Word processing techniques and user learning preferences

ABSTRACT

This study compared guided exploration training and instruction- based training as methods of learning to use a word processing system. User learning preferences and attitudes toward computers were also assessed. Seventy five computer-naive people learned basic word processing functions in two training sessions. Post- training performance and knowledge tests were then administered. Guided exploration proved to be more effective than the instruction-based method. There is evidence for the potential benefit of matching training techniques to user learning preferences.

REFERENCES

• 1: Bear, G. G., Richard, H. C., &amp; Lancaster, P. (1987). <i>Attitudes toward computers: Validation of a computer attitudes scale</i>. <b>Journal of Educational Computing Research</b>, 3, 207--218.
• 2: Stuart K. Card , Allen Newell , Thomas P. Moran, The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, NJ, 1983
• 3: John M. Carroll, Interfacing thought: cognitive aspects of human-computer interaction, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987
• 4: John M. Carroll , Caroline Carrithers, Training wheels in a user interface, Communications of the ACM, v.27 n.8, p.800-806, Aug 1984 [doi>10.1145/358198.358218]
• 5: Carroll, J. M., Mack, R. L., Lewis, C. H., Grischkowsky, N. L., &amp; Robertson, S. R. (1985). <i>Exploring a Word Processor</i>. <b>Human-Computer Interaction</b>, 1, 283--307.
• 6: Richard Catrambone , John M. Carroll, Learning a word processing system with training wheels and guided exploration, Proceedings of the SIGCHI/GI conference on Human factors in computing systems and graphics interface, p.169-174, April 05-09, 1987, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
• 7: Curry, L. (1983). <i>An Organization of Learning Styles Theory And Constructs</i>. Paper presented at Annual Meeting, American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec, April 1983.
• 8: Dunn, R. (1984). <i>Learning Style: State of the Science</i>. <b>Theory into Practice</b>, 23, 10--19.
• 9: Eason, K. D., &amp; Damodaran, L. (1981). <i>The Needs of the Commercial User</i>. In M. J. Coombs &amp; J. L. Alty (Eds.), <b>Computing Skills and the User Interface</b>. New York: Academic Press.
• 10: Gorham, J. (1986). <i>Assessment, Classification and Implications of Learning Styles in Instructional Interactions</i>. <b>Communication Education</b>, 35, 411--417.
• 11: Hill, T., Smith, N. D., &amp; Mann, M. F. (1987). <i>Role of Efficacy Expectations in Predicting the Decision to Use Advanced Technologies: The Case of Computers</i>. <b>Journal of Applied Psychology</b>, 72, 307-313.
• 12: Lorraine M Jackson , Lorraine Vollmer , John Stuurman, Effects of attitude and task complexity on microcomputer text-editing, Journal of Computer Based Instruction, v.12 n.4, p.111-115, Autumn 1985
• 13: Lepper, M. R. (1985). <i>Microcomputers in Education: Motivational and Social Issues</i>. <b>American Psychologist</b>, 40, 1--18.
• 14: Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R., &amp; Cox, P. W. (1977). <i>Field-Dependent and Field-Independent Cognitive Styles and Their Educational Implications</i>. <b>Review of Educational Research</b>, 47, 1--64.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.4 INFORMATION SYSTEMS APPLICATIONS
      H.4.1 Office Automation
          Subjects: Word processing

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES
      H.1.2 User/Machine Systems
          Subjects: Human factors

  K. Computing Milieux
  K.3 COMPUTERS AND EDUCATION
      K.3.2 Computer and Information Science Education
          Subjects: Curriculum

General Terms:
Design, Human Factors, Management