While many studies have examined the influence of design on information transfer, comprehension, recall and so on, less attention has been given to affective impacts. In this study, we examined the impact of visual context in a biology life cycle diagram on viewers’ perception of relevance, sense of concern, and others. Results indicated that the presence of a contextual background in the diagram was associated with higher perception of relevance (related to personal experience). Context may also correlate with greater concern, though further research is needed to confirm this.

Keywords

Affect
relevance
visual context
diagram design

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED, Volume 17, Issue 1, 2021, Article No: e2224

https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9154

Publication date: 10 Nov 2020

Article Views: 2454

Article Downloads: 1316

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Bazire, M., & Brézillon, P. (2005). Understanding context before using it. Modeling and using context, 3554, 29–40. doi:10.1007/11508373_3
Bennett, J., Hogarth, S., & Lubben, F. (2003). A systematic review of the effects of context-based and science-technology-society (sts) approaches in the teaching of secondary science. EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.
Bernaards, C. A., & Jennrich, R. I. (2005). Gradient projection algorithms and software for arbitrary rotation criteria in factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65, 676–696. Retrieved from http://www.stat.ucla.edu/research/gpa
Buchanan, E. (2016). R - exploratory factor analysis lecture & example. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/uPFQQtdKCAM
Butterworth, G. (1992). Context and cognition in models of cognitive growth. In Context and cognition: Ways of learning and knowing (pp. 1-13). Hertfordshire: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Ceci, S. J., & Roazzi, A. (1994). The effect of context on cognition: postcards from brazil. In R. J. Sternberg & R. K. Wagner (Eds.), Mind in context: Interactionist perspectives on human intelligence (pp. 74–104). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coakes, S. J., Steed, L., & Ong, C. (2010). SPSS: analysis without anguish: version 17.0 for windows. Milton: John Wiley & Sons.
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
Cordova, D. I., & Lepper, M. R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 715–730. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.88.4.715
Frymier, A. B., & Shulman, G. M. (1995). “What’s in it for me?”: increasing content relevance to enhance students’ motivation. Communication Education, 44(1), 40–50. doi:10.1080/03634529509378996
Gilbert, J. K. (2006). On the nature of “context” in chemical education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 957–976. doi:10.1080/09500690600702470
Hegarty, M., Smallman, H. S., & Stull, A. T. (2012). Choosing and using geospatial displays: effects of design on performance and metacognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 18(1), 1–17. doi:10.1037/a0026625
Heidig, S., Müller, J., & Reichelt, M. (2015). Emotional design in multimedia learning: differentiation on relevant design features and their effects on emotions and learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 81–95. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.009
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
Hulleman, C. S., Godes, O., Hendricks, B. L., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). Enhancing interest and performance with a utility value intervention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 880–895. doi:10.1037/a0019506
Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2009). Promoting interest and performance in high school science classes. Science (New York, N.Y.), 326(5958), 1410–2. doi:10.1126/science.1177067
Klassen, S. (2006). A theoretical framework for contextual science teaching. Interchange, 37(1–2), 31–62. doi:10.1007/s10780-006-8399-8
Komsta, L., & Novomestky, F. (2015). Moments: moments, cumulants, skewness, kurtosis and related tests. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=moments
Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography - describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10, 177–200. doi:10.1007/BF00132516
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2002). Animation as an aid to multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 87–100. doi:10.1023/A:1013184611077
Park, B., Flowerday, T., & Brünken, R. (2015). Cognitive and affective effects of seductive details in multimedia learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 267–278. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.061
Park, B., Moreno, R., Seufert, T., & Brünken, R. (2011). Does cognitive load moderate the seductive details effect? A multimedia study. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 5–10. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.05.006
Plass, J. L., Heidig, S., Hayward, E. O., Homer, B. D., & Um, E. (2014). Emotional design in multimedia learning: effects of shape and color on affect and learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 128–140. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.02.006
R Core Team. (2016). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.r-project.org/
Revelle, W. (2016). Psych: procedures for personality and psychological research. Evanston, Illinois, USA: Northwestern University. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=psych
RStudio Team. (2015). RStudio: integrated development for r. Boston, MA: RStudio Inc. Retrieved from http://www.rstudio.com/
Schneider, S., Nebel, S., & Rey, D. (2016). Decorative pictures and emotional design in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 44, 65–73. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.03.002
Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest : A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 23–53. doi:10.1023/A:1009004801455
ScienceAlert Pty Ltd. (n.d.). ScienceAlert media kit. Retrieved from www.sciencealert.com
Smallman, H. S., & St John, M. (2005). Naive realism: limits of realism as a display principle. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 49th Annual Meeting. doi:10.1177/154193120504901714
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th Ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.
Trumbo, J. (2000). Essay: seeing science: research opportunities in the visual communication of science. Science Communication, 21(4), 379–391. doi:10.1177/1075547000021004004
Venables, W. N., & Ripley, B. D. (2002). Modern applied statistics with s. New York: Springer.
Walker, G. J. (2012). Motivational features of science show. Australian National University.
Wickham, H. (2009). Ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Wickham, H., & Francois, R. (2016). Dplyr: a grammar of data manipulation. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=dplyr
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
Wiley, J. (2019). Picture this! effects of photographs, diagrams, animations, and sketching on learning and beliefs about learning from a geoscience text. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33(1), 9–19. doi:10.1002/acp.3495
Wood, M., & Stocklmayer S. M. (2018). Exploring the relationship between visual context and affect in diagram interpretation. In P. Chapman, G. Stapleton, A. Moktefi, S. Perez-Kriz, & F. Bellucci (Eds.), Diagrammatic Representation and Inference. Diagrams 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 10871. Springer, Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-91376-6_46

How to cite this article

APA

Wood, M., & Stocklmayer, S. (2021). Visual Context and Relevance in Life Cycle Diagrams. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 17(1), e2224. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9154

Vancouver

Wood M, Stocklmayer S. Visual Context and Relevance in Life Cycle Diagrams. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2021;17(1):e2224. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9154

AMA

Wood M, Stocklmayer S. Visual Context and Relevance in Life Cycle Diagrams. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2021;17(1), e2224. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9154

Chicago

Wood, Matthew, and Susan Stocklmayer. "Visual Context and Relevance in Life Cycle Diagrams". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education 2021 17 no. 1 (2021): e2224. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9154

Harvard

Wood, M., and Stocklmayer, S. (2021). Visual Context and Relevance in Life Cycle Diagrams. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 17(1), e2224. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9154

MLA

Wood, Matthew et al. "Visual Context and Relevance in Life Cycle Diagrams". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, vol. 17, no. 1, 2021, e2224. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/9154