Arai presentation

Arai presentation

• 1.
  Perception of Objects inTechnical Illustrations: A Challenge in Technical Communication s1170002 Yu Arai CLR Technical Communication Laboratory Supervised by Prof. Debopriyo Roy 2/14/2013 1
• 2.
  Overview 1.  Introduction 2.  WorkFlow 3.  Method Ø  Making Figures Ø  Data collecting from Test sheets Ø  Data analysis 4.  Findings 5.  Discussion 6.  Conclusion 2
• 3.
  Introduction § Mental image is. . . like a picture in own brain. § Mental rotation is . . . Basically about how the brain moves objects in the physical space in a manner that helps with positional understanding of objects in space. § Technical illustration is . . . The use of illustration to visually communicate information of a technical nature. 3
• 4.
  Work Flow MakeFigures ↓ Top view version figures ↓ Make Test seats ↓ Take test ↓ Data collect ↓ Analysis ↓ SPSS ↓ Discussions ↓ Conclusions 4
• 5.
  Method – MakingFigures (POSER) Heights a.  Chest height b.  Waist height Activities a.  Holding a Ball b.  Throwing a Ball Camera Positions 1.  Front – 0degree 2.  1/3rd Side – 30 degrees 3.  Side – 90 degrees 4.  1/3rd Back – 120 degrees 5.  Back – 180 degrees 5 B : Top of view A : Basic View
• 6.
  Method – Datacollecting ü 41 students who are non-native English speaker participated in this study. ü Having 20 test sheets. 6
• 7.
  Method – Dataanalysis (SPSS) § Given a score of either 1 or 0. § The data was entered in SPSS statistical software for data analysis § A score in the range of 1-5 was reported for each test sheet. 7
• 8.
  Finding – CochranTest •  Correct Answer : 1 •  Incorrect Answer : 0 •  Q = 17.968 Asymp.sig. = .525 •  P > .05 8
• 9.
  Chest height –Confidence data 3.80 3.68 3.80 3.80 3.73 3.53 3.63 3.70 3.85 3.73 3.30 3.40 3.50 3.60 3.70 3.80 3.90 Front 1/3 side Side 1/3 back Back Holding Throwing 9
• 10.
  Waist height –Confidence data 3.93 3.93 3.80 3.90 3.73 3.95 3.78 3.78 3.80 3.83 3.60 3.65 3.70 3.75 3.80 3.85 3.90 3.95 4.00 Front 1/3 side Side 1/3 back Back Holding Throwing 10
• 11.
  Finding – Friedmantest •  20 body positions/ height/ action ü  Chi-square = 25.172 ü  Asymp.sig. = .115 > .05 11
• 12.
  Finding – Confidencelevel Correlations Between Personal Value Sig. Value Throwing Chest Back .514** .001 Throwing Waist Side .474** .002 Holding Waist Back .439** .005 Holding Waist Front .429** .006 Throwing Waist 1/3rd Back .406** .009 12 Significant Correlations between Mean Accuracy Scores and Confidence Scores Significant Correlations between Mean Accuracy Scores and Confidence ScoresSignificant Correlations between Mean Accuracy Scores and Confidence Scores
• 13.
  Discussion Ø Body height/rotation/action §  Whencompared with a plan view, it becomes more various visual cues. •  Accuracy score around the 85 – 95% level Ø Similarity body height – action - rotation §  20 body position – insignificant difference §  Height/Action combinations – insignificant difference 13
• 14.
  Conclusion and Futureresearch § Explored the effect of Body rotation, height and action ü Increased the accuracy levels ü  reader’s interesting approach § In the future research… o The level of correctness should be analyzed carrying out time observation. 14
• 15.
  Thank you 15