| In order to get around language learners’ age-old problem of struggling to comprehend texts,researchers in the field have explored ways to render implicit concept relations in such textsmore explicit. Adjunct aids have been largely studied in recent years as a potential breakthroughin easing out the problems associated with comprehending texts. They represent objects,concepts, and their relations by the use of symbols and their spatial arrangements. Adjunct aidsare of two types: inside-the-text (internal) and outside-the-text (external) adjunct aids. Examplesof the former include bold typing or underlining keywords. And the latter include pictures,geographic maps, concept maps, graphic organizers, outlines, advance organizers and the like.This latter category is also called adjunct display. And usually external adjunct aids role inpromoting reading text called adjunct display effect (ADE). Illustration as an important externaladjunct aids which has widespread concerned by researchers in recent years. The purpose of thisstudy is to investigate the illustrations of different levels of complexity and different presentationhow to affect text reading for individuals with different cognitive style. We investigated theinfluence of illustration to text reading process and reading product by using the reaction timetechnology, eye movement tracking technology and thinking aloud protocols.In this study, we designed four experiments. Experiment I investigated the influence ofillustrations to processing effort and reading results for individuals with different cognitive stylesby reaction time strategy. Using2(cognitive style: field independence (FI) and field dependence(FD))×2(presentation: illustration+text, text only) mixed design, cognitive style isbetween-subject factor, and presentation is the within-subject factor. Experiment II investigatedthe influence of illustrations and text reread to text reading for individuals with differentcognitive styles through reaction time strategy and delayed recall task. Using2(cognitive style:FI, FD)×2(presentation: Illustration+text, text+text) mixed design, in which cognitivestyle is between-subject factor, presentation as within-subject factor. Experiment III investigatedthe influence of illustrations to understanding process and reading results for individuals withdifferent cognitive styles by the method of thinking aloud protocols. Using2(cognitive style: FI, FD)×2(presentation: illustration+text, text only) mixed design, cognitive style isbetween-subject factor, presentation as within-subject factor. Experiment Ⅳ investigated theinfluence of illustrations with different levels of complexity to text reading for individuals withdifferent cognitive styles by eye tracking technology. Using2(cognitive style: FI, FD)×4(presentation: no illustrations, detailed illustrations, condensed illustrations, simplifiedillustration) mixed design, both the cognitive style and presentation are between-subject factor.The results showed that: Illustration prompted readers to produce a more reasoninginference strategy to integration important information in text, thus contributing to the textreading. Both the illustrations and text reread can promote reading, but illustration is differentfrom the role of a simple repetition of the text content, illustration readers learned moreconducive to keeping the content. Compared to the detailed illustrations and simplifiedillustrations, concise illustrations better promote reading. When the illustration and textpresented successively, the reading efficiency of both the FI and FD individuals weresignificantly increased, but the FD individuals paid more processing effort; but when theillustration and text presented simultaneously, the FD readers benefit more from illustration thanthe FI readers, FD individuals can adjust their reading strategies according to the illustrationtimely. These findings provide evidence for the related theories of adjunct display effect. |
PDF Full Text Request