This poster is presented at Hypertext 2016. The paper available here: http://halley.exp.sis.pitt.edu/cn3/presentation2.php?taction=system&conferenceID=144&presentationID=8961

1. A Comparative Study of Visual Cues for Annotation-Based
Navigation Support in Adaptive Educational Hypermedia
Roya Hosseini & Peter Brusilovsky
{roh38,peterb}@pitt.edu
Visual Cues in Past Work Annotation Design Choices The Study Findings
A2
A3
Knowledge-based Annotation
Recommendations
C1A1
C1A2
C1A3
C2A1
C2A2
C2A3
Task 1: Finding Least/Most Known Lines +
Task 3: Finding Recommended Lines +
Visual Cues Were Perceptually Different
User Preference Changed in Task Context
B1A1
B1A2
B1A3
B2A1
B2A2
B2A3
History-based Annotation
NavEx: Fillable Shape
Progressor: Red-to-Green Gradient
Mastery Grids: Green Color Intensities
WebEx: Check Mark Annotation
The plots show that the
percent of subjects
favoring a design
changed before and
after performing Task 1,
Task 2, and Task 3.
….
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
A1 A2 A3
3.5
4
4.5
5
B1 B2
3.5
4
4.5
5
C1 C2
20
40
60
80
Before After --
A1
A2
A3
20
40
60
80
100
Before After
B1
B2
C1
C2
The plots show
predictive margins of
designs’ preference
score with 95% CI, for
30 subjects.
Design A1, B2, and C2
received significantly
higher preference
scores compared to
other designs in their
group.
Preference score was
calculated by aggregating
responses over all
questions in each
questionnaire.
The top designs A1–
B2–C2 identified in out-
of-context evaluation
increased their
standing above other
designs during in-
context evaluation.
Task 2: Finding Clicked Lines +
A1
Most Efficient Design
Most Efficient Design
Most Efficient Design