The Role of Dynamic Visualizations and Spatial Layout of Static Visualizations for Learning How to Classify Locomotion Patterns

The Role of Dynamic Visualizations and Spatial Layout of Static Visualizations for Learning How to Classify Locomotion Patterns Birgit Imhof (b.imhof@iwm-kmrc.de) a Katharina Scheiter (k.scheiter@iwm-kmrc.de) a Peter Gerjets (p.gerjets@iwm-kmrc.de) a Jorg Edelmann (edelmann@gris.uni-tuebingen.de) b a Knowledge Media Research Center, Konrad-Adenauer-Strasse 40, 72072 Tuebingen, Germany Wilhelm Schickard Institute, University of Tuebingen, Sand 14, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany b In two studies the effectiveness of dynamic and multiple static visualizations was investigated for a highly perceptual learning task, namely locomotion pattern classification. In Study 1a, seventy-five students viewed either dynamic, static- sequential, or static-simultaneous visualizations. For tasks with intermediate difficulty dynamic visualizations led to better recognition of the locomotion patterns than static- sequential visualizations, but not than static-simultaneous visualizations. To test whether the presentation of the static- simultaneous visualizations in rows or their permanent visibility was accountable for this effect, three additional static-simultaneous conditions were investigated in Study 1b. Seventy-five students viewed the static-simultaneous visualizations either presented in columns, in matrices, or in circles. The dynamic condition outperformed all three additionally investigated static-simultaneous conditions in the intermediate tasks. Accordingly, for learning how to classify locomotion patterns dynamic visualizations are better suited than most static presentation formats. Nevertheless, presenting static-simultaneous visualizations appropriately can achieve equal results at least for tasks with intermediate difficulty. Similarly, the current study focuses on a task that explicitly requires identifying the continuity of the depicted dynamics and involves a strong perceptual component, namely recognizing biological locomotion patterns of fish as a basis of species classification. To accomplish this task, it is important that learners correctly perceive the underlying kinematics, for instance, to decide whether a fin moves in a wave-like or a paddle-like manner. The continuity of these dynamics can be shown explicitly only in dynamic visualizations. However, one can argue that multiple static visualizations may also foster the understanding of continuity, but that this is likely to depend on how they are presented. In particular, to foster the understanding of continuity static pictures have to be presented in a way that they facilitate mental animation (e.g., Paas, Van Gerven, & Wouters, 2007). Mental animation is the process of inferring movements from static pictures based on knowledge about relevant components and their causal relations to other components (Hegarty, 1992). We assume that both, temporal as well as spatial aspects of presenting static pictures affect how well they support mental animation. Keywords: learning; dynamic visualizations; multiple static visualizations; spatial ability Temporal Aspects of Presenting Static Pictures Abstract Learning with Visualizations Dynamic visualizations have not always been found to lead to better learning than static visualizations (Tversky, Bauer- Morrison, & Betrancourt, 2002). Betrancourt and Tversky (2000) have suggested that dynamic visualizations should be superior only for specific tasks. In particular, they will aid learning if understanding the content explicitly requires understanding of its dynamic aspects like trajectory or continuity of changes. These dynamic aspects can be conveyed directly through a dynamic visualization. Thus, in many studies in which dynamic visualizations failed to be beneficial, a direct depiction of the contents’ dynamic aspects may not have been necessary (e.g., Byrne, Catrambone, & Stasko, 1999). On the other hand, tasks that require a profound understanding of continuous changes often benefit from dynamic visualizations (e.g., hand manipulation tasks, Ayres et al., 2009; Wong et al., 2009). The main difference concerning temporal aspects of presenting multiple static pictures is their sequentiality. They can be depicted either sequentially or simultaneously. In a sequential presentation one picture is shown after another at the same position, whereby later pictures replace former ones. In a simultaneous presentation all pictures are shown next to each other on a single screen. The temporal alignment of visual elements is easier in a sequential presentation because elements that are identical across the pictures are depicted at identical spatial positions (unless they change their position over time). However, to make comparisons between relevant objects the information of earlier pictures has to be memorized until later pictures are shown (Paas et al., 2007). Hence, integrating information across the pictures may be challenging for learners. In contrast, in a simultaneous presentation the depicted information remains visible on the screen and therefore comparisons among discrete steps are enabled. Moreover, in