| 參考文獻 |
一、中文文獻
林怡均（2012）。認知負荷理論的應用與省思：優化電腦模擬輔助學習之介面設
計與認知支持的系列研究（未出版之博士論文）。國立中央大學，桃園縣。
林振欽、洪振方（2008）。國中學生電腦模擬單擺建模歷程個案研究。高雄師大
學報，25，1-24。
洪振方（2003）。探究式教學的歷史回顧與創造性探究模式之初探。高雄師大學
報，15，641-662。
劉子鍵、林怡均（2011）。發展二階段診斷工具探討學生之統計迷思概念：以「相
關」為例。教育心理學報，42，379-400。
顏弘志（2004）。從建構主義看探究教學。科學教育研究與發展季刊，36，1-14。
二、英文文獻
Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers &
Education, 33(2), 131-152.
Ayres, P., Marcus, N., Chan, C., & Qian, N. (2009). Learning hand manipulative
tasks:When instructional animations are superior to equivalent static
representations. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 348-353.
Baddeley, A. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255(5044), 556-559.
Bell, R. L., & Trundle, K. C. (2008). The use of a computer simulation to promote
scientific conceptions of moon phases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
45(3), 346-372.
Blake, C., & Scanlon, E. (2007). Reconsidering simulations in science education at a
distance: features of effective use. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(6),
491-502.
Bodemer, D., Ploetzner, R., Feuerlein, I., & Spada, H. (2004). The active integration
of information during learning with dynamic and interactive visualisations.
Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 325-341.
Boucheix, J. M., & Schneider, E. (2009). Static and animated presentations in
learning dynamic mechanical systems. Learning and Instruction, 19(2), 112-127.
Cairncross, S., & Mannion, M. (2001). Interactive multimedia and learning: Realizing
the benefits. Innovations in education and teaching international, 38(2),
156-164.
Carlson, R. A., Lundy, D. H., & Schneider, W. (1992). Strategy guidance and
67
memory aiding in learning a problem-solving skill. Human Factors: The Journal
of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 34(2), 129-145.
Chen, Y. L., Hong, Y. R., Sung, Y. T., & Chang, K. E. (2011). Efficacy of simulationbased
learning of electronics using visualization and manipulation. Educational
Technology & Society, 14(2), 269-277.
Cierniak, G., Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2009). Explaining the split-attention effect:
Is the reduction of extraneous cognitive load accompanied by an increase in
germane cognitive load? Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 315-324.
Deubel, P. (2003). An investigation of behaviorist and cognitive approaches to
instructional design. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 12(1),
63-90.
de Jong, T. (2006). Technological advances in inquiry learning. Science, 312(5773),
532–533.
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 Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with
computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of educational research,
68(2), 179-201.
de Jong, T., van Joolingen, W. R., Swaak, J., Veermans, K., Limbach, R., King, S., &
Gureghian, D. (1998). Self‐directed learning in simulation‐based discovery
environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 14(3), 235-246.
Evans, C., & Gibbons, N. J. (2007). The interactivity effect in multimedia learning.
Computers & Education, 49(4), 1147-1160.
Gentry, J. W. (1990). What is experiential learning? In J. W. Gentry (Ed.), Guide to
business gaining and experiential learning (pp. 9-20). London: Kogan Page.
Gerjets, P., & Scheiter, K. (2003). Goal configurations and processing strategies as
moderators between instructional design and cognitive load: Evidence from
hypertext-based instruction. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 33-41.
Gerjets, P., Scheiter, K., & Catrambone, R. (2006). Can learning from molar and
modular worked examples be enhanced by providing instructional explanations
and prompting self-explanations? Learning and Instruction, 16(2), 104-121.
Govaere Jan, L., de Kruif, A., &Valcke, M. (2011). Differential impact of unguided
versus guided use of a multimedia introduction to equine obstetrics in veterinary
education. Computers & Education, 58(4), 1076-1084.
Hannafin, M., & Hannafin, K. (2008). Cognition and student-centered, Web-based
learning: Issues and implications for research and theory. In D. G. Kinshuk, J. M.
Sampson, P. Spector, D. Isaı´as, & D. Ifenthaler (Eds.), Proceedings of the
IADIS international conference on cognition and exploratory learning in the
68
digital age (pp. 113-120). Freiburg, Germany: IADIS.
Hannafin, M., & Hannafin, K. (2008, February). Cognition and student-centered,
web-based learning: issues and implications for research and theory. Presented at
the International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital
Age, Freiburg, Germany.
Hannafin, M., Hannafin, K., & Gabbitas, B. (2009). Re-examining cognition during
student-centered, web-based learning. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 57(6), 767-785.
Hegarty, M. (2004). Dynamic visualizations and learning: Getting to the difficult
questions. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 343-351.
Huk, T., & Ludwigs, S. (2009). Combining cognitive and affective support in order to
promote learning. Learning and Instruction, 19(6), 495-505.
Jackson, S. L., Stratford, S. J., Krajcik, J., &Soloway, E. (1996). A learner-centered
tool for students building models. Communication of the ACM, 39(4), 48-49.
Kalyuga, S. (2007). Enhancing instructional efficiency of interactive e-learning
environments: A cognitive load perspective. Educational Psychology
Review,19(3), 387-399.
Kalyuga, S. (2009). Instructional designs for the development of transferable
knowledge and skills: A cognitive load perspective. Computers in Human
Behavior, 25(2), 332-338.
Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal
effect. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 23-31.
Khalil, M., Paas, F., Johnson, T., & Payer, A. (2005). Interactive and dynamic
visualizations in teaching and learning of anatomy: A Cognitive. Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during
instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery,
problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational
Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.
Koedinger, K. R., & Aleven, V. (2007). Exploring the assistance dilemma in
experiments with Cognitive Tutors. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3),
239-264.
Kolloffel, B., Eysink, T. H. S., de Jong, T., & Wilhelm, P. (2009). The effects of
representational format on learning combinatorics from an interactive
computer-simulation. Instructional Science, 37(6), 503–517.
Kolloffel, B., Eysink, T. H. S., & de Jong, T. (2010). The influence of learnergenerated
domain representations on learning combinatorics and probability
theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(1), 1-11.
Lazonder, A. W., Wilhelm, P., & Hagemans, M. G. (2008). The influence of domain
69
knowledge on strategy use during simulation-based inquiry learning. Learning
and Instruction, 18(6), 580-592.
Lazonder, A. W., Wilhelm, P., & van Lieburg, E. (2009). Unraveling the influence of
domain knowledge during simulation-based inquiry learning. Instructional
Science, 37(5), 437-451.
Lazonder, A. W., Hagemans, M. G., & de Jong, T. (2010). Offering and discovering
domain information in simulation-based inquiry learning. Learning and
Instruction, 20(6), 511-520.
Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2008). The imagination effect increases with an increased
intrinsic cognitive load. Applied cognitive psychology, 22(2), 273-283.
Leahy, W., &Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation and
the transient information effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(6), 943-951.
Limón, M. (2001). On the cognitive conflict as an instructional strategy for
conceptual change: a critical appraisal. Learning and Instruction, 11(4), 357-380.
Liu, T. C. (2010). Developing Simulation-based Computer Assisted Learning to
Correct Students’ Statistical Misconceptions based on Cognitive Conflict Theory,
using "Correlation" as an Example. Educational Technology & Society, 13 (2),
180-192.
Liu, Y., & Shrum, L. J. (2002). What is interactivity and is it always such a good
thing? Implications of definition, person, and situation for the influence of
interactivity on advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising, 31(4):53-64.
Liu, T. C., Lin, Y. C., & Kinshuk (2010). The application of Simulation-Assisted
Learning Statistics (SALS) for correcting misconceptions and improving
understanding of correlation. Journal of Computer Assist Learning, 26(2),
143-158.
Liu, T. C., Kinshuk, Lin, Y. C., & Wang, S. H. (2012). Can verbalisers learn as well as
visualisers in simulation-based CAL with predominantly visual representations
Preliminary evidence from a pilot study. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 43(6), 965-980.
Liu, T. C., Lin, Y. C., Tsai, M. J., & Paas, F. (2012). Split-attention and redundancy
effects on mobile learning in physical environments. Computers & Education,
58(1), 172-180.
Löhner, S., van Joolingen, W. R., Savelsbergh, E. R., & van Hout-Wolters, B. (2005).
Students’ reasoning during modeling in an inquiry learning environment.
Computers in Human Behavior, 21(3), 441-461.
Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions?
Educational psychologist, 32(1), 1-19.
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
70
Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery
learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist,
59(1), 14- 19.
Mayer, R. E., & Chandler, P. (2001). When learning is just a click away: Does simple
user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages? Journal of
educational psychology, 93(2), 390-397.
Mayer, R. E. (2002). Cognitive theory and the design of multimedia instruction: An
example of the twoway street between cognition and instruction. New Directions
for Teaching and Learning, 89, 55-71.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in
multimedia learning. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.
McCombs, B., & Vakili, D. (2005).A learner-centered framework for e-learning. The
Teachers College Record, 107(8), 1582-1600.
Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance
Education, 3(2), 1-6.
Moris, E. (2001). The design and evaluation of link: A computer based learning
system for correlation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(1), 39-52.
Moreno, R. (2006). Learning with high-tech and multimedia environments. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 15(2), 63-67.
Mayer, R. & Moreno, R. (2010). Techniques that reduce extraneous cognitive load
and manage intrinsic cognitive load during multimedia learning. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2005).Role of guidance, reflection, and interactivity in
an agent-based multimedia game. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(1),
117-128.
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. (2007). Interactive multimodal learning environments:
Special issue on interactive learning environments: Contemporary issues and
trends. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 309-326.
Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social
agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they
interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction, 19(2),
177-213.
Moreno, R., & Valdez, A. (2005). Cognitive load and learning effects of having
students organize pictures and words in multimedia environments: The role of
student interactivity and feedback. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 53(3), 35-45.
Mulder, Y. G., Lazonder, A. W., & de Jong, T. (2011). Comparing two types of
model progression in an inquiry learning environment with modelling facilities.
71
Learning and Instruction, 21(5), 614-624.
Njoo, M., & de Jong, T. (1993). Exploratory learning with a computer simulation for
control theory: Learning processes and instructional support. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 30(8), 821-844.
Norman, D. A., & Spohrer, J. C. (1996). Learner-centered education.
Communications of the ACM, 39(4), 24-27.
Paas, F., Renkl, A., &Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional
design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1-4.
Paas, F., & Van Gog, T. (2006). Optimising worked example instruction: Different
ways to increase germane cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 16(2), 87-91.
Paas, F. G. W. C., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (1993). The efficiency of instructional
conditions: An approach to combine mental effort and performance measures.
Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society,
35(4), 737-743.
Paas, F. G. W. C., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (1994).Variability of worked examples
and transfer of geometrical problem-solving skills: A cognitive-load approach.
Journal of educational psychology, 86(1), 122-133.
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Van Merrienboer, J. J. G., &AubteenDarabi, A. (2005). A
motivational perspective on the relation between mental effort and performance:
Optimizing learner involvement in instruction. Educational Technology
Research and Development, 53(3), 25-34.
Rasch, T., &Schnotz, W. (2009). Interactive and non-interactive pictures in
multimedia learning environments: Effects on learning outcomes and learning
efficiency. Learning and Instruction, 19(5), 411-422.
Regan, M., & Sheppard, S. (1996). Interactive Multimedia Courseware and Hands-on
Learning Experience: An Assessment Study. Journal of Engineering Education,
85(2), 123-130.
Renkl, A., & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Interactive learning environments:
Contemporary issues and trends. An introduction to the Special Issue.
Educational Psychology Review, 19, 235-238.
Plass, J. L., Homer, B., & Hayward, E. O. (2009). Design factors for educationally
effective animations and simulations. Journal of Computing in Higher Education,
21, 31-61
Reed, S. K. (2006). Cognitive architectures for multimedia learning. Educational
Psychologist,41(2), 87–98.
Richards, D. (2006, December). Is interactivity actually important? Proceedings of
the Third Australasian Conference on Interactive Entertainment (IE’2006). Perth:
Murdoch University
72
Rogers, Y., & Scaife, M. (1998). How can interactive multimedia facilitate learning?
In Lee, J. (ed.) Intelligence and Multimodality in Multimedia Interfaces:
Research and Applications. AAAI. Press: Menlo Park, CA.
Sabry, K., & Baldwin, L. (2003). Web‐based learning interaction and learning styles.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(4), 443-454.
Scalise, K., Timms, M., Moorjani, A., Clark, L. K., Holtermann, K., & Irvin, P. S.
(2011). Student learning in science simulations: Design features that promote
learning gains. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(9), 1050-1078.
Schnotz, W. (2002). Commentary: Towards an integrated view of learning from text
and visual displays. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 101-120.
Schnotz, W., & Rasch, T. (2005). Enabling, facilitating, and inhibiting effects of
animations in multimedia learning: Why reduction of cognitive load can have
negative results on learning. Educational Technology Research and Development,
53(3), 47-58.
Schüler, A., Scheiter, K., Rummer, R., & Gerjets, P. (2012). Explaining the modality
effect in multimedia learning: Is it due to a lack of temporal contiguity with
written text and pictures? Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 92-102.
She, H. C., & Chen, Y. Z. (2009). The impact of multimedia effect on science
learning: Evidence from eye movements. Computers & Education, 53(4),
1297-1307.
Shellman, S. M., & Turan, K. (2006). Do simulations enhance student learning? An
empirical evaluation of an IR simulation. Journal of Political Science Education,
2(1), 19-32.
Sims, R. (1997). Interactivity: A forgotten art? Computers in Human Behavior, 13(2),
157-180.
Smith, S. M., & Woody, P. C. (2000). Interactive effect of multimedia instruction and
learning styles. Teaching of Psychology, 27(3), 220-223.
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), 808-820.
Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane
cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123-138.
Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive
architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3),
251-296.
Van Joolingen, W. (1998). Cognitive tools for discovery learning. International
Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education (IJAIED), 10, 385-397.
van Merrienboer, J. J. G., Kester, L., & Paas, F. (2006). Teaching complex rather than
73
simple tasks:Balancing intrinsic and germane load to enhance transfer of learning.
Applied CognitivePsychology, 20, 343–352.
Van Joolingen, W., De Jong, T., & Dimitrakopoulou, A. (2007). Issues in computer
supported inquiry learning in science. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,
23(2), 111-119.
Van der Meij, J., & de Jong, T. (2011). The effects of directive self-explanation
promptsto support active processing of multiple representations in a
simulation-based learning environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,
27(5), 411-423.
Van der Meij, J., & de Jong, T. (2006). Supporting students’ learning with multiple
representations in a dynamic simulation-based learning environment. Learning
and Instruction, 16(3), 199-212.
Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex
learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology
Review, 17(2), 147-177.
Varma, K., Husic, F., & Linn, M. C. (2008). Targeted support for using technologyenhanced
science inquiry modules. Journal of Science Education and
Technology, 17(4), 341-356.
Verhoeven, L., Schnotz, W., & Paas, F. (2009). Cognitive load in interactive
knowledge construction. Learning and Instruction, 19(5), 369-375.
Vogel-Walcutt, J. J., Gebrim, J. B., Bowers, C., Carper, T. M., & Nicholson, D.
(2010). Cognitive load theory vs. constructivist approaches: which best leads to
efficient deep learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning: 27(2), 133-145.
Wang, P. Y., Vaughn, B. K., & Liu, M. (2011). The impact of animation interactivity
on novices’ learning of introductory statistics. Computers & Education, 56(1),
300-311.
Zacharia, Z., & Anderson, O. R. (2003). The effects of an interactive computer-based
simulation prior to performing a laboratory inquiry-based experiment on students’
conceptual understanding of physics. American Journal of Physics, 71(6), 618-
62 |
[Endnote RIS 格式]
[相關文章]
[文章引用]
[完整記錄]
[館藏目錄]
[檢視]
plurk
funp
live
udn
HD
myshare
netvibes
friend
youpush
delicious
baidu
Google bookmarks
del.icio.us
hemidemi
facebook
twitter
google
reddit