Abstract
Learning with hypertexts require learners to navigate in a non-linear environment and build a coherent representation of the informational content. The expansion of digital technologies and hypertext use in higher education has emphasized the need to examine how technological tools may foster quality learning. This study examined how three types of interactive content organizers (COs) used to represent the main concepts and to navigate in the content pages can impact information processing and learning outcome. The COs designed for the experiment varied in terms of conceptual and navigation support they provide and format. Ninety-three undergraduates used a list of concepts that only provided conceptual support, a summary or a concept map that provided both conceptual and navigation support either with text or graphic format. Results showed that highly coherent COs such as summaries or concept maps improved navigation coherence. However, the summary focused the attention of learners and decreased hypertext exploration (i.e. longer time on the CO and fewer content pages accessed). Longer reading times of the summary also increased text-based outcome, whereas longer processing of the concept map improved inference-based outcome. Implications for the design of interactive COs used to access, navigate and a learn with hypertexts are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Adesope, O. O., Cavagnetto, A., Hunsu, N. J., Anguiano, C., & Lloyd, J. (2017). Comparative effects of computer-based concept maps, refutational texts, and expository texts on science learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(1), 46–69.
Ahuja, J. S., & Webster, J. (2001). Perceived disorientation: An examination of a new measure to assess web design effectiveness. Interacting with Computers, 14(1), 15–29.
Amadieu, F., & Salmerón, L. (2014). Concept maps for comprehension and navigation of hypertexts. In Digital knowledge maps in education (pp. 41–59). Springer, New York.
Amadieu, F., Lemarié, J., & Tricot, A. (2017). How may multimedia and hypertext documents support deep processing for learning? Psychologie Française, 62, 209–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psfr.2015.04.002
Amadieu, F., Salmerón, L., Cegarra, J., Paubel, P. V., Lemarié, J., & Chevalier, A. (2015). Learning from concept mapping and hypertext: An eye tracking study. Educational Technology & Society, 18(4), 100–112.
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(5), 376–386.
Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., & Seibert, D. (2004). Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students’ ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 344–370.
Barzilai, S., Zohar, A. R., & Mor-Hagani, S. (2018). Promoting integration of multiple texts: A review of instructional approaches and practices. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 973–999.
Bezdan, E., Kester, L., & Kirschner, P. A. (2013). The influence of node sequence and extraneous load induced by graphical overviews on hypertext learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 870–880.
Blom, H., Segers, E., Knoors, H., Hermans, D., & Verhoeven, L. (2018). Comprehension and navigation of networked hypertexts. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(3), 306–314.
Blom, H., Segers, E., Knoors, H., Hermans, D., & Verhoeven, L. (2019). Comprehension of networked hypertexts in students with hearing or language problems. Learning and Individual Differences, 73, 124–137.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power and analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Colliot, T., & Jamet, É. (2019). Asking students to be active learners: The effects of totally or partially self-generating a graphic organizer on students’ learning performances. Instructional Science, 47(4), 463–480.
Colliot, T., & Jamet, É. (2020). Effects of self-generated graphic organizers on learning depend on in-task guidance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(5), 646–655.
Colliot, T., & Jamet, É. (2021). Improving students’ learning by providing a graphic organizer after a multimedia document. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(1), 252–265.
Cuddihy, E., & Spyridakis, J. H. (2012). The effect of visual design and placement of intra-article navigation schemes on reading comprehension and website user perceptions. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(4), 1399–1409.
De Jong, T. (2010). Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: Some food for thought. Instructional Science, 38(2), 105–134.
De Jong, T., & Van Der Hulst, A. (2002). The effects of graphical overviews on knowledge acquisition in hypertext. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(2), 219–231.
Dee-Lucas, D., & Larkin, J. H. (1995). Learning from electronic texts: Effects of interactive overviews for information access. Cognition and Instruction, 13(3), 431–468.
DeStefano, D., & LeFevre, J. A. (2007). Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1616–1641.
Elm, W.C., Woods, D.D. (1985). Getting lost: A case study in interface design. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 29, No. 10, p. 927–929). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
Foltz, P. W. (1996). Comprehension, coherence, and strategies in hypertext and linear text. In J.-F. Rouet, J. J. Levonen, A. Dillon, & R. J. Spiro (Eds.), Hypertext and cognition (pp. 109–136). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Hofman, R., & Van Oostendorp, H. (1999). Cognitive effects of a structural overview in a hypertext. British Journal of Educational Technology, 30(2), 129–140.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163.
Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363.
Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 863.
Langan-Fox, J., Waycott, J. L., & Albert, K. (2000). Linear and graphic advance organizers: Properties and processing. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4(1), 19–34.
Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11(1), 65–100.
Lemarié, J., Eyrolle, H., & Cellier, J.-M. (2006). Visual signals in text comprehension: How to restore them when oralizing a text via a speech synthesis? Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 1096–1115.
Leopold, C., Sumfleth, E., & Leutner, D. (2013). Learning with summaries: Effects of representation mode and type of learning activity on comprehension and transfer. Learning and Instruction, 27, 40–49.
Lorch, R. F. (1989). Text-signaling devices and their effects on reading and memory processes. Educational Psychology Review, 1(3), 209–234.
Mayer, R. E. (1979). Twenty years of research on advance organizers: Assimilation theory is still the best predictor of results. Instructional Science, 8(2), 133–167.
Mayer, R. E. (2003). Learning and instruction. Prentice-Hall.
Mayer, R. E., & Bromage, B. K. (1980). Different recall protocols for technical texts due to advance organizers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 209–225.
Müller-Kalthoff, T., & Möller, J. (2003). The effects of graphical overviews, prior knowledge, and self-concept on hypertext disorientation and learning achievement. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 12(2), 117–134.
Naumann, J., Richter, T., Flender, J., Christmann, U., & Groeben, N. (2007). Signaling in expository hypertexts compensates for deficits in reading skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(4), 791.
Nesbit, J. C., & Adesope, O. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 413–448.
Novak, J. D., Gowin, D. B., & Bob, G. D. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge University Press.
O’donnell, A. M., Dansereau, D. F., & Hall, R. H. (2002). Knowledge maps as scaffolds for cognitive processing. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 71–86.
Passig, D., & Nadler, L. (2010). Structural and conceptual user interfaces and their impact on learning. Education and Information Technologies, 15(1), 51–66.
Potelle, H., & Rouet, J. F. (2003). Effects of content representation and readers’ prior knowledge on the comprehension of hypertext. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58(3), 327–345.
Puntambekar, S., & Goldstein, J. (2007). Effect of visual representation of the conceptual structure of the domain on science learning and navigation in a hypertext environment. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16(4), 429.
Puntambekar, S., & Stylianou, A. (2005). Designing navigation support in hypertext systems based on navigation patterns. Instructional Science, 33(5–6), 451–481.
Puntambekar, S., Stylianou, A., & Hübscher, R. (2003). Improving navigation and learning in hypertext environments with navigable concept maps. Human-Computer Interaction, 18(4), 395–428.
Robinson, D. H., & Kiewra, K. A. (1995). Visual argument: Graphic organizers are superior to outlines in improving learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 455–467. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.87.3.455
Rouet, J.F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to Web-based learning. Psychology Press.
Rouet, J.F., Durik, A.M., Britt, M.A. (2017). Literacy beyond text comprehension: A theory of purposeful reading. Routledge.
Salmerón, L., Strømsø, H.I., Kammerer, Y., Stadtler, M., Van den Broek, P. (2018). Comprehension processes in digital reading. Learning to read in a digital world, 91–120.
Salmerón, L., Baccino, T., Cañas, J. J., Madrid, R. I., & Fajardo, I. (2009). Do graphical overviews facilitate or hinder comprehension in hypertext? Computers & Education, 53(4), 1308–1319.
Salmerón, L., Cañas, J. J., Kintsch, W., & Fajardo, I. (2005). Reading strategies and hypertext comprehension. Discourse Processes, 40(3), 171–191.
Salmerón, L., & García, V. (2011). Reading skills and children’s navigation strategies in hypertext. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1143–1151.
Salmerón, L., Kintsch, W., & Canãs, J. J. (2006). Reading strategies and prior knowledge in learning from hypertext. Memory & Cognition, 34(5), 1157–1171.
Sanchiz, M., Lemarié, J., Chevalier, A., Cegarra, J., Paubel, P. V., Salmerón, L., & Amadieu, F. (2019). Investigating multimedia effects on concept map building: Impact on map quality, information processing and learning outcome. Education and Information Technologies, 24(6), 3645–3667.
Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2007). Learner control in hypermedia environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 285–307.
Schnotz, W., & Heiß, A. (2009). Semantic scaffolds in hypermedia learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 371–380.
Schroeder, N. L., Nesbit, J. C., Anguiano, C. J., & Adesope, O. O. (2018). Studying and constructing concept maps: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9403-9
Seufert, T. (2003). Supporting coherence formation in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 227–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00022-1
Stull, A. T., & Mayer, R. E. (2007). Learning by doing versus learning by viewing: Three experimental comparisons of learner-generated versus author-provided graphic organizers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(4), 808.
Sweller, J. (2005). Implications of Cognitive Load Theory for Multimedia Learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (p. 19–30). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816819.003
Van den Broek, P., & Kendeou, P. (2015). Building coherence in web-based and other non-traditional reading environments. In J. J. Spiro, M. Deschryver, M. S. Hagerman, P. Morsink, & P. Thompson (Eds.), Reading at a crossroads? Disjunctures and continuities in current conceptions and practices (pp. 104–114). Routledge.
Vöros, Z., Rouet, J. F., & Pléh, C. (2009). Content maps help low spatial capacity users memorize link structures in hypertext. The Ergonomics Open Journal. https://doi.org/10.2174/1875934300902010088
Vörös, Z., Rouet, J. F., & Pléh, C. (2011). Effect of high-level content organizers on hypertext learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 2047–2055.
Wong, R. M., Sundararajan, N., Adesope, O. O., & Nishida, K. R. (2020). Static and interactive concept maps for chemistry learning. Educational Psychology, p. 1–18.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1: Translation of the summary
Type 2 diabetes is a chronic, incurable disease in which environmental factors and genetic predispositions lead to an increase in blood sugar levels. The increase of blood sugar levels causes disturbances in the pancreas. When the pancreas malfunctions, this results in a disturbance in the action of the insulin, which in turn causes a disturbance in the action of the liver. The liver can no longer fulfill its role properly, which worsens the increase in blood sugar levels. This mechanism then reinforces all of the disturbances involved in type 2 diabetes. Excessive fluctuations in blood sugar levels cause symptoms that can have serious consequences for individuals. However, there are adapted treatments that can help regulate blood sugar levels.
Appendix 2 : translation of the concept map
Generally the prognosis of BFH is good, and it can be managed with totally resection. Because of local recurrence is rare, even with involved margins, Choice of treatment for BFH is the surgical excision of the tumor, without any specific role of radiotherapy or chemotherapy [3, 10].
Appendix 3 : text-based questions used to assess learning outcome
1/8 What are the main factors that cause diabetes?
2/8 When a person suffers from diabetes, which hormone is not secreted sufficiently produced?
3/8 Which organ produces the hormones necessary to regulate blood sugar?
4/8 In what ways does the insulin help regulate blood sugar?
5/8 At which time of day is blood sugar the highest?
6/8 What are the main symptoms of diabetes?
7/8 How does glucagon raise blood glucose level?
8/8 With diabetes, why is the pancreas at risk of burning out?
Appendix 4 : inference-based questions used to assess learning outcome
1/8What impact does obesity have on the pancreas?
2/8 How can sport limit the risk of diabetes?
3/8 What should be done when a person with diabetes has a hypoglycemic attack?
4/8 Who controls blood glucose levels?
5/8 Why does the pancreas secrete different amounts of insulin at different times of the day?
time of day?
6/8 Why is it important for people with type 2 diabetes to monitor their blood sugar levels?
7/8 Why does a person treated for diabetes may experience
hypoglycemia (low blood sugar)?
8/8 With diabetes, why is the pancreas at risk of burning out?
8/8 What happens if a person suffering from diabetes exercises too much after taking insulin?
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sanchiz, M., Amadieu, F., Lemarié, J. et al. Do graphic and textual interactive content organizers have the same impact on hypertext processing and learning outcome?. J Comput High Educ 35, 433–465 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-022-09328-z
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-022-09328-z