Learning from Animations: The eect of High and Low Domain knowledge on learning from Animations with or without

Auditive feedback.
Jaap Kabbedijk 0444332 j.kabbedijk@cs.uu.nl Bachelor Research Project Information Science Utrecht University Supervision: dr. H. van Oostendorp October 20, 2009

Abstract
A lot of information is passed through by animations. Because of this, it is of great importance to know what the best conditions are to present an animation to dierent types of persons, in order to transfer the most information. This paper examines the dierence between persons with High Domain Knowledge and persons with Low Domain Knowledge in the way they learn from animations. We test whether the mental model of a person with LDK is higher when an animation is shown to him with auditive comment, than when an animation is shown without auditive comment. Also we test if a reversed eect is found with persons with HDK, where an animation with auditive comment can possibly give a worse mental image than an animation without auditive comment. This paper shows that there is no signicant dierence of mental image between people with LDK or HDK and also no dierence between auditive comment and the lack of auditive comment when showing the animation. There is no dierence in mental image whatsoever that we could prove by our experiment.

Introduction

Lets start by stating what an animation exactly is. An animation is a pictorial representation that depicts apparent movement and consists of objects that are articially created (Mayer & Moreno, 2002). More and more information is transferred by animations. Previously the transfer of information was done through static media. Paper was the primary medium, on which text illustrated with static images was presented. Nowadays a lot of information is presented to people in the form of animations and this is the reason why a whole new research area with a lot of new questions has been established. You can imagine that if you, for example, need to learn something new and you are no expert, you would like a lot of information about the specic topic. For someone who has a lot of domain knowledge about this topic and therefore is a expert on the topic, information that will be useful to you, will be redundant. This redundant information that is crucial for you as a low domain knowledge user (LDK), can give an unnecessary load on the limited working capacity of the high domain knowledge user (HDK). This redundant information for the HDK user can result in a lower understanding of the information than the HDK user would have if the redundant information was not present. This eect is known as the expertise reversal eect (Kalyuga et al., 2003). Giving people information through animations, you want them to make a mental image of the animation and interpret this, to extract the information you put in the animation. The use of animations for giving information to a user can be preferred above normal static representation, when the information is about a certain process. Think about the ushing of a toilet, this is something that is hard to explain by words and static images, but people can make a good mental image of it when they are presented an animation (Hegarty et al., 2003). People with a HDK on a certain topic have better mental images after being shown an animation an that specic topic (Hegarty & Kriz, 2007), but according to Kalyuga et al. (2003) this mental image can be negatively inuenced by a too high amount of redundant information. The expertise reversal eect is not an eect that is only applies to visual representations (visuospatial sketchpad), but it can also occur when information is oered in dierent modalities. Think about a visual representation, with additional information given in an auditive way.

This auditive information that is meant to give extra information to persons who have low domain knowledge, can lead to a cognitive overload by persons who already have high domain knowledge on the specic topic, and by this possibly give them a worse mental model of a topic than users without this extra auditive information. To see if this is true, we will test in this paper if there is a relation between the mental model people create with, or without extra auditive information, based on the level of their domain knowledge. There has been earlier research about the possible eect of multiple interacting elements of information that is presented at the same time. Sweller & Chandler (1994) stated that people have a limited cognitive workload and that by designing learning material in a way that take this cognitive load theory into account, spectacular gains in learning eciency could be seen. When someone has to split his attention between two dierent sources of materials, he uses a lot of his limited working memory and therefore has less working memory available for the learning process (Kalyuga et al., 1999). These studies indicate that a larger amount of interacting elements of information will make the learning process less ecient. This is true, but another element also has to be taken into account. This is the domain knowledge a person has. As discussed before this domain knowledge has an eect on the eectiveness of the learning process (Kalyuga et al., 2003). Kalyuga et al. (2003) showed the existence of the expertise reversal eect on multiple interacting elements of information, but did this by a literature study and not by an experiment that puts an animation and auditive feedback together to test this eect. The research question: Is there an expertise reversal eect on animations with or without auditive feedback, will be answered in this paper.

Hypotheses construction

In order to explore the research question stated above, several hypothesis have to be formed and tested. The rst hypotheses is (1): People with Low Domain Knowledge and auditive comments, will have a better mental image of the process than people with Low Domain Knowledge and no auditive comments. The second hypotheses we will test is (2): People with High Domain Knowledge and no auditive comments will have a better mental image than people with High Domain Knowledge and auditive comments. These two hypotheses are summarized in gure 1, where the hypotheses are depicted as arrows. Hypothesis 1 states a better cognitive model for persons with low domain knowledge, when they get auditive comments. Hypothesis 2 shows the expertise reversal eect on the cognitive model of a person. It states that the cognitive model at persons with a high domain knowledge will be better if no auditive comment is provided.

Figure 1: Hypotheses

3
3.1

Method
Subjects

The 40 subjects that were tested within this experiment are mostly students. All people tested have a reasonably high educational level and no experience on the domain of ush-systems or heart systems. All subject did the experiment alone, under the same conditions.

3.2

Materials

Before the animation was shown, the participants were presented a questionnaire to test their prior domain knowledge. These questionnaires can be found in appendix A. For this experiment a representation of two dierent systems was presented to the subjects. The representations were designed in a way that no prerequisite knowledge about the system was needed. One system presented was the working of the human hart (gure 2). The second system presented was a toilet ush and its relling process (gure 3). The reason that we chose these two dierent systems was to make it possible in the end to give a more generic answer to the research questions. Therefore a representation of a biological system (the working of a human hart) as well as a diagram of an artifact (the working of a toilet ush) was chosen. O these two systems three dierent conditions were made. For every condition a textual description of the main steps was shown on top of the screen. The used background was made of an inconspicuous gray color. There were two possible conditions a test subject could get. In one condition there was no auditive feedback to the animation shown and in the second condition, the test subject would get auditive feedback to the animation he was shown. To measure the cognitive load a generated by the experiment on a per3

Figure 2: Heart animation son, questions were asked about the system to test a persons understanding. This is a subjective objective way of measuring (Brunken et al., 2003).

3.3

Apparatus

The animations used in the experiment are made with Macromedia Flash 81 and converted to a XVID2 movie le to implement in a Superlab 43 environment. The experiment was shown to the test subjects at a resolution of 1152X864 on a 17 computer screen.

3.4

Procedure

All test subjects were randomly assigned between the condition with or the condition without auditive comment.

All participants are rst presented with a document that contains extra information about the domain that will be tested. First they will get some information about ush systems (another system than is shown in the experiment), and after that some information about the vascular system of humans. These documents (in Dutch) can be found in the appendix. With these documents high domain knowledge could be created. After the information is read, eight
1 http://www.adobe.com/ 2 http://www.xvid.org/ 3 http://www.superlab.com/

Figure 3: Flush animation Condition: Condition LDK NoCom Condition LDK AudCom Condition HDK NoCom Condition HDK AudCom Contents: Low Domain Knowledge, no auditive information Low Domain Knowledge, auditive information High Domain Knowledge, no auditive information High Domain Knowledge, auditive information

with with with with

Table 1: Conditions of the experiment. true or false questions are asked to test the subject on the topic they read about. Based on the answers to these eight questions it is determined whether someone has high or low domain knowledge. After this, all four conditions are shown the same animation of a ush system twice. Two conditions get to see an animation with no additional auditive comment (Condition LDK NoCom and HDK NoCom) and the two other conditions (Condition LDK AudCom and HDK AudCom) get to see the same animation, but with auditive comment. After the animations are shown, the participant has to ll in a Flags Test Thurstone & Jereys (1956). This test consists of several tasks in which an example ag and a serie of rotated or else way altered ags are shown and the test subject has to select the ags that are the same as the example ag. This test has two reasons. within the experiment. The rst reason is to test the visual spatial ability of the person and next it is meant to erase all the information about the animation from the short term memory. By this, we will test the actual mental image someone has developed and not his ability to remember information for a short time. After this Flags test, the test subjects were asked to answer dierent types of questions. To test users understanding of the dierent systems, three groups

of dierent types of questions of both systems were made up based on (Awan & Stevens, 2006); (Paas, 1993) and (Betrancourt et al., 2003) The retention process followed the conventional paradigm for studying construction of mental model (Schnotz, 2001). First they participants were asked some retention questions. For example: What is the name of part A in gure 3?. These type of questions are meant to test how much of the explicit parts they remember. Participants received one point for every part that was labelled correct. Since there were respectively 8 parts in the ush system and 9 parts in the heart system, participants could get 8 and 9 points for these questions. When the test subject has answered the retention questions, ve multiple choice questions are posed about the animation shown. An example of such a question is: Why does the oater go down?. 1. a) Because the lever is pulled down 2. b) Because the water throughput valve opens 3. c) Because the water inlet valve opens 4. d) Because the water goes down These questions measure the comprehension of the user about the system. One point was given for each good answer and 5 multiple choice questions were posed for both system. Finally ve troubleshooting questions were asked. In this kind of question a problem with the system is given to the subject. The subject is then asked to diagnose the cause of the problem. This is an open question looking for example like: The toilet was used one hour ago. Water is still running into the toilet. What could be wrong?. When all questions are answered, the subjects is shown an animation again, but this time it is about the human heart. This animation is shown twice as well and the same kind of questions are asked afterwards. There was no time constraint for the participants to complete the experiment, but the time they needed to complete each subtask was measured. This measurement was done automatically by the software in which the experiment was conducted. The time measurement started the moment the experiment started (this includes the reading of the explanation by the participant) and ended the moment the last question was lled in.

4
4.1

Results
Variable Construction

The hypotheses make statements about High or Low Domain Knowledge, so it is important to divide the participants in these two groups rst. Before they did the actual experiment, their domain knowledge of ush system and the heart was measured (separately) and a score was attached to their knowledge. There is no signicant correlation between their domain knowledge on ush systems and their knowledge on the heart, r(38) = .273, p > 0.05, so we have to analyse the ush and the heart system separately, and can not create one variable on domain knowledge.

Since there is a condition with and a condition without auditive comment, the participants will be split into two domain knowledge groups, within one of these conditions. DK Score (Flush) 3 4 5 6 7 8 Cumulative percent 5 20 50 85 95 100

Table 2: Frequency of Domain Knowledge scores (Flush).

As can be seen in table 2, 50% of the participants have a domain knowledge score of 3, 4 or 5 on the ush subject. Because of this we state that people with a score 5 on the ush subject have a Low Domain Knowledge, and everyone with a score > 5 has a High Domain Knowledge. Summarized: DK 5 = LDK; DK > 5 = HDK. DK Score (Heart) 6 7 8 Cumulative percent 5 45 100

Table 3: Frequency of Domain Knowledge scores (Heart).

The frequency distribution of the Domain Knowledge scores on the heart subject diers from the one on the ush subject, as can be seen in table 2. 45% of the participants had a score of 6 or 7, so the separation between HDK and LDK is as follows: DK 7 = LDK; DK > 7 = HDK. When we apply this division of high and low domain knowledge on the ush and heart system to the participants of the experiment we get 4 groups of approximately the same size. Low Domain Knowledge 20 19 High Domain Knowledge 20 21

Flush Heart

Table 4: Number of participants per condition

The results of the experiment are summarized in table 5. In this table we stated all means and standard deviations for the dierent kind of questions in the experiment. 7

Results Flush Domain Knowledge (0-8) Retention of part names (0-8) Comprehension questions (0-5) Transfer of knowledge (0-15) Proportional Combined questions Time (minutes) Heart Domain Knowledge (0-8) Retention of part names (0-9) Comprehension questions (0-5) Transfer of knowledge (0-11) Proportional Combined questions Time (minutes)

LDK NoCom Mean SD 4.5 3.5 3.6 3.8 .47 23.1 6.9 5.1 3.1 3.1 .49 10.2 .707 .850 1.350 1.398 .117 4.679 .333 1.691 1.054 1.537 .148 1.296

LDK AudCom Mean SD 4.4 3.7 3.1 4.3 .46 20.3 7.0 4.5 2.6 2.5 .42 11.5 .516 .939 1.101 .949 .101 9.130 .000 1.780 .1.075 .972 .123 1.573

HDK NoCom Mean SD 6.4 4.1 4.0 4.4 .54 24.3 8.0 5.0 3.2 3.1 .49 15.2 .699 .876 .943 1.075 .074 .815 .000 1.483 .751 .701 .101 3.531

HDK AudCom Mean SD 6.2 3.8 4.1 5.20 .55 19.0 8.0 5.7 3.3 3.8 .55 10.9 0.422 .1.033 .1.287 1.619 .126 7.991 .000 2.263 .675 .632 .116 3.694

Table 5: Mean and Standard Deviation of test scores.

There is a weak correlation between the three dierent types of questions. This correlation is too weak to create one variable out of the three separate variables, but for the sake of explorative research we will create one variable to test the the understanding of the ush system and one variable for understanding the heart system. Possible signicant results found by using this variable could indicate a direction for future research. We created the variables by taking the average of the relative result of the three dierent types of questions. For the ush system this means the following:
1 1 1 + 5/ComprehensionScore + 15/T ransf erScore 8/RetentionScore

For the heart system this will mean:

1 1 1 + 5/ComprehensionScore + 11/T ransf erScore 9/RetentionScore

4.2

Eect of Auditive Information

To validate the rst hypothesis, we will need to examine the eect of auditive comment on people with low domain knowledge. H0 : There is no dierence in mental model of a process between people with low domain knowledge that got auditive comment with the animation, in comparison to people with low domain knowledge that got no auditive comment with the animation. H1 : People will have a better mental model of a process when they get auditive comment with an animation, then people who dont get auditive comment with an animation. Since we have to test the two dierent systems separately, we started by testing the ush system. The mental model of people was tested by pos8

ing three dierent kind of questions. Looking at the retention questions, we can see no signicant dierence after doing an independent sample T-test: t(18) = .497, p = .63 (appendix B). When testing the dierence between auditive comment and no auditive comment on comprehension questions, we again did not found a signicant dierence: t(18) = .908, p = .38. Finally on the troubleshoot questions there also was no signicant dierence according to an independent sample T-test: t(18) = .936, p = .36. No dierences were found between people who watched the animation on the ush system with, or without auditive comments and have a low domain knowledge. For the heart system, also no signicant dierences were found. Retention: t(17) = .765, p = .46, Multiple Choice: t(17) = 1.044, p = .31 and Troubleshoot: t(17) = 1.048, p = .31 (See appendix B). Based on this, we can not accept H1 and conclude there is no dierence in mental image between people with LDK that got no auditive comment, compared to people that did get auditive comment. The second hypothesis is also based on the eect of auditive comment on the mental image of a person. This hypothesis is as follows: H0 : There is no dierence in mental model of a process between people with high domain knowledge that got auditive comment with the animation, in comparison to people with high domain knowledge that got no auditive comment with the animation. H1 : People will have a worse mental model of a process when they get auditive comment with an animation, then people who dont get auditive comment with an animation. Conducting a independent-samples T-test shows no signicant dierences for the ush system. The result for the ush system are: Retention: t(18) = .701, p = .49, Multiple Choice: t(18) = .198, p = .85 and Troubleshoot: t(18) = 1.302, p = .21. When testing the results for the heart system, we can see a signicant dierence in the troubleshoot questions. The results for the hearts system are: Retention: t(19) = .846, p = .41, Multiple Choice: t(19) = .378, p = .71 and Troubleshoot: t(19) = 2.425p = .03 (See appendix B). People with a HDK did a signicant better job when they get auditive comment, compared to when they dont. We can not accept H1 , since only one of the results had a signicant dierence, but this dierence is something that should be researched in more detail.

4.3

Eect of Combined Variables

When testing the combined variable for both the ush and the heart system, we can see no signicant result for the people with high domain knowledge on the ush system: t(18) = .259, p = .80. Concerning people with LDK we did not nd any signicant results at the ush systems (t(18) = .284, p = .78), nor at the heart system, where the results for LDK were t(18) = 1.210, p = .24 and for HDK were t(18) = 1.167, p = .26 (see appendix B).

4.4

Eect of Time

There was no time constraint for participants to complete the experiment and also there was not stated to the participants that their time was measured. Still 9

it is possible that there is a correlation between the time they needed to complete the experiment and the result they had. When we test this correlation, we can see there is no signicant correlation between the participants nal result and the time the took to do the entire experiment (r(38) = .240, p > 0.05 for the ush system and r(38) = .084, p > 0.05 for the heart system). This correlation however does not take the dierent levels of domain knowledge into account. When low and high domain knowledge are tested separately for the ush and heart system however, still no signicant correlation can be found. Based on our results no signicant correlation between time and the quality of the mental image participants have,can be found.

Conclusion and Discussion

When we look again at gure 1 we can conclude, based on section 4.2, that there is no signicant dierence on the mental image people create, between people with LDK and HDK. Hypothesis 1 could not be accepted based on our research. Also we can conclude that there is no dierence between auditive comment and the lack of auditive comment. Hypothesis 2 could not be accepted as well. There is no provable dierence between the mental image of people with high domain knowledge after they were shown an animation with auditive comment, compared to people who were shown an animation without auditive comment. We did not nd any signicant dierences for the heart or ush system on retention questions. This means the ability for people to remember elements in a system does not dier when they get auditive comment, compared to when they do not receive auditive comment. The same goes for the comprehension questions (multiple choice), where we did not nd any dierence between auditive comment and the lack of auditive comment. We did nd a signicant dierence on the troubleshoot questions about the heart system between people with a LDK and people with a HDK. This could mean that people with HDK do benet from auditive comments. This benet is not there for knowledge retention or comprehension, but can benet them in troubleshoot situations. The fact that we did nd a signicant result when we combined the variables does not necessarily mean there really is a dierences between the mental image of people high domain knowledge. Future research has to be performed to see if there really is a dierence. The research question: Is there an expertise reversal eect on animations with or without auditive feedback, therefore has to be answered with a no. Since all two hypotheses could not be proved or accepted, the research question proved to be negatively answered. This means we did not nd an expertise reversal eect on animations. The eect may be there, but with the experiment we conducted, we could not nd it. This could be caused by the way we dened our high domain knowledge participants. People were classied as HDK participant when they had a score that was higher than 50% of the other participants. By classifying people in this way, it is possible that the HDK participants did not really had that much of domain knowledge, but they only relatively had more knowledge than the other participants. The use of both a not natural system (ush) and a natural system (heart) has been done before ((Oostendorp & Beijersbergen, 2007), so this should not have given any problems in the experiment.

10

Based on this research we conclude that we did not nd the expertise reversal eect on animations, but future research has to prove this is not due to the classication method used for creating people with low or high domain knowledge.

References
Awan, R. N., & Stevens, B. (2006). Static animated diagrams and their eect on students perceptions of conceptual understanding in computer aided learning (cal) environments. (P. H. C. I. 2005, Ed.). Springer-Verlag. Betrancourt, M., Dillenbourg, P., & Clavien, L. (2003). Reducing cognitive load in learning from animation: Impact of delivery features. In Earli 2003 symposium comprehension processes in learing with animation. Brunken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2003). Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38 , 53-61. Hegarty, M., & Kriz, S. (2007). Top-down and bottom-up inuences on learning from animations. Human Computer Studies, 65 , 911-930. Hegarty, M., Kriz, S., & Cate, C. (2003). The roles of mental animations and external animations in understanding mechanical systems. Cognition and Instruction, 21 , 325-360. Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). Expertise reversal eect. Educational Psychologist, 38 , 23-31. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13 , 351-371. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2002). Animation as an aid to multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review , 14 , 87-99. Oostendorp, H. van, & Beijersbergen, M. (2007). Animated diagrams: their effect on understanding, condence and mental eort. Proceedings 12th EARLI Conference. Paas, G. W. C. (1993). Instructional control of cognitive load in training of complex cognitive tasks. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Twenty University. Schnotz, W. (2001). Sign systems, technologies, and the acquisition of knowledge (J. F. Rouet, J. Levonen, & A. Biardeau, Eds.). Amsterdam, Elsevier. Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is dicult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12 , 185-233. Thurstone, L., & Jereys, T. (1956). Flags: A test of space thinking. Chicago Industry Service.

11

Appendix

Domeinkennis doortreksysteem
Een ballcock is een mechanisme voor het vullen van waterreservoirs, zoals bijvoorbeeld gevonden kan worden in het doortreksysteem van een toilet, wat ervoor zorgt dat het reservoir niet overstroomt. Het is uitgevonden door Thomas Crapper. Het bestaat uit een klep, verbonden met een drijver door middel van een hefboom, gemonteerd aan de bovenkant van de tank. De klep is verbonden met de toevoer van het water, en wordt geopend of gesloten door middel van de hefboom die de drijver aan zijn andere kant gemonteerd heeft. Het systeem kan schematisch als volgt weergegeven worden: 1. Drijver 2. Watertoevoer, gesloten door klep 3. Hefboom 4. Vulpijp 5. Toilet vulpijp 6. Afsluitstop 7. Overloopbuis 8. Doortrekhendel 9. Ketting 10. Vullijn 11. Klepverbinding Figure 4: Ballcock systeem in rust. 12. Doorspoelbuis

Zie ommezijde.

12

Wanneer het water de hoogte van de vullijn heeft behaald, zorgt de drijver er via de hefboom voor dat de watertoevoer wordt afgesloten. Wanneer de doortrekhendel naar beneden wordt getrokken, wordt de afsluitstop omhoog getrokken via een ketting. De stop is dusdanig ontworpen, dat het zachter daalt dan het water, wat onderuit het reservoir stroomt, zodat het reservoir leeg raakt. Als het waterniveau zakt, zakt de drijver ook, wat ervoor zorgt dat de watertoevoer geactiveerd wordt.

(a) Hendel naar beneden

(b) Terug in startpositie

Figure 5: Ballcock systeem in verschillende fasen

Wanneer de afvoerstop weer beneden is, vult het water het reservoir weer tot de vullijn bereikt is en is het systeem weer klaar voor gebruik.

13

Vragenlijst Domeinkennis Flush

1. De hendel zorgt ervoor dat de watertoevoer weer wordt afgesloten. Goed / Fout 2. De drijver zakt mee met het water. Goed / Fout 3. De stop in het systeem daalt sneller dan het water. Goed / Fout 4. Een hefboom verbindt de drijver met de doortrekhendel. Goed / Fout 5. De watertoevoer wordt afgesloten door een klep. Goed / Fout 6. Wanneer het water de vullijn bereikt, wordt de watertoevoer geactiveerd. Goed / Fout 7. De doorspoelbuis wordt afgesloten door een klep. Goed / Fout 8. Als de afvoerstop beneden is, vult het systeem zich vanzelf met water. Goed / Fout

14

Domeinkennis hart
De bloedsomloop is nodig om het lichaam en organen van bloed te voorzien. Er is een grote en een kleine bloedsomloop. Kleine bloedsomloop: Deze begint in de rechterkamer en pompt zuurstofarm en koolzuurgasrijk bloed naar de longen via de longaders. In de longen vind de gaswisseling plaats, zuurstof wordt opgenomen en koolzuurgas wordt afgegeven aan de lucht. Het zuurstofrijk en koolzuurarm bloed stroomt dan weer in de linkerboezem. Grote bloedsomloop: Deze begint in de linkerkamer, het bloed wordt de aorta ingepompt en brengt zuurstofrijk bloed naar de weefsels in het hele lichaam. De zuurstof en voedingsstoen worden afgegeven en de afvalstoen en koolzuurgas uit de weefsels opgenomen. Deze komt via de bovenste en de onderste holle ader. (vena cava superior en vena cava inferior) via de rechterboezem in de rechterkamer waar de kleine bloedsomloop weer kan beginnen. Het hart zelf wordt door bloed voorzien door een stelsel van slagaders die het hart als een krans omgeven, de kransslagaders. De gemiddelde hartslag is ongeveer 70 slagen per minuut.

Figure 6: Bloedsomloop

15

In guur 6 is te zien dat het zuurstofarme bloed (blauw van kleur) vanuit de rechter hartkamer naar de longen wordt gepompt. De longen zijn gepositioneerd aan de linker en rechter kant van de afbeelding. Er moet opgemerkt worden dat het hart van voren is weergeven en de rechter hartkamer dus links op de afbeelding staat. Wanneer het bloed in de longen van zuurstof is voorzien (rood van kleur) wordt het terug naar de linker hartkamer gepompt, van waar het verder door het hele hart wordt gepompt.

16

Vragenlijst Domeinkennis Hart

1. De kleine bloedsomloop begint in de rechter kamer. Goed / Fout 2. De grote bloedsomloop brengt zuurstofrijk bloed naar het lichaam. Goed / Fout 3. De gemiddelde hartslag is ongeveer 90 slagen per minuut. Goed / Fout 4. Zuurstofarm bloed komt binnen in de rechter kamer. Goed / Fout 5. In de longen wordt koolzuurgas afgegeven aan de lucht. Goed / Fout 6. De kransslagaders voorzien het hart van bloed. Goed / Fout 7. Bloed vanuit de longen wordt de rechter kamer ingepompt. Goed / Fout 8. In de kleine bloedsomloop kunnen ook afvalsstoen opgenomen worden. Goed / Fout

17

SPSS output

Figure 7: Correlation between the three dierent ush questions

Figure 8: Correlation between the three dierent heart questions

18

Figure 9: Independent sample T-test Flush system with LDK - Comment/NoComment on retention questions

Figure 10: Independent sample T-test Flush system with LDK - Comment/NoComment on multiple choice questions

Figure 11: Independent sample T-test Flush system with LDK - Comment/NoComment on troubleshoot questions

Figure 12: Independent sample T-test Heart system with LDK - Comment/NoComment on retention questions

Figure 13: Independent sample T-test Heart system with LDK - Comment/NoComment on multiple choice questions

19

Figure 14: Independent sample T-test Heart system with LDK - Comment/NoComment on troubleshoot questions

Figure 15: Independent sample T-test Flush system with HDK - Comment/NoComment on retention questions

Figure 16: Independent sample T-test Flush system with HDK - Comment/NoComment on multiple choice questions

Figure 17: Independent sample T-test Flush system with HDK - Comment/NoComment on troubleshoot questions

Figure 18: Independent sample T-test Heart system with HDK - Comment/NoComment on retention questions

20

Figure 19: Independent sample T-test Heart system with HDK - Comment/NoComment on retention questions

Figure 20: Independent sample T-test Heart system with HDK - Comment/NoComment on retention questions

Figure 21: Independent sample T-test Flush system with NoComment LDK/HDK on retention questions

Figure 22: Independent sample T-test Flush system with NoComment LDK/HDK on multiple choice questions

Figure 23: Independent sample T-test Flush system with NoComment LDK/HDK on troubleshoot questions

21

Figure 24: Independent sample T-test Heart system with NoComment LDK/HDK on retention questions

Figure 25: Independent sample T-test Heart system with NoComment LDK/HDK on multiple choice questions

Figure 26: Independent sample T-test Heart system with NoComment LDK/HDK on troubleshoot questions

22

Figure 27: Independent sample T-test Flush system with LDK - Comment/NoComment combined variable

Figure 28: Independent sample T-test Flush system with HDK - Comment/NoComment combined variable

Figure 29: Independent sample T-test Heart system with LDK - Comment/NoComment combined variable

Figure 30: Independent sample T-test Heart system with HDK - Comment/NoComment combined variable

23