Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- Genre: Interactive multimedia--Psychological aspects.
- Genre: Cartographic
- Creators: Arizona State University
Description
When cartographers and graphic designers create maps they choose typefaces. Often, serif and sans serif typefaces are paired together to represent different information on a map. Typefaces have a communicated tone and choosing the correct typeface combination to send the intended message can be challenging. The purpose of this study was to create an analysis of the aesthetic characteristics of typeface pairings to assist map creators when choosing typefaces. An online survey was utilized to collect responses from graphic designers who have been trained in at least one year or more in design from a higher education institution. There were 30 participants in the study and they scored 24 typeface pairings, 12 differentiating and 12 superfamily, on 48 maps. Scoring was done on eight aesthetic characteristics: friendly, whimsical, cheap, neutral, bland, corporate, serious and modern. The researcher conducted an analysis of each typeface’s microaesthetics and then compared these to the survey’s scored aesthetic characteristics. It was concluded that there are many factors that go into comparing the typeface pairings of serif and sans serif typeface combinations. However, a selection of a superfamily typeface pairing is better than selecting a differentiating pairing. Future research should focus on conducting studies with a varying amount of typeface styles. Also, to include less maps per survey and a survey completion status bar.
ContributorsFinden, Nathan (Author) / Ralston, Laurie (Thesis advisor) / Carrasquilla, Christina (Committee member) / Westover, William (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
The current study investigated how multimedia pacing (learner-control versus system-paced) and presentation styles (visual-only versus audio/visual) impact learning physics concept material, mental effort, and self-efficacy. This 2X2 factorial study randomly assigned participants into one of four conditions that manipulated presentation style (visual-only versus audio/visual) and pacing of the content (system-paced versus learning-controlled). Participant's learning was measured by recording their retention of information and ability to transfer information. Measures of perceived difficulty (mental effort) and perceived ability (self-efficacy) were also obtained. No significant effects were observed in this study which doesn’t support the existence of either the modality or reverse modality effect at least in these noisier online learning environments. In addition, the hypothesis that their effects could be an artifact of experimental design could not be proven as the learner control condition did not yield any significant results.
ContributorsKrause, Tyler (Author) / Craig, Scotty D. (Thesis advisor) / Gray, Robert (Committee member) / Branaghan, Russell (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
The purpose of this study was to investigate the impacts of three types of instructional presentation methods on learning, efficiency, cognitive load, and learner attitude. A total of 67 employees of a large southwestern university working in the field of research administration were randomly assigned to one of three conditions. Each condition presented instructional materials using a different method, namely dynamic integrated, dynamic non-integrated, or non-dynamic non-integrated. Participants completed a short survey, pre-test, cognitive load questions, learner attitude questions, and a post-test during their experience. The results reveal that users of the dynamic integrated condition treatment showed significant improvement in both learning and efficiency. The dynamic non-integrated participants had a faster mean time to complete an assigned task, however, they also had significantly lower average test scores. There were no other significant findings in terms of cognitive load or learner attitude. Limitations, implications and future studies are discussed.
ContributorsBrown, Andrew (Author) / Nelson, Brian (Thesis advisor) / Savenye, Wilhelmina (Committee member) / Atkinson, Robert (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016