閱讀是學生必備的學習技能，而教科書更是各級學校引導學生學習知識的重要媒介，為了更進一步了解學生如何閱讀物理教科書，本研究利用行動式眼動儀，來探討大學生閱讀物理教科書的眼球移動歷程，並進一步分析其與閱讀成效之間的關係。本研究以便利取樣方式招募35位大學生，首先，先進行光學基本概念前測試題，隨後配戴行動式眼動儀閱讀物理教科書的「光折射」單元，完成閱讀後再進行光折射概念後測，最後請受試者觀看回放眼球移動錄影並進行晤談。為了解受試者閱讀後理解程度與眼球移動歷程之間的關係，本研究將受試者依其科系背景與後測成績分為高分理工、低分理工、非理工三組，以分析三組受試者在不同眼動指標之間是否有所差異，並藉由序列分析(lag sequential analysis)比較三組在教科書圖文內容的視覺注意力與轉移過程。研究結果發現，非理工組在閱讀說明與定義的區域時，其凝視時間與次數顯著高於其他兩組，而低分理工組反而在公式與圖解區域比其他兩組有較多的凝視時間，顯示其在閱讀理解上會較為困難。而序列分析的結果顯示，所有受試者在不同圖形與文字表徵之間皆有顯著的轉移，但可以發現，非理工組與理工組有明顯不同的轉移模式，非理工組會透過翻頁來回顧先前的單元內容，藉此複習先備知識來理解新的學習內容，相較之下，不論高分或低分理工組，會依照教科書內容的順序閱讀，並可以就現有的圖文內容來理解新的知識，而較少回顧先前的單元概念。

The purpose of this study was to explore how college students read physics textbooks by using eye-tracking techniques. A cohort of 35 college students was recruited as the participants in this study. Each participant first took a pre-test, and then read a section, Total refraction, of a physics textbook with a mobile eye-tracker. Afterward, s/he took a post-test and was interviewed to both reflect and share her/his strategy for reading the textbook section. In order to investigate the relationships between reading process and reading outcomes, the participants were divided into three groups based on their post-test scores and educational backgrounds, the participants who gained a higher-level of the post-test score with a science or engineering major (Group 1), the participants who gained a lower-level of the post-test score with science or engineering major (Group 2), and the participants with social science or liberal art major (Group 3). The results indicated that, comparing to Group 1 participants, Group 2 participants had a longer fixation duration on the formula and pictorial diagrams, while Group 3 participants demonstrated a longer fixation duration on textual information. In addition, according to the results of lag sequential analyses, different visual transitional patterns could be found among the three groups. Group 1 and Group 2 participants tended to read through the textbook section by directly following its visual layout, that is, both from the top to the bottom and from the left to the right. In contrast, while reading the given section, Group 3 participants were more likely to switch their visual attention between the present and the previous section by turning pages back and forth.

中文部份
王晉基、郭重吉（1992）。利用選擇題的方式來探求國中學生對 “光” 的迷思概念之研究。科學教育，3，73-92。
張春興（2003）。心理學原理。台北市：東華書局。
教育部（2009）。職業學校群科課程綱要暨設備基準-一般科目。台北市：教育部。
郭重吉（1988）。從認知觀點探討自然科學的學習。教育學院學報，13，351-378。
陳均伊、張惠博、郭重吉（2004）。光反射與折射的另有概念診斷工具之發展與研究。科學教育學刊，12(3)，311-340。
謝青龍（1995）。從「迷思概念」到「另有架構」的概念改變。科學教育月刊，180，23-29。
鍾聖校（1994）。對科學教育錯誤概念研究之省思。教育研究資訊，2(3)，89-110。
英文部份
Abrams, R. A., Meyer, D. E., & Kornblum, S. (1989). Speed and accuracy of saccadic eye movements: Characteristics of impulse variability in the oculomotor system. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15(3), 529-543. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.15.3.529
Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33(2), 131-152. doi:1016/S0360-1315(99)00029-9
Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183-198. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.03.001
Annisette, L. E., & Lafreniere, K. D. (2017). Social media, texting, and personality: A test of the shallowing hypothesis. Personality and Individual Differences, 115, 154-158.
Ashby, J., & Clifton, C, Jr. (2005). The prosodic property of lexical stress affects eye movements during silent reading. Cognition, 96(3), B89-B100. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2004.12.006
Baddeley, A. D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255(5044), 556-559. doi:10.1126/science.1736359
Baddeley, A. D. (1999). Essentials of human memory. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Bakeman, R., & Quera, V. (2011). Sequential analysis and observational methods for the behavioral sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Brandstetter, M., Sandmann, A., & Florian, C. (2017). Understanding pictorial information in biology: students’ cognitive activities and visual reading strategies. International Journal of Science Education, 39(9), 1218-1237. doi:10.1080/09500693.2017.1320454
Bruner, J. S. (1964). The course of cognitive growth. American Psychologist, 19(1), 1-15. doi:10.1037/h0044160
Chace, K. H., Rayner, K., & Well, A. D. (2005). Eye movements and phonological parafoveal preview: effects of reading skill. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(3), 209-217. doi:10.1037/h0087476
Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3(3), 149-210. doi:10.1007/BF01320076
Clinton, V. (2019). Reading from paper compared to screens: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Journal of Research in Reading, 42(2), 288-325.
Cobern, W. W. (1991). World view theory and science education research. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1043&context=science_slcsp
Eysenck, M. W., & Keane, M. T. (2005). Cognitive psychology: A student's handbook. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., & Gentner, D. (1989). The structure-mapping engine: Algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence, 41(1), 1-63. doi:10.1016/0004-3702(89)90077-5
Gagne, E. D., Gagné, E. D., Yekovich, C. W., & Yekovich, F. R. (1993). The Cognitive Psychology of School Learning. New York, NY: Harper Collins College Publishers.
Galili, I., & Hazan, A. (2000). Learners' knowledge in optics: Interpretation, structure and analysis. International journal of science education, 22(1), 57-88. doi:10.1080/095006900290000
Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and Analogical Reasoning (pp. 199-241). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511529863.011
Gilmore, D. J., & Green, T. R. G. (1984). Comprehension and recall of miniature programs. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 21(1), 31-48. doi: 10.1016/S0020-7373(84)80037-1
Hannus, M., & Hyönä, J. (1999). Utilization of illustrations during learning of science textbook passages among low- and high-ability children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24(2), 95-123. doi:10.1006/ceps.1998.0987
Hashweh, M. (1986). Toward an explanation of conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 8(3), 229-249. doi:10.1080/0140528860080301
Head, J. (1986). Research into 'Alternative Frameworks': Promise and problems. Research in Science & Technological Education, 4(2), 203-211. doi:10.1080/0263514860040210
Hiebert, J., & Carpenter, T. P. (1992). In Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (pp. 65-97). New York, NY: Macmillan.
Holšánová, J., Holmberg, N., & Holmqvist, K. (2009). Reading information graphics: The role of spatial contiguity and dual attentional guidance. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1215-1226. doi:10.1002/acp.1525
Jian, Y.-C. (2015). Fourth graders' cognitive processes and learning strategies for reading bllustrated biology texts: Eye movement measurements. Reading Research Quarterly, 51(1). doi:10.1002/rrq.125
Jian, Y.-C. (2017). Eye-movement patterns and reader characteristics of students with good and poor performance when reading scientific text with diagrams. Reading and Writing 30(7), 1447-1472. doi:10.1007/s11145-017-9732-6
Jian, Y.-C. (2019). Reading instructions facilitate signaling effect on science text for young readers: An eye-movement study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 17, 503-522. doi:10.1007/s10763-018-9878-y
Jian, Y.-C., Su, J.-H., & Hsiao, Y.-R. (2019). Differentiated processing strategies for science reading among sixth-grade students: exploration of eye movements using cluster analysis. Computers & Education, 142, 103652. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103652
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87(4), 329-354. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.87.4.329
Kong, Y., Seo, Y. S., & Zhai, L. (2018). Comparison of reading performance on screen and on paper: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 123, 138-149. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.005
Lai, M.-L., Tsai, M.-J., Yang, F.-Y., Hsu, C.-Y., Liu, T.-C., Lee, S. W.-Y., . . . Tsai, C.-C. (2013). A review of using eye-tracking technology in exploring learning from 2000 to 2012. Educational Research Review, 10, 90-115. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2013.10.001
Latini, N., Bråten, I., & Salmerón, L. (2020). Does reading medium affect processing and integration of textual and pictorial information? A multimedia eye-tracking study. Contemporary educational psychology, 62, 101870. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101870
Lowe, R. K. (1996). Background knowledge and the construction of a situational representation from a diagram. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 11(4), 377-397. doi:10.1007/BF03173279
Mason, L., Tornatora, M.C., & Pluchino, P. (2015). Integrative processing of verbal and graphical information during re-reading predicts learning from illustrated text: an eye-movement study. Reading and Writing, 28(6), 851–872. doi:10.1007/s11145-015-9552-5
Mason, L., Scheiter, K., and Tornatora, M. C. (2017) Using eye movements to model the sequence of text–picture processing for multimedia comprehension. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(5), 443-460. doi:10.1111/jcal.12191
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2014). The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
McGowan, M. K., Stephens, P. R., & West, C. (2009). Student perceptions of electronic textbooks. Issues in Information Systems, 10(2), 459-465.
McTigue, E. M. (2009). Does multimedia learning theory extend to middle-school students?. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(2), 143-153. Doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.12.003
Millar, M., & Schrier, T. (2015). Digital or printed textbooks: Which do students prefer and why? Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 15(2), 166-185. doi:10.1080/15313220.2015.1026474
Norman, R. R. (2012). Reading the graphics: What is the relationship between graphical reading processes and student comprehension? Reading and Writing, 25(3), 739–774. doi:10.1007/s11145-011-9298-7.
Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach (Vol. 9). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Rayner, K. (1978). Eye movement latencies for parafoveally presented words. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 11(1), 13-16. doi:10.3758/BF03336753
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372-422. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372
Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457-1506. doi:10.1080/17470210902816461
Rayner, K., Rotello, C., Stewart, A., Keir, J., & Duffy, S. (2001). Integrating text and pictorial information: Eye movements when looking at print advertisements. Journal of experimental psychology. Applied, 7(3), 219-226. doi:10.1037/1076-898X.7.3.219
Schnotz, W. (1993). On the relation of dual coding and mental models in graphics comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 3(3), 247-249. doi:10.1016/0959-4752(93)90008-N
Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 141-156. doi: 10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00017-8
Schnotz, W., & Kürschner, C. (2008). External and internal representations in the acquisition and use of knowledge: Visualization effects on mental model Construction. Instructional Science, 36(3), 175-190. doi:10.1007/s11251-007-9029-2
Stenning, K., Cox, R., & Oberlander, J. (1995). Contrasting the cognitive effects of graphical and sentential logic teaching: Reasoning, representation and individual differences. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10(3-4), 333-354. doi:10.1080/01690969508407099
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), 295-312. doi:10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5
van den Broek, P., & Kendeou, P. (2008). Cognitive processes in comprehension of science texts: The role of co-activation in confronting misconceptions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 335-351. doi:10.1002/acp.1418