How the Quality of Annotation Influences Academic Reading: An Eye‐Tracking Study

ABSTRACT Background Collaborative reading can facilitate students’ understanding of complex learning materials. High‐quality annotations provided by peer learners are essential for successful collaborative reading. However, it remains to be understood how annotation quality affects reading comprehension. Objectives A simulated collaborative reading environment was constructed for interactive highlighting and commenting. The environment was used to conduct a laboratory experiment and examine the benefits of reading annotations by others. Methods Forty‐seven college students participated in the study and were randomly assigned to two conditions. The constructive annotation group was provided with annotations containing information that pertained to the constructive level of cognitive processing, while the active annotation group was supplied with annotations containing information that pertained to the active level of cognitive processing. Pre‐ and post‐tests were used to measure learning gains. System log files and eye‐tracking data were analysed to compare and contrast the differences in underlying processing. Results and Conclusions The results showed that constructive and active annotations incurred different reading patterns, with the constructive annotations attracting more attention than the active annotations. The results implied that instructors could use seed annotations of a constructive level in reading assignments to facilitate reading comprehension.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
Published
2025-05-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.70062
Primary Topic
Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How the Quality of Annotation Influences Academic Reading: An Eye‐Tracking Study

Lishan Zhang, Min Xu, Shuwen Wang, Lili Liu et al.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
article

How the Quality of Annotation Influences Academic Reading: An Eye‐Tracking Study

Lishan Zhang, Min Xu, Shuwen Wang, Lili Liu, Sixv Zhang, Yun Tang
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background Collaborative reading can facilitate students’ understanding of complex learning materials. High‐quality annotations provided by peer learners are essential for successful collaborative reading. However, it remains to be understood how annotation quality affects reading comprehension. Objectives A simulated collaborative reading environment was constructed for interactive highlighting and commenting. The environment was used to conduct a laboratory experiment and examine the benefits of reading annotations by others. Methods Forty‐seven college students participated in the study and were randomly assigned to two conditions. The constructive annotation group was provided with annotations containing information that pertained to the constructive level of cognitive processing, while the active annotation group was supplied with annotations containing information that pertained to the active level of cognitive processing. Pre‐ and post‐tests were used to measure learning gains. System log files and eye‐tracking data were analysed to compare and contrast the differences in underlying processing. Results and Conclusions The results showed that constructive and active annotations incurred different reading patterns, with the constructive annotations attracting more attention than the active annotations. The results implied that instructors could use seed annotations of a constructive level in reading assignments to facilitate reading comprehension.

Journal of Computer Assisted LearningVol. 41(3)
Beijing Institute of Technology (CN), Beijing Institute of Education (CN), Beijing Normal University (CN), Central China Normal University (CN), Renmin University of China (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China, Beijing Institute of Technology
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 89%
Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.