在問題解決歷程中，提示被認為可引導解題者的注意力，有助於提取解題相關資訊。本研究目的以眼球追蹤技術探討立體空間問題中「提示與否和解題者答對與否」在圖文訊息的認知歷程，因而將解題者類型分為無提示答對、無提示答錯、有提示答對與有提示答錯四類。本研究將立體空間問題解決歷程分為解題歷程與作答歷程，並且針對解題歷程提出三階段「立體空間問題解決模式」：定義問題、圖文整合與解出問題。參與者為68位大學生，本研究以R統計軟體分析，結果顯示：定義問題階段由首次凝視時間可知，無提示答對者以文字區訊息為主。圖文整合階段由凝視回合數可知，四類解題者以圖形區為主，透過來回進出文字區與圖形區以整合圖文訊息。解出問題階段根據總凝視時間比率與總凝視次數可知，無提示答對者在圖文比重無顯著差異，其他三者則以圖形區訊息為主。因此，「無提示答對者」在文字區的首次凝視時間較久，亦即在文字區界定問題時間較久，但比「有提示答對者」在圖形區的總凝數次數及時間比率較少，顯示有提示答對者受提示影響，投入圖形區的認知處理較多。未來研究可探討「回饋與否」對解題歷程的影響，針對答錯者提供回饋以釐清問題。此外，亦可考量解題者的先備知識，進一步探討專家與生手解題策略的差異。

During the problem solving process, cues are used to guide the solvers’ attention, helping to retrieve information related to the solution. Little is known, however, about how the involved mental processes unfold. The present study begins by proposing a “model for solving three-dimensional space problems” (STSP), consisting of the following stages: define the problem, integrate text and diagram, and solve the problem. The present study analyzes the problem solving process for a three-dimensional space problem with eye movement monitoring, and investigates the effectiveness of cues related to the text and diagram information for successful and unsuccessful problem-solvers. Sixty-eight undergraduates were recruited as participants and classified into four groups: successful problem solvers in the non-cues (SNC); unsuccessful problem solvers with non-cues (USNC); successful problem solvers with cues (SC), and unsuccessful problem solvers with cues (USC). The problem solving process was divided into two stages: the solving stage and the answering stage. Eye movement data for the four groups was analyzed for the two stages. The statistical software R was used to analyze the data. Turning to the results, in the stage of ‘defining the problem’, first past gaze duration data indicated that the SNC group relied on textual information. In the stage ‘integration of text and diagram’ stage, run counts revealed that all four groups relied on both textual and diagram information, shifting their view back and forth and combining the information in the text and diagram areas; in the stage of ‘solving the problem’, the percentage of total viewing duration and total fixation count showed that the SNC group equally used the information in both area but the remaining three groups mainly used the information in the diagram area. In conclusion, the SNC group had longer first past gaze duration in the text area and spent more time defining the problem; but the SNC group had a lower total fixation count and lower percentage of total viewing duration than the SC group in the diagram area, suggesting that for the performance of the SC group, cues influenced them to invest more cognitive processes in the diagram area. Future studies might find it worthwhile to investigate the effects of feedback on performance. In particular, it would be useful to see whether and how feedback helps less successful solvers to clarify the problem. Future research might also explore the influence of prior knowledge and discuss the differences between expert and novice strategies.

致謝詞 i
中文摘要 iii
英文摘要 v
目錄 vii
表次 ix
圖次 xi

緒論 1
一、研究動機 1
二、研究目的 3

文獻探討 5
一、立體空間問題解決歷程 5
二、圖文認知歷程理論 8
三、提示效果與問題解決歷程 10
四、解題者表現類型與問題解決歷程 13
五、提示、解題者表現與問題解決歷程 15
六、問題解決歷程的眼動研究 17
七、研究架構與研究問題 21

研究方法 25
一、參與者 25
二、實驗設計 25
三、實驗材料 26
四、實驗程序 29
五、實驗儀器 30

研究結果 33
一、眼動資料分析 33
二、理解程度與困難程度評定 49

綜合討論 51
一、立體空間問題解決歷程：解題歷程 51
二、立體空間問題解決歷程：作答歷程 54
三、研究限制 56
四、未來研究建議 58

參考文獻 61
附錄 69

陳琪瑤、吳昭容（2012）。幾何證明文本閱讀的眼動研究：圖文比重及圖示著色效果。教育實踐與研究，25(2)，35-66。
劉嘉茹、侯依伶（2011）。以眼動追蹤技術探討先備知識對科學圖形理解的影響。教育心理學報，43，227-250。.
簡郁芩、吳昭容（2012）。以眼動型態和閱讀測驗表現探討箭頭在科學圖文閱讀中的圖示效果。中華心理學刊，54(3)，385-402。
Anderson, O. R. (1983). A neuromathematical model of human information processing. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 603-620.
Anderson, O. R. (2009). Neurocognitive theory and constructivism in science education: A review of neurobiological, cognitive and cultural perspectives. Brunei International Journal of Mathematics and Science Education, 1, 1-32.
Anderson, O. R. (2014). Progress in application of the neurosciences to an understanding of human learning: The challenge of finding amiddle-ground neuroeducational theory. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(3), 475-492, doi:10.1007/s10763-013-9455-3.
Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working memory. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Baddeley, A. D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255(5044), 556-559.
Berends, I. E., & van Lieshout, E. C. (2009). The effect of illustrations in arithmetic problem-solving: Effects of increased cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 19(4), 345-353.
Bishop, A. J. (1989). Review of research on visualization in mathematics education. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 11(1), 7-16.
Boucheix, J. M., & Lowe, R. K. (2010). An eye tracking comparison of external pointing cues and internal continuous cues in learning with complex animations. Learning and Instruction, 20(2), 123-135.
Bruer, J. T. (2003). Learning and technology: A view from cognitive science. In H. F. O’Neil & R. S. Perez (Eds.), Technology applications in education: A Learning View (pp.159-172). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bryson, M., Bereiter, C., Scardamalia, M., & Joram, E. (1991). Going beyond the problem as given: Problem solving in expert and novice writers. In R. J. Sternberg & R. A. Frensch (Eds.), Complex problem solving: Principles and Mechanisms (pp. 61-84). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Carney, R. N., & Levin, J. R. (2002). Pictorial illustrations still improve students' learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 5-26.
Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1978). Eye fixations during mental rotation. In J. W. Senders, D. F. Fishes, & R. A. Monty (Eds.), Eye movements and the higher psychological functions (pp. 115-133). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Copeland, D., & Radvansky, G. (2004). Working memory and syllogistic reasoning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 57(8), 1437-1457.
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 19, 450-466.
de Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M., & Paas, F. (2007). Attention cueing as a means to enhance learning from an animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21(6), 731-746.
Epelboim, J., & Suppes, P. (2001). A model of eye movements and visual working memory during problem solving in geometry. Vision Research, 41(12), 1561-1574.
Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive psychology, 12(3), 306-355.
Glaser, R., Chi, M. T., & Farr, M. J. (Eds.). (1988). The nature of expertise (pp. xv-xxviii). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Goswami, U. (2004). Neuroscience, education and special education. British Journal of Special Education, 31(4), 175-183.
Grant, E. R., & Spivey, M. J. (2003). Eye movements and problem solving guiding attention guides thought. Psychological Science, 14(5), 462-466.
Groner, R., & Groner, M. (1982). Towards a hypothetico-deductive theory of cognitive activity. In R. Groner & P. Fraisse (Eds.) Cognition and eye movements (pp. 100-122). North Holland: Amsterdam.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
Hegarty, M., Canham, M. S., & Fabrikant, S. I. (2010). Thinking about the weather: How display salience and knowledge affect performance in a graphic inference task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(1), 37.
Hegarty, M., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1991). Diagrams in the comprehension of scientific texts. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 641-668). New York, NY: Longman.
Hegarty, M., Mayer, R. E., & Green, C. E. (1992). Comprehension of arithmetic word problems: Evidence from students' eye fixations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(1), 76-84.
Hegarty, M., Mayer, R. E., & Monk, C. A. (1995). Comprehension of arithmetic word problems: A comparison of successful and unsuccessful problem solvers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(1), 18-32.
Hoffman, B., McCrudden, M. T., Schraw, G., & Hartley, K. (2008). The effects of informational complexity and working memory on problem-solving efficiency. Asia Pacific Education Review, 9(4), 464-474.
Hyönä, J., & Nurminen, A. M. (2006). Do adult readers know how they read? Evidence from eye movement patterns and verbal reports. British Journal of Psychology, 97(1), 31-50.
Hyönä, J., Lorch, R. F., & Rinck, M. (2003). Eye movement measures to study global text processing. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind’s eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 313–334). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Jian, Y. C., Wu, C. J., & Su, J. H. (2014). Learners' eye movements during construction of mechanical kinematic representations from static diagrams. Learning and Instruction, 32, 51-62.
Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Byrne, R. M. J. (1991). Deduction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Juhasz, B. J., & Rayner, K. (2003). Investigating the effects of a set of intercorrelated variables on eye fixation durations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(6), 1312-1318.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: from eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87(4), 329-354.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13(4), 351-371.
Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., & Raney, G. E. (2001). An eye movement study of insight problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 29(7), 1000-1009.
Laborde, C. (2005). The hidden role of diagrams in students’ construction of meaning in geometry. In J. Kilpatrick, C. Hoyles, & O. Skovsmose (Eds.), Meaning in mathematics education (pp. 159-179). New York, NY: Springer.
Lesgold, A., Glaser, R., Rubinson, H., Klopfer, D., Feltovich, P., & Wang, Y. (1988). Expertise in a complex skill: Diagnosing X-ray pic- tures. In M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. J. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. 311-342). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lin, J. J., & Lin, S. S. (2013). Cognitive load for configuration comprehension in computer-supported geometry problem solving: An eye movement perspective. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(3), 605-627.
Lin, J. J., & Lin, S. S. (2014). Tracking eye movements when solving geometry problems with handwriting devices. Jounal of Eye Movement Research, 7(1), 1-15.
Madsen, A., Rouinfar, A., Larson, A. M., Loschky, L. C., & Rebello, N. S. (2013). Can short duration visual cues influence students’ reasoning and eye movements in physics problems? Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 9(2), 020104.
Mason, L., Tornatora, M. C., & Pluchino, P. (2013). Do fourth graders integrate text and picture in processing and learning from an illustrated science text? Evidence from eye-movement patterns. Computers & Education, 60(1), 95-109.
Mathai, S., & Ramadas, J. (2009). Visuals and visualisation of human body systems. International Journal of Science Education, 31(3), 439-458.
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31-48). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2010). Unique contributions of eye-tracking research to the study of learning with graphics. Learning and instruction, 20(2), 167-171.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A cognitive theory of multimedia learning: Implications for design principles. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 358-368.
Mayer, R. E., & Sims, V. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 389-401.
Mayer, R.E. (1985). Mathematical ability. In R.J. Sternberg (Eds.), Human Abilities: An Information Processing Approach (pp. 127-150). New York, NY: Freeman.
Mayer, R.E. (1992). Thinking, Problem Solving, Cognition: Second Edition. New York, NY: Freeman.
McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N. B., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and instruction, 14(1), 1-43.
Mwangi, W., & Sweller, J. (1998). Learning to solve compare word problems: The effect of example format and generating self-explanations. Cognition and instruction, 16(2), 173-199.
O’Keefe, P. A., Letourneau, S. M., Homer, B. D., Schwartz, R. N., & Plass, J. L. (2014). Learning from multiple representations: An examination of fixation patterns in a science simulation. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 234-242.
Ohlsson, S. (1992). Information-processing explanations of insight and related phenomena. In M. T. Keane & K. J. Gilhooly (Eds.), Advances in the psychology of thinking (pp. 1-44). New York, NY: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Ozcelik, E., Karakus, T., Kursun, E., & Cagiltay, K. (2009). An eye-tracking study of how color coding affects multimedia learning. Computers & Education, 53(2), 445-453.
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes, New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45(3), 255-287.
Paivio, A. (2006). Mind and its evolution: A dual coding theoretical interpretation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32(1), 3-25.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372-422.
Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457-1506.
Reichle, E. D., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D. L., & Rayner, K. (1998). Toward a model of eye movement control in reading. Psychological Review, 105(1), 125-157.
Rouinfar, A., Agra, E., Larson, A. M., Rebello, N. S., & Loschky, L. C. (2014). Linking attentional processes and conceptual problem solving: visual cues facilitate the automaticity of extracting relevant information from diagrams. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1094.
Schmidt-Weigand, F., Kohnert, A., & Glowalla, U. (2010). A closer look at split visual attention in system-and self-paced instruction in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20(2), 100-110.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285.
Tarmizi, R. A., & Sweller, J. (1988). Guidance during mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 424-436.
Velichkovsky, B. M., Rothert, A., Kopf, M., Dornhöfer, S. M., & Joos, M. (2002). Towards an express-diagnostics for level of processing and hazard perception. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 5(2), 145-156.