skip to main content
10.1145/800049.801753acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

Notetaking and comprehension for computer-displayed messages: Personalized versus fixed formats

Published:15 March 1982Publication History

ABSTRACT

An experiment was performed to evaluate the usefulness of an option for users of an automated information system to construct their own preferred formats for receiving intelligence messages. It was hypothesized that such an option would enhance the acquisition and comprehension of intelligence data from each message. The results indicated that users who personalized the format arranged the message elements in an interpretable manner, and they took fewer notes during the subsequent paced presentation of messages in their individualized formats than users who received the messages in a reasonable, pre-experimentally fixed format. In addition, the users with personalized formats learned more with the fixed format. These data suggest that the personalization of the message format was useful and led to improved subjective organization of the intelligence data.

References

  1. 1.Geiselman, R.E., and Samet, M.G. Summarizing military information: an application of schema theory. Human Factors, 1980, 22, 693-705.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. 2.Samet, M.G., and Geiselman, R.E. Guideline development for information summarization. Human Factors, 1981, 23, 727-736.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. 3.Kintsch, W. Comprehension and memory of text. In W.K. Estes (Ed.) Handbook of learning and cognitive processes, Vol. 6. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1978.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.Thorndyke, P.W. Cognitive structures in comprehension and memory of narrative discourse. Cognitive Psychology, 1977, 9, 77-110.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. 5.Peper, R.J., and Mayer, R.E. Notetaking as a generative activity. Journal of Educational Research, 1978, 70, 514-522.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.CACDA. Fixed format input messages and remarks (unpublished draft). U.S. Army Combined Arms Combat and Development Activities (Ft. Leavenworth, KS), 7 June 1978.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.Frase, L.T. Boundary conditions for mathemagenic behaviors. Review of Educational Research, 1970, 40, 337-347.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. 8.Faw, H.W., and Waller, F.G. Mathematical behaviors and efficiency in learning from prose. Review of Educational Research, 1976, 46, 691-720.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. 9.Tulving, E. Subjective organization and the effects of repetition in multi-tree free recall verbal learning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1966, 5, 193-197.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Notetaking and comprehension for computer-displayed messages: Personalized versus fixed formats

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          CHI '82: Proceedings of the 1982 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
          March 1982
          399 pages
          ISBN:9781450373890
          DOI:10.1145/800049

          Copyright © 1982 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 15 March 1982

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • Article

          Acceptance Rates

          CHI '82 Paper Acceptance Rate75of165submissions,45%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader