本研究旨在瞭解認知風格對於高職餐飲科學生在網路食譜教學中，視覺注意力分佈和學習成效之影響，根據眼動指標資料瞭解學習者的學習認知歷程情形。本研究實驗設計為，認知風格（文字風格v.s.圖像風格）單因子準實驗設計，實驗素材為研究者自行設計製作之網路食譜教材，其素材內容以靜態多媒體與動態多媒體部份表徵方式呈現。實驗樣本以便利取樣方式選取台北市某一所私立高職餐飲科學生29名，並於實驗前後以自編測驗卷來測量其先備知識與學習成效。本研究所收集之眼動指標資料與問卷資料，則利用描述性統計、單因子共變數分析、獨立/成對相依樣本T檢定以及皮爾森基差相關分析等方法進行分析。研究結果發現，學生的認知風格和其在閱讀網路食譜之視覺注意力分佈有密切的關聯性，此外，利用網路多媒體食譜進行程序性知識的教學，是有助於學生的學習成效及學習保留，且靜態多媒體素材比較有助於立即學習成效，而動態多媒體素材比較有助於學習保留。本研究結果建議未來可加入其他不同的研究工具與方法，更深入的瞭解學習者的認知學習歷程，可針對不同認知風格的學生在閱讀靜態與動態多媒體素材之認知歷程做進一步的探究，並提供數位餐飲課程與網路食譜教學設計之建議。教師在設計規畫餐飲課程與網路數位食譜素材的教學建議。

This study aims to explore, based on eye-tracking data, the effect of cognitive style on attention distributions and learning achievement in web-based multimedia recipe learning. The study uses a one way (verbal style V.S. visual style) quasi-experimental design. Subjects are 29 vocational high school students of hospitality. The treatments of the study multimedia recipes are including static representation and dynastic representation. Students’ prior knowledge and learning achievement are assessed via a survey. This study uses on way ANCOVA, independent/paired t-test and correlation analyses to examine the eye-tracking indices and the survey scores collected in this study. Result of this study revels that students’ cognitive styles have an intimate relationship with their visual attention distributions in reading wed-based recipes. And gender could play an important role in this learning context. In addition, it shows that it is effective to improve students’ immediate learning achievement and retention of learning when the procedural knowledge of recipes is represented by web-based multimedia. Specifically, the static multimedia materials improve students’ immediate learning achievement while the dynamic multimedia materials improve their retention of learning. Base on the above results this study suggests future study to further explore the cognitive process of reading static and dynamic multimedia materials by students with different cognitive styles. And this study also provides suggestions on designing web-based recipes, hospitality
curriculum and instructions.

洪久賢（2004）。餐旅網路數位學習之探討研究。中華家政學刊，36，93-113。
黃子瓔、計惠卿（2009）。數位教材之文字與圖像訊息的設計實務。2009 年臺灣教育學術研討會－社會變遷中的教育發展論文集，247-261。
許瓊文（2007）。應用眼動儀於決策偏誤與資訊注意力之研究。國立中山大學資訊管理學系博士論文，未出版，高雄市。
Anderson, J. R. (2010) Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications. New York: Worth Publishers.
Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In The psychology of learning and motivation (89-195). New York: Academic Press.
Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a Theory of Instruction. London & England: Harvard University Press.
Brunye, T. T., Taylor, H. A., & Rapp, D. N. (2008). Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 887-895.
Chen, L. -I. (2010). Web-based learning programs: Use by learners with various cognitive styles. Computers and Education, 54, 1028-1035.
Childers, T. L., Houston, M. J., & Heckler, S. E. (1985). Measurement of Individual Differences in Visual Versus Verbal Information Processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 125-133.
Chen, S. Y., & Macredie, R. D. (2004). Cognitive Modeling of Student Learning in Web-Based Instructional Programs. International Journal of Human- Computer Interaction, 17(3), 375-402.
Crisp, V., & Sweiry, E. (2006). Can a picture ruin a thousand words ? The effects of visual resources in exam questions. Educational Research, 48(2), 139-154.
Davis, R., Shrobe, H., & Szolovits, P. (1993). What is a Knowledge Representation? AI Magazine, 14(1). 17-33.
David, A., & Cook, M. D. (2005). Learning and Cognitive Styles in Web-Based Learning: Theory, Evidence, and Application. Academic Medicine, 80(3). 266-277.
de Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H.K., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2010). Attention guidance in learning from a complex animation: Seeing is understanding? Learning and Instruction, 20, 111-122.
Graff, M. (2003). Learning from web-based instructional systems and cognitive style. British Journal of Education Technology, 34(4). 407-418.
Goldberg, J. H., & Kotval, X. P. (1999). Computer interface evaluation using eye movements: methods and constructs. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 24, 631-645.
Jarodzka, H., Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., & van Gog, T. (2010). In the eyes of the beholder: How experts and novices interpret dynamic stimuli. Learning and Instruction, 20, 146-154.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329-354.
Kuo, M. –L. A., & Hooper, S. (2004). The effects of visual and verbal coding mnemonics on learning Chinese characters in computer-based instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3). 23-34.
Massa, L. J., & Mayer, R. E. (2006). Testing the ATI hypothesis: Should multimedia instruction accommodate verbalizer-visualizer cognitive style? Learning and Individual Differences, 16, 321-335.
Massa, L. J., & Mayer, R. E. (2005). Three obstacles to validating the Verbal-Imager Subtest of the Cognitive Styles Analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 845-848.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2002). Aid to computer-based multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 12, 107–119.
Mayer, R. E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13, 125–139.
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2010). Unique contributions of eye-tracking research to the study of learning with graphics. Learning and Instruction, 20, 167-171.
Mayer, R. E., & Johnson, C. I. (2008). Revising the Redundancy Principle in Multimedia Learning. Journal of Education Psychology, 100(2), 380-386.
Price, L. (2004) Individual difference in learning: Cognitive control, cognitive style, and learning style. Educational Psychology, 24(5), 681-698.
Paivio, A. (2006). Mind and its evolution; A dual coding theoretical interpretation, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Peterson, E. R., Deary, I. J., & Austin, E. J. (2005a). A new of Verbal-Imagery Cognitive Style: VICS. Personality and Individual Differences,38. 1269-1281.
Peterson, E. R., Deary, I. J., & Austin, E. J. (2005b). Are intelligence and personality related to verbal-imagery and wholistic-analytic cognitive styles? Personality and Individual Differences, 39. 201-213.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372-422.
Riding, L. R. (2001). The Nature and Effects of Cognitive Style. In Sternberg, R. J., & Zhang, L. -F. (Eds.), Perspectives on Thinking, Learning, and Cognitive Styles (pp. 47-72). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Riding, R. J., & Wigley, S. (1997). The relationship between cognitive style and personality in further education students, Personality and Individual Differences 23, 379–389.
Riding, L. R., & Al-Hajji, J. (2000). Cognitive style and behaviour in secondary school pupils in Kuwait. Educational Research, 42(1). 29-42.
Radach, R., & Kennedy, A. (2004). Theoretical perspectives on eye movements in reading: Past controversies, current issues, and an agenda for the future. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16, 3–26.
Rayner, K., Chace, K. H., & Slattery, T. J. (2006). Eye movements as reflections of comprehension processes in reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 241-255.
Sadoski, M. (2002). Dual coding theory and reading poetic text. Journal of the Imagination in Language and Teaching, 78-83.
Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003) Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and Instruction 13, 141-156.
She, H. C., & Chen, Y. Z. (2009). The impact of multimedia effect on science learning: Evidence from eye movements. Computers & Education, 53, 1297-1307.
Schmidt-Weigand, F., Kohnert, A., & Glowalla, U. (2010). A closer look at split visual attention in system- and self-paced instruction in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 100-110.
Tsai, M.-J., Hou, H. T., Lai, M. L., Liu, W.-Y., & Yang, F. Y. (2012). Visual attention for solving multiple-choice science problem: An eye-tracking analysis. Computers & Education, 58(1), 375-385.
Tsai, M.-J., & Wang, C. Y. (2011). Cognitive style and visual attention distributions in scientific reading: Evidence from eye-tracking. Poster presented in the Scientific Language & E-Learning Conference, Pingtung, Taiwan, June 3-4, 2011.
Thomas, P. R., & McKay, J. B. (2010). Cognitive styles and instructional design in university learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(3), 197-202.
Wang, C. Y., Kuo, Y. E., Tsai, M.-J., & Liang, J. C. (2011). Assessing the university students’ self-efficacy and attitude towards web-based recipes. Poster presented in the Scientific Language & E-Learning Conference, Pingtung, Taiwan, June 3-4, 2011.