East Tennessee State University Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University Electronic Theses and Dissertations Student Works 12-2002 Relationship between Text Display Method and College Student Short Term Knowledge Retention during Self-Study. Jeff .W Church East Tennessee State University Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.etsu.edu/etd Part of the Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons Recommended Citation Church, Jeff .,W "Relationship between Text Display Method and College Student Short Term Knowledge Retention during Self- Study." (2002). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 727. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/727 This Dissertation - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Works at Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Relationship Between Text Display Method and College Student Short-Term Knowledge Retention During Self-Study A dissertation presented to the faculty of the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis East Tennessee State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Education by Jeffrey W Church December 2002 Dr. Russell West, Chair Bill Hemphill Dr. Louise MacKay Dr. Russell Mays Keywords: Hypertext, Linear Text, Freshman, Reading, Learning ABSTRACT Relationship Between Text Display Method and College Student Short-Term Knowledge Retention During Self-Study by Jeffrey W. Church This purpose of this study was to determine if a significant difference existed in the short- term knowledge retention of college freshmen reading informational stimulus materials presented through one of three different text display modes; 1) traditional printed text, 2) computer-displayed linear text, and 3) computer-displayed hypertext. The sample consisted of 267 college freshmen at a southern regional university. The 267 students were randomly selected from the entire population of entering freshmen during Fall 2002. These students were then randomly assigned to one of the three treatment groups. After reading the stimulus materials for a specified amount of time, students completed a multiple-choice knowledge-based test that was designed by the researcher. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare scores on the knowledge test across the three different treatment groups. The analysis showed a significant difference in the scores of students in the computer-displayed hypertext and traditional printed text groups, with those reading traditional printed text scoring higher. There was also a main effect for gender, with females scoring higher on the knowledge test than males. There was no significant gender by text display method interaction These findings support the relative efficacy of presenting information to college students in a traditional printed text format under similar conditions. 2 DEDICATION This work is dedicated to my wife Dawn without whom I could never have survived the process. This work is also dedicated to my parents Otis and Jo Ann Church. I credit them with teaching me to fulfill my goals. 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my appreciation to the chairperson of my graduate committee, Dr. Russell West, and to my committee members -- Bill Hemphill, Dr. Louise MacKay, and Dr. Russell Mays. I also wish to give special thanks to Dr. Ron Lindahl, my previous graduate committee chair. Additionally, I would like to thank Appalachian State University’s Institutional Research for their assistance in this study. 4 CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ................................................................................................ 2 DEDICATION............................................................................................... 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................. 4 LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................ 8 Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 9 Current State of Educational Technology.......................................... 10 Electronic Formats for Displaying Text ............................................ 13 Statement of the Problem................................................................... 14 Research Questions and Associated Null Hypotheses....................... 16 Significance of the Study................................................................... 17 Overview of the Study ....................................................................... 17 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE .................................................................. 19 Learning Theory and Technology...................................................... 19 Behaviorist Theory............................................................................. 19 Cognitive Theory ............................................................................... 21 Constructivist Theory......................................................................... 24 A Comparison of Computer-Displayed Text and Printed Text ......... 25 The Text-based Process..................................................................... 26 Luminance.................................................................................... 26 Contrast........................................................................................ 27 Resolutions and Fonts.................................................................. 27 Flicker.......................................................................................... 28 Letter Case................................................................................... 29 Eye Fatigue .................................................................................. 29 5 Chapter Page Knowledge-Based Process................................................................. 30 A Comparison of Hypertext With Linear Text.................................. 33 Hypertext............................................................................................ 33 Summary............................................................................................ 41 3. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................. 42 Research Design................................................................................. 42 Population .......................................................................................... 43 Sample Methods and the Sample....................................................... 43 Instrumentation .................................................................................. 44 Materials ............................................................................................ 45 Group 1 Computer Displayed Linear Text ........................................ 46 Group 2 Computer Displayed Hypertext ........................................... 46 Group 3 Traditional Printed Text....................................................... 47 Procedure ........................................................................................... 47 Data Analysis..................................................................................... 49 4. ANALYSIS OF DATA............................................................................ 50 Research Question 1.......................................................................... 51 Research Question 2.......................................................................... 53 Research Question 3.......................................................................... 55 Research Question 4.......................................................................... 57 Summary............................................................................................ 59 5. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS............. 60 Findings.............................................................................................. 60 Conclusions........................................................................................ 62 Recommendations.............................................................................. 62 Recommendations for Practice ......................................................... 62 REFERENCES .............................................................................................. 64 APPENDICES ............................................................................................... 70 Appendix A: Study Text ................................................................... 70 6 Appendix B: Instrument .................................................................... 92 Appendix C: Java code ..................................................................... 96 VITA ............................................................................................................. 97 7 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Studies of Computer Displayed Linear Text Compared to Traditional Printed Text........................................................................... 32 2. Alexander, Kulikowich, and Jetton’s Comparison of Studies Comparing Computer-displayed Hypertext with Linear Text in Either Printed Form or Computer-displayed Form......................................................................