Can verbalisers learn as well as visualisers in simulation‐based CAL with predominantly visual representations? Preliminary evidence from a pilot study

Abstract

Simulation-based computer-assisted learning (CAL) is emerging as new technologies are finding a place in mainstream education. Dynamically linked multiple representations (DLMRs) is at the core of simulation-based CAL. DLMRs includes multiple visual representations, and it enables students to manipulate one representation and to immediately receive feedback from others. An interesting and important research question is whether verbalisers, who prefer to process verbal material, have similar learning performance and learning features as visualisers, who prefer to process visual material. To answer this question, 28 undergraduate students were selected as participants from the 855 undergraduate students who were initially tested with the style of processing scale (SOP). They were representative of either visualisers or verbalisers (students who scored upper 10% and lower 10% on the SOP). A study was conducted using an experimental design that included pre-and posttest and thinking-aloud methods. Simulation-Assisted Learning Statistics (SALS) was adopted as the learning environment for both groups. The analysis results are based on the data of 25 participants because three participants had trouble thinking aloud while using SALS. The results indicated that the visualisers and verbalisers did not differ significantly in their learning performance, but they did exhibit significantly different learning features in their use of DLMRs, their methods of reading learning guides and their learning strategies. Additionally, the learning features of the verbalisers explained why their learning performance was similar to that of the visualisers. Finally, this study provides recommendations for future applications and studies of simulation-based CAL.

Neuromarketing as a scale validation tool: Understanding individual differences based on the style of processing scale in affective judgements

“…A shorter version of the SOP scale with 10 items has been developed (Ramsey & Deeter-Schmelz, 2008) and widely adopted in many subfields of consumer research relevant to marketing, including new product development (Hoffman et al, 2010;Oliver et al, 1993;Petrova & Cialdini, 2005), product aesthetics (Bloch et al, 2003), advertising effectiveness (Burns et al, 1993), incidental ad exposure (Shapiro et al, 1997), sports sponsorships (Close et al, 2015), media perception (Darley, 1999), preferences in assortment choice (Townsend & Kahn, 2014), healthy food choices (Cao et al, 2020), ecommerce website design (Lightner & Eastman, 2002), sense of telepresence (Orth et al, 2019), food pictures for menu design (Hou et al, 2017), consumption vision and brand perception (Chang, 2012), persuasive messaging (Myers & Jung, 2019) and many others. Other fields of study that also involve processing information, such as education and learning theories, have applied the SOP scale to understand multimedia learning (Chen & Sun, 2012;Smith & Woody, 2000), effective use of simulation programs in learning (Liu et al, 2012), intuition learning style (Sadler-Smith, 2011), learning effectiveness on MOOCs (Chang et al, 2019) and others. Specific mental processes, emotional and cognitive, and their impact on other behaviors and decisions have been investigated in the field of consumer psychology by considering individual differences in SOP among consumers.…”

Use of an Online Simulation to Promote Content Learning

“…Using simulations students have opportunities to experiment with different roles and tools, hitherto unknown in their everyday life. In the engaging environment made possible by simulations, students have the potential to learn important critical thinking, reasoning, and problem solving skills along with decision-making and strategizing skills (Gratch, Kelly, & Bradley, 2007;Li, et al, 2012;Liu, Kinshuk, Lin, & Wang, 2012;Prensky, 2000;Prensky, 2006;Pillay, 2003;Ronen & Eliahu, 1999). For example, computer simulations allow medical students to practice and perform surgery without risk of harming a patient and students of history to take a safe, yet engaging journey across 19 th century America in a covered wagon.…”

โมเดลการออกแบบสถานการณ์จำลองเสมือนจริงที่ส่งเสริมการสร้างแบบจำลองคอมพิวเตอร์และการให้เหตุผลเชิงวิทยาศาสตร์ด้วยการสืบสอบบนฐานการโต้แย้ง

“…1.1.2 โมเดลที ่ ผู ้ วิ จั ยพั ฒนาขึ ้ นยั งได้ น าเอาจุ ดเด่ นของโมเดลการออกแบบ สถานก ารณ์ จ าลองของ Alessi and Trollip (2001 (Alessi & Trollip, 2001;Seow et al, 2005) Lee et al, 2010;Burdea & Coiffet, 2003;Merchant et al, 2012;Sherman & Craig, 2003 Lee et al, 2010;Burdea & Coiffet, 2003;Merchant et al, 2012;Sherman & Craig, 2003) (Aldrich, 2009;Foronda et al, 2013) ที ่ โปรแกรมสถานการณ์ จ าลองจะต้ อง สามารถแสดงผลของการกระท าให้ เห็ นได้ แบบเวลาจริ ง 2) การให้ ข้ อมู ลย้ อนกลั บและผลลั พธ์ (Aldrich, 2009;Liu et al, 2012) ที ่ โปรแกรมโปรแกรมสถานการณ์ จ าลองจะต้ องมี ความสามารถ ในการให้ ผลลั พธ์ ของการด าเนิ นการแก่ ผู ้ เรี ยนได้ อย่ างเหมาะสมด้ วยกราฟ หรื อตาราง 3) ระบบ (Aldrich, 2009;Clough et al, 2013;Foronda et al, 2013;Landriscina, 2013;Liu et al, 2012) ที ่ โปรแกรมสถานการณ์ จ าลองจะต้ องสามารถจ าลองระบบของสภาพแวดล้ อมได้ อย่ างสมจริ ง และสามารถแสดงปฏิ กิ ริ ยาต่ อแบบจ าลองย่ อยต่ างๆ ในระบบได้ และ 4) แบบจ าลอง (Clough et al, 2013;Foronda et al, 2013;Landriscina, 2013)…”