Navigational Correlates of Comprehension in Hypertext
Authors: John E. McEneaney
Publication: Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia (Hypertext 2000), ACM, 2000.
DOI: 10.1145/336296.336504
Source: Supplied ACM HyperText 2000 proceedings PDF (SHA-256: 503e989120ddfddf6be56d6453df7ac374bcf4d0bf2ac7ea18b234dcdf6aef4e).
Full text
Source page 1
Navigational Correlates of Comprehension in Hypertext
John E. McEneaney
Department of Reading and Language Arts
Oakland University
Rochester, MI 48309-4494, USA
E-mail: mceneane@oakland.edu
ABSTRACT
Despite a substantial literature on problems related to user
navigation, we know remarkably little about the relationship
between navigational strategies and successful use of
hypertext. Revealing the complex interactions of navi-
gational decision making and comprehension, however, will
require objective, reliable, and empirically significant
navigational metrics that go beyond the largely informal and
indirect measures that have traditionally been used. The
purpose of this paper is to describe a study that replicates
and extends earlier work that defines and validates two
objective navigational metrics [5]. Results of this study
confirm the empirical significance of these metrics, support
the reliability of their relationship to hypertext com-
prehension, and provide indirect support for a model of
reading comprehension that postulates greater demands on
higher-level processing in hypertext compared to traditional
print.
KEYWORDS: comprehension; empirical validation;
navigational metrics; navigational patterns; user paths.
INTRODUCTION
The present study employs two navigational measures, path
compactness and path stratum, that are based on structural
metrics originally developed to describe hypertext networks
[1]. The purpose of these metrics is to yield global,
network-based assessments of structure grounded in node-
based centrality measures, with each metric ranging from 0
to 1. Network compactness refers to the complexity or
degree of linking within a network. As defined, more
sparsely linked networks result in values for compactness
closer to 0, while densely connected networks yield
compactness closer to 1. Stratum, on the other hand, refers
to the degree of linearity of a network, as indicated by the
extent to which a network is organized so that certain nodes
must be read before others.
The path metrics employed in this study also range from 0
to 1 and similarly reflect degree of complexity and
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. To copy
otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists,
requires prior specific permission and/or a fee.
Hypertext 2000, San Antonio, TX.
Copyright 2000 ACM 1-58113-227-1/00/0005…$5.00
linearity. Path metrics, however, are based on path matrices
that reflect use of links during a reading session rather than
network adjacency matrices.
Path compactness (PC) is defined in a manner analogous to
the compactness structural metric with the one noted
difference that path matrices are employed instead of
adjacency matrices. The metric is formally defined as
(
-
)
Σ
Σ
PC
P
Max
i
j
ij
=
,
P
C
(
-
)
P
P
Max
Min
Readable transcription: PC = (PMax − Σ_i Σ_j Pij) / (PMax − PMin).
where PC refers to the converted distance matrix of the path
and PMax and PMin refer, respectively, to the maximum and
minimum converted distance values that the path matrix
can assume for a completely-connected (PMin) and
completely-disconnected (PMax) network consisting of as
many nodes as are in the path. PMax and PMin are given by PMax
= K(n
2-n), and PMin = (n
2-n), where n is the order of the path
matrix and K is a matrix conversion constant.
Path stratum (PS) is also defined in a manner analogous to
its structural equivalent with
path
absolute
prestige
=
,
PS
LAP
Readable transcription: PS = (path absolute prestige) / LAP.
where the path absolute prestige is defined as in a network
with the exception that the distance matrix is derived from a
path matrix rather than an adjacency matrix. The linear
absolute prestige (LAP) that serves as the normalizing
measure for this metric is also defined analogously to the
structural metric, based on the number of distinct nodes in
the path.
METHOD
Participants in the study were 133 students at a medium-
sized midwestern public university in the USA, with data
collection extending across both terms of the 1998-1999
academic year. The experiment required subjects to answer
a set of academic advising questions using a hypertext
student handbook that was presented through a web-browser
interface. Subjects answered as many questions as possible
in a 15-minute period. The handbook consisted of
approximately 31,000 words in 78 text nodes structured in a
hierarchical-linear fashion with major handbook divisions
organized hierarchically and nodes within those divisions
organized in a largely linear fashion. Subject movement
within the handbook was recorded to the browser cookie file
by JavaScript code embedded in the handbook pages.
254
Source page 2
Following experimental sessions, subjects' path data were
retrieved from browser cookie files. Data was formatted for
visual display and path compactness and stratum metrics
were calculated for each subject. Responses to academic
advising questions were scored on a three-point scale. Zero
points for incorrect and omitted responses, 1/2 point for
partially correct and correct-but-incomplete responses, and 1
point for complete and correct responses [6].
RESULTS
As in the earlier study [5], there were pronounced visual
patterns evident in the path graphics [4]. Higher scoring
subjects consistently followed more complex "criss-
crossing" paths while lower scoring subjects tended to take
more linear paths through the document. Moreover, the
graphical analyses relating readers' paths to their scores on
the hypertext task were confirmed by follow-up statistical
analyses based on the path compactness and stratum metrics.
Results of the statistical analyses (Table 1), replicate earlier
findings indicating that performance on the hypertext task
had a moderate positive correlation for the Pc metric and a
moderate inverse correlation for the Ps metric. Moreover, as
in the previous study, both of these metrics correlate more
highly with the number of questions answered correctly than
a variety of other variables, including total pages viewed,
different
pages
viewed,
and
even
a
print-based
comprehension measure administered prior to the hypertext
reading task.
Variable
r
p
n
Vocabulary Pretest
.000
48
.529
Comprehension Pretest
.023
48
.289
Total Pages Read
.073
.202
133
Distinct Pages Read
.026
.383
133
Path Compactness (Pc)
.000
133
.381
Path Stratum (Ps)
.000
133
-.353
Table 1. Correlations of experimental
variables with hypertext reading scores.
Furthermore, although in the earlier study print reading
measures failed to correlate significantly with the hypertext
task, in this investigation there were significant correlations.
Related to this, it is interesting to note that the vocabulary
pretest accounted for more than 3 times the variance of the
hypertext score than did the comprehension pretest, a result
that seems counterintuitive given the fact that the hypertext
task assesses comprehension rather than vocabulary.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study are important for a number of
reasons. One reason is that they confirm earlier findings
that navigational metrics account for a significant degree of
variance in measures of hypertext comprehension. Given
the robust character of this association, and the ready
availability of real-time path-based data in electronic
reading environments, it seems likely that the metrics used
in this study can make significant contributions to user
models that will certainly be important elements in adaptive
hypermedia systems [2,3]. A second reason these results are
important is that they lend still greater credibility to the
broader theoretical framework used to derive these metrics
and, as pointed out in a previous paper [5], this framework
provides a basis for a more systematic and objective
analysis of reader navigation than has been possible before.
Finally, a third reason for interest in these results is that they
are consistent with independent empirical evidence [7]
suggesting that hypertext makes different demands on
higher-level comprehension processing (as compared to
traditional print), while lower-level processing remains
largely unchanged. Specifically, the smaller correlation of
the comprehension pre-assessment may simply reflect the
fact that comprehension processes are altered in a hypertext
environment while lower-level processes (like vocabulary)
are not. If this is the case, the differences in higher-level
processing would tend to erode the correlation between the
hypertext task and a print-oriented comprehension measure,
while there would be little reason to expect a reduction in
the association with lower-level vocabulary processes.
REFERENCES
Botafogo, R. A., Rivlin, E., & Shneiderman, B. (1992).
Structural analysis of hypertexts: Identifying hierarchies
and useful metrics. ACM Transactions on Information
Systems, 10(2), 142-180.
Dattolo A. & Loia, V. (1997). Active distributed
framework for adaptive hypermedia. International Journal
of Human-Computer Studies, 46, 605-626.
De Bra, P., Eklund, J., Kobsa, A., Brusilovsky, P., & Hall,
W. (1999). Adaptive hypermedia: Purpose, methods, and
techniques. In Klaus Tochtermann, Jörg Westbomke, Uffe
K. Wiil, & John J. Leggett (Eds.), Proceedings of the
Tenth ACM Conference on Hypertext - Hypertext '99,
199-200. New York: ACM.
Ellson, J., Koutsofios, E., & North, S. (1998). GraphViz
1.3 [Computer software]. Murray Hill, NJ: Lucent
Technologies.
McEneaney, J.E. (1999). Visualizing and assessing
navigation in hypertext. . In Klaus Tochtermann, Jörg
Westbomke, Uffe K. Wiil, & John J. Leggett (Eds.),
Proceedings of the Tenth ACM Conference on Hypertext
Hypertext '99, 61-70. New York: ACM.
McKnight, C., Dillon, A., & Richardson, J. (1990). A
comparison of linear and hypertext formats in information
retrieval. In R. McAleese & C. Green (Eds.), Hypertext:
State of the art (pp. 10-19). Oxford: Intellect.
Wenger, M.J. & Payne, D.G. (1996). Comprehension and
retention of nonlinear text: Considerations of working
memory and material-appropriate processing. American
Journal of Psychology, 109(1), 93-130.
255
Do you like what you are reading? Subscribe to receive updates.
Unsubscribe anytime