| dc.description.abstract | The major purpose of the present experiment was to assess the effectiveness of multiple relationship knowledge maps for the presentation of related information domains. A second purpose of the investigation was to explore the effectiveness of a comparative versus sequential format for the presentation of the related domains. Ninety-two participants from undergraduate classes at Texas Christian University completed all 3 sessions of the experiment. In the first session, students were introduced to the knowledge map format, after which they studied material on the autonomic nervous system (ANS) in one of four formats: maps presented in a comparative format, maps presented in a sequential format, text presented in a comparative format, or text presented in a sequential format. In studying the material, students were first required to take four minutes to get a general overview of the text/map, after which they completed an overview questionnaire. After completing the questionnaire, students were then allowed an additional forty-five minutes to study the information. On the second day of the experiment (two days later) students completed recall tests over the ANS material, after which they studied text/maps on Research Designs in the same manner as they studied the ANS information. During the third session of the experiment, which took place two days later, students completed recall tests over the Research Design Material and completed four individual difference measures. The results indicated that students in the map groups had more positive initial perceptions about the ANS passage (relative to the text groups), outperformed the text groups on recall of the ANS material, and had more positive post-experimental perceptions about both types of material. Map groups also reported improving their learning strategies as a result of their experience in the experiment more than did the text groups. Further, those in the comparative groups reported more negative perceptions of the research design material. Interpretation of experimental group effects, practical and theoretical implications, and future research directions are discussed. | |
