production paper summary
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Production Paper Summary

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 16

Production Paper Summary - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Production Paper Summary. Vanita , Robin, Jeannette, & Chris. Social modeling for children with Asperger’s Direction taken from usability testing Tutorials to support first-time users Clarify button names. Background. Animation Practical considerations Functional considerations

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Production Paper Summary' - leena

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
production paper summary

Production Paper Summary

Vanita, Robin, Jeannette, & Chris


Social modeling for children with Asperger’s

  • Direction taken from usability testing
  • Tutorials to support first-time users
  • Clarify button names
design decisions


    • Practical considerations
    • Functional considerations
      • Attract attention (Lowe, 2004)
      • Engage learners (Lowe)
      • Sustain motivation (Lowe)
      • Reduction of extraneous cognitive load (Mayer et al., 2005)
Design Decisions
design decisions1

Animation – Research is inconclusive

    • Ayres et al. (2005; 2007) identify why animation may not be effective:
      • Information is transitory
      • Animations are a series of successive elements
    • To offset these characteristics:
      • ‘tracing’ – leaving information on the screen
      • Employ a cuing technique to direct attention
      • Build in user-control (Ayres et al., 2005)
Design Decisions
voice and text

Objective of using voice–overs/ sound and text:

    • To enhance user experience
    • To engage and catch the user’s attention
  • Rationale:
    • “In contrast to print and audio comparisons, which generally reveal no advantage for dual over single presentations, studies show that adding pictures to print or audio generally increases learning” (Nugent, 1992)
    • A dual modality presentation improves user comprehension and retention.
Voice and Text

“Flexibility is extremely important to system use since different users may require different degrees of support” (Sipior and Garrity, 1992)

  • A mix of audio and visual components improves attributes such as perception, attention, comprehension, and retention.
  • Research also revealed some Disadvantages
    • “a special consideration for video (and spoken audio) is that any narration may lead to difficulty for international users as well as for users with a hearing disability” (Nielsen, 1995)
  • Decision made:
    • a combination of voice and
    • use of simple text along with graphics and icons.



Text and Voice

colour and graphics

Facilitate learning rather than distract

      • Figure familiarity and consistency
      • Clear, recognizable, transferable, simple shapes,

symmetry or balance of positioning

      • Coordinated color palette and background


      • Text without button surround:

simplified, less cluttered

Colour and Graphics
segment length

Episodic nature of memory – Mayes & Roberts (2001) – visual information most salient

  • Optimal web video episode length – Nielsen (2005) - keep it short, less than one minute
  • Google Sketchup and Adobe tutorials – one to eight minute lengths
  • Czerwinski & Horvitz (2002) – let a previous task item fade from memory before introducing a new one
  • An issue of length or amount of information required to perform a task?
Segment Length
assessment of learning

Usability testing

    • Parallel design: test multiple design prototypes
      • Dynamic animated – graphics, voice, text
      • Still images with text
    • Test efficacy of learning with Virti-Cue mock-up
      • 3-5 Users
      • Test with/without both designs
      • Open-ended questionnaire plus compare/contrast
      • Observation of specified task performances
    • Iterative design
      • Ease and efficiency of use
      • Few errors, pleasant to use
      • Achievement of learning goal
Assessment of Learning

Trial 1 – Stop Action Animation – Digital Camera

  • Trial 2 – Animating ‘Jings’
  • Trial 3 … Word, Jing, PinPoint, Camtasia - final?

Ayres, P., Kalyuga, S., Marcus, N., & Sweller, J. (2005). The conditions under which instructional animations may be effective. Paper presented at an International Workshop and Mini-conference, Open University of the Netherlands: Heerlen, The Netherlands. Retrieved from Ayres.doc

  • Ayres, P., & Paas, F. (2007). Making instructional animations more effective: A cognitive load approach. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 695-700. doi: 10.1002/acp.1343
  • Czerwinski, M., & Horvitz, E. (2002). An investigation of memory for daily computing events. In Xristine Faulkner, Janet Finlay, & Françoise Détienne (Eds.). People and computersXVI – memorable yet invisible:Proceedings of HCI 2002 (pp. 229-245). London, ENG: Springer-Verlag.
  • Grantastic Designs. URL:
  • Lowe, R.K. (2004). Animation and learning: Value for money? In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds), Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE Conference (pp. 558-561). Perth, 5-8 December. Retrieved from
  • Malamed, C., eLearning, Information & Visual Designer. Retrieved from
  • Mayer, R., Hegarty, M., Mayer, S., & Campbell, J. (2005). When static media promote active learning: Annotated illustrations versus narrated animations in multimedia instruction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11(4), 256-265. Retrieved from
  • Mayes, A. R., & Roberts, N. (2001). Theories of episodic memory. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of Bilogical Sciences, 356, 1395-1408. doi 10.1098/rstb.2001.0941
  • Nielsen, J. (1995). Guidelines for multimedia. Jakob Nielsen\'s alertbox for December 1995. Retrieved from
  • Nielsen, J. (2009). Parallel & Iterative Design. Jakob Nielsen’s alertbox for January 2011. Retrieved from
  • Nielsen, J. (2005). Talking-head video is boring online. Jakob Nielsen’s alertbox, December 5, 2005. Retrieved from
  • Nugent, G. (1982). Pictures audio and print: Symbolic representation and effect on learning. Educational Comm. Tech. J. 30, 3, 163-174.
  • Online Technology Learning Center, Tuscaloosa City Schools. Retrieved from
  • Reynolds, G., Associate Professor of Management, Kansai Gaidai University, Japan. Retrieved from
  • Sipior, J.C.& Garrity, E.J., (1992). Merging expert systems with multimedia technology. ACM SIGMUS Database, 23(1), 45-49. doi: 10.1145/134347.134359
  • Skaalid, B., College of Education, University of Saskatchewan. Retrieved from
  • UCAR and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, US. Retrieved from
  • U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (2006). Research-Based Web Design & Usability Guidelines. Retrieved from
  • Webster K., Online Course Developer/Consultant, University of Victoria. Retrieved from