human factors and ergonomics 2011 maria c. r. harrington
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Maria C. R. HarringtonFounder & CEO Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Assistant Professor of Information Systems Computer Science Department, Slippery Rock University
Ph.D. in Information ScienceSchool of Information Science, University of Pittsburgh
Bachelor of Science in Economics & Art, Carnegie Mellon
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
“Can Simulated Ecological
Environments of nature inspire independent
exploration, an intrinsic desire to learn and acts
of creation for the child?”
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Field Work
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Design Context & Partnerships
• User Needs, Goals & Activity– Child’s Exploration, Discovery &
Inquiry– Teacher and Naturalist Guide
Support– Physical & Cognitive Activity
• Educational & Learning Content– PA Ecology NCLB Standards– Informal Educational Materials – Audubon Society of Western PA– Elementary School Teachers
• Realistic Data & Visualization – ESRI Visualized Terrain Datasets– NSF Long-term Plant Population
Datasets (Dr. Kalisz) (http://www.pitt.edu/~kalisz/)
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Immersive Virtual World & Informal Learning Simulation
• Used High-end Game Engine– Visualize 1 Square Mile of Data
• Annotate Virtual World– Cards for Facts– Audio Sprites for Concepts
• The Virtual Trillium Trail– Working Prototype in 2005– Rebuilt with Garage Games
Torque 3D in 2009 for a Commercial PC Release
– iPad, Macintosh versions expected in 2012
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Photorealistic Game Engine
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Annotate with Facts
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Annotate with Story
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
The Virtual Trillium Trail
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Two Research Studies
• Study One: Real vs. Virtual– Baseline Control (n=12)– A one-way, within-subject ANOVA, with repeated
measurements, in counterbalanced order (n=12)
• Study Two: Two Factor ANOVA– Factor 1: Visual Fidelity (High & Low)– Factor 2: Navigational Freedom (High & Low)– One system with four condition states
• Planed Orthogonal Contrast on Critical User Interface Software Dimensions (n=64)
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Study One: Real vs. Virtual
• Baseline Control (n=12)– A one-way, within-subject ANOVA, with repeated
measures, in counterbalanced order (n=12)
• Two Groups: – Group 1: Real-Virtual– Group 2: Virtual-Real
• Experience the two Environments in opposite order • Count Learning Activity of “Salient Events”
– Measurements• Demographic, Pre & Post tests after each on Facts,
Concepts, Emotional Response, and a Creative Activity
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
• Total Objects
• Real has more information than the Virtual, results in higher learning activity:
– H1a: μ Total Activity (Real) > μ Total Activity (Virtual)
– Real (M = 4.5, SD = 2.71)
– Virtual (M = 2.83, SD = 3.43)
– F(1,11) = 4.68, p = 0.05
Main Effects: Environment
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Main Effects: Environment
• Plant Only Objects
• When Content in the Virtual is Identical to the Real, there is no difference in learning activity:
– H2o: μ Plant-only Activity (Real) = μ Plant-only Activity (Virtual)
– Real (M = 2.75, SD = 1.96)
– Virtual (M = 2.83, SD = 3.43)
– F(1,11) = 0.00, p = 0.95
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Main Effects: OrderSecond Field Trip,
Real or Virtual, shows more Learning Activity
Practice Makes Perfect!
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
• The t-test for two independent groups (one-tail, post-hoc analysis) was carried out to help explain the results.
• H8a: Total Activity: μ Real(First) < μ Real(After Virtual)– Real (First) (M = 2.8, SD = 2.6)
– Real (After Virtual) (M = 5.8, SD = 1.9)
– t = -2.29, df = 10, p = 0.023 (one-tailed, α = 0.01)
• Prime the Real with the Virtual, as the mean value significantly increased.
Virtual to Real Transfer
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Real to Virtual Transfer
• In the past, such an analysis was impossible for life-critical training -- combat military training.
• Educational and learning applications, the question is valid and viable.
• H9a: Total Activity: μ Virtual(First) < μ Virtual(After Real) – Virtual (First) (M = 0.0, SD = 0.0) – Virtual (After Real) (M = 3.8, SD = 2.4) – t = -3.88, df = 10, p = 0.00 (one-tailed, α = 0.01)
• Reinforce the Real with the Virtual, as the mean value significantly increased.
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Interaction
• Interaction was found (Total Map Annotations by Group)
– The one-way, between-subjects ANOVA produced evidence of interaction for the Total map Annotation learning activity
• H6a: Total Activity: Interaction Groups x Order
– F(1, 5) = 30.69, p = 0.003.
• Thus, some factor is effecting the variables in a non-constant way…
• Something in the real world is having an interesting impact.
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Salient Events
• Some probability distribution of events, like a “Salamander Find,” that occur only in the real environment, and result in highly salient, personally meaningful memories.
• “Salient Events” are critical for learning and become design features
• If recognized by a teacher, or software, become “Teachable Moments”
• Episodic Memory anchors entire knowledge ontology
Salient Event Teachable Moment
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Conclusions: Real vs. Virtual
• Real is Superior Overall
• Virtual match the Real for in-curriculum materials
• Practice makes Perfect
• “Salient Events” as Environmental Driven Opportunities for Teachable Moments for Learning, Uniquely Personal, & UI Critical Design Features
• Transfer in Both Directions
• Prime & Reinforce with the Virtual
• Use Real & Virtual Together for Maximized Learning
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Study Two: 2X2 ANOVA
• Study Two: Two Factor ANOVA as a Planed Orthogonal Contrast (POC) on Critical User Interface Software Dimensions (n=64)– Factor 1: Visual Fidelity
• Low Fidelity set to Cartoon Quality• High Fidelity set to Photorealistic Quality
– Factor 2: Navigational Freedom• Low Navigational Freedom set to a virtual path• High Navigational Freedom allow 360 degree exploration at will
• UI and Game Design Parameters?– Knowledge Gained– Salient Events– Emotional Reactions of Curiosity, Beauty, Awe & Wonder, Calm
& Excitement– Acts of Creation & Sharing
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Visual Fidelity
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Navigational Freedom
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Independent Variables Visual Fidelity: Two Levels: Low (LF) and High (HF)Navigational Freedom: Two Levels: Low (LN) and High (HN)
Dependent Variables Knowledge GainedSalient EventsFact Cards InquiredTime in SystemEmotional ReactionsActs of Creation
Study Two: 2X2 ANOVA
Group LFLNn=16)
Visual FidelityN
avig
atio
nal F
reed
omLow Visual Fidelity
(LF)High Visual Fidelity
(HF)Lo
w
Nav
igat
iona
l F
reed
om
(LN
)
Hig
h N
avig
atio
nal
Fre
edom
(H
N) Group LFHN
n=16)Group HFHN
n=16)
Group HFLNn=16)
Group LFLNn=16)
Visual FidelityN
avig
atio
nal F
reed
omLow Visual Fidelity
(LF)High Visual Fidelity
(HF)Lo
w
Nav
igat
iona
l F
reed
om
(LN
)
Hig
h N
avig
atio
nal
Fre
edom
(H
N) Group LFHN
n=16)Group HFHN
n=16)
Group HFLNn=16)
Group LFLNn=16)
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Hypothesis
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Knowledge Gained
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Results: Knowledge Gained
• Navigational Freedom shows Trend– F(1,60) = 2.71, p = 0.105
• Visual Fidelity is Strong and Significant– F(1,60) = 10.54, p = 0.0019
• Significant Evidence of Interaction– F(1, 60) = 4.85, p = 0.0315
• Highest Gains in Condition of High Visual Fidelity & High Navigational Freedom– (M=37.44, SD = 13.88)
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Salient Events
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Results: Salient Events
• Navigational Freedom shows strong Trend– F(1,60) = 3.23, p = 0.0773
• Visual Fidelity is Strong and Significant– F(1,60) = 4.35, p = 0.00413
• No Interaction– F(1, 60) = 1.48, p = 0.2285
• Highest Counts: Condition of High Visual Fidelity & High Navigational Freedom– (M=16.75, SD = 6.27)
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Emotional Reactions
• Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient show– Inquiry to Learning (r =0.700**, p = 0.00) – Awe & Wonder to Total Attitude, (r=0.727**, p =0.000)– Awe & Wonder to Knowledge Gained, (r = 0.273**, p
=0.000)– Beauty to Awe & Wonder (r =0.506**, p=0.000)– And many more on Exploration, Calm, Excitement,
Curiosity, Desire to Share, Create, Presence, and Immersion
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Future Work
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
SEEE Tripartite Model
• Simulated Ecological Environments for Education (SEEE)– Conceptual,
theoretical, and empirical framework
– Used to explain information flows between the world and the human
– Markov Model?
http://etd.library.pitt.edu/ETD/available/etd-08072008-141657/unrestricted/MariaCRHarrington.pdf
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
Child Computer Environment Interface
Truth,Fidelity,
Freedom,Beauty,Awe &
Wonder
September 21, 2011 Virtual Field Trips, LLC
The Virtual Trillium Trailis available here: http://www.virtualtrilliumtrail.com/index.html