Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
Google ScholarTM
NCCU Library
Citation Infomation
Related Publications in TAIR
題名 以功能性磁振造影技術探討線上課程中學習者對於教師在場與否之學習效果與神經機制
An fMRI investigation of neural mechanisms underlying instructor presence effect during online learning作者 葉冠廷
Ye, Guan-Ting貢獻者 張葶葶
Chang, Ting-Ting
葉冠廷
Ye, Guan-Ting關鍵詞 教師在場
社會線索
功能性磁振造影
線上學習
自然情境實驗
任務狀態功能性連結
前額頂葉網絡
顯著性網絡
人格特質
機器學習
邏輯斯回歸
Instructor presence
Social cue
fMRI
Online learning
Naturalistic experiment
Task-state functional connectivity
Frontoparietal network
Salience network
Personality traits
Machine learning
Logistic regression日期 2024 上傳時間 1-Sep-2025 16:12:53 (UTC+8) 摘要 隨著線上學習的重要性日益提升，教育者愈發傾向採用虛擬教學作為傳統面授課程的替代方案。儘管過去已有大量行為研究探討線上學習的成效，但有關其背後神經機制的理解仍相對有限，特別是在教師在場效應（instructor presence effect）方面更是鮮少著墨。本研究運用功能性磁振造影（fMRI），探討線上學習中所涉及的認知與神經歷程，聚焦於教師在場效應如何影響注意力、工作記憶以及神經連結性。 在第一項研究中，我們透過自然情境實驗設計，檢驗教師在場效應。受試者觀看兩段材料科學教學影片，一段呈現動態教師影像（具有動作表情與社交線索），另一段則僅顯示教師的靜態照片，期間同時進行 fMRI 掃描。所有受試者皆為非自然科學背景學生。行為結果顯示，相較於靜態教師條件，動態教師條件下的學習成效顯著提升，學習者的參與程度與學習表現亦大幅提高，顯示社會臨場感在數位教學中的關鍵角色。 第二項研究進一步透過任務狀態下的功能性連結分析，探討教師在場對大腦網絡活動的影響。我們聚焦於動態與靜態教師條件對功能性網絡連結之影響，特別是前額頂葉網絡（frontoparietal network, FPN）與顯著性網絡（salience network, SN）之間的連結。結果顯示，動態教師條件顯著增強 FPN 與 SN 間的功能性連結，此網絡組合被認為能夠促進學習者的認知處理與注意力調控。此外，FPN–SN 的連結強度亦調節了注意力與學習成效之間的關係，高連結強度的個體其注意力對學習表現的正向影響更加顯著，進一步揭示教師在場效應背後的神經基礎。 在第三項研究中，我們進一步探討由動態教師所引發的功能性連結是否能有效預測個體在學習成效上的差異，特別是人格特質與注意力參與程度的作用。我們以 FPN–SN 的連結強度作為主要神經特徵，建構邏輯斯回歸模型，將學習者分類為高學習成效與低學習成效兩組。結果顯示，模型在高外向性或低神經質的學習者中預測準確率顯著較高，顯示這些人格特質更容易回應動態教學中所蘊含的社交與認知資源。同時，該模型亦能有效區分高注意力參與者的學習表現，顯示 FPN–SN 網絡的連結強度可增強注意力對學習成效的影響。這些結果突顯了學習行為增益與教師在場所誘發的神經特徵之間的密切關聯。 總結而言，本研究提供了有關線上學習中教師在場效應的嶄新神經認知觀點。研究結果顯示，具有社交互動性與動態表現的教師能有效提升學習成效，其益處來自於強化了前額頂葉網絡與顯著性網絡之間的功能性連結，進而支持學習者的認知處理與注意力維持。透過整合行為數據與神經證據，本研究強調在設計線上學習環境時應納入具社會臨場感的教學策略，以優化學習者的參與度與學習成果。
With the growing importance of online learning, educators increasingly turn to virtual online approaches as alternatives to traditional in-person instruction. However, while numerous behavioral studies have explored the effectiveness of online learning, the underlying neural mechanisms remain largely unexamined, particularly regarding the role of instructor presence. This thesis uses fMRI to investigate the cognitive and neural processes involved in online learning, focusing on the instructor presence effect and its influence on attention, working memory, and neural connectivity. In Study 1, we conducted a naturalistic experiment to assess the "instructor presence effect" by comparing a live instructor with a static instructor during student watching a science video. We recruited students with non-natural science backgrounds, who then participated in two materials science lectures during fMRI scanning: one featuring a live instructor who employed dynamic expressions and social cues, and the other displaying only a static image of the instructor. Analysis of behavioral data revealed significantly better learning outcomes in the live instructor condition compared to the static image condition. Moreover, the live instructor condition significantly enhanced student engagement and learning performance, underscoring the importance of social presence in online education. In Study 2, we further examined this presence effect by analyzing task-based functional connectivity via fMRI. Specifically, we compared the neural impact of a live instructor versus a static instructor, investigating how instructor presence influences neural network connectivity and subsequently improves learning outcomes. Neuroimaging results indicated that students in the live instructor condition exhibited stronger functional connectivity between the frontoparietal network (FPN) and the salience network (SN), which facilitates cognitive processing and attentional focus. Additionally, connectivity between the FPN and SN moderated the relationship between attention and learning outcomes; higher connectivity strengthened the positive effects of attention on learning performance, highlighting the neural mechanisms that underpin the instructor presence effect. In Study 3, we investigated whether the enhanced functional connectivity elicited by live instructor lectures could reliably predict individual differences in learning outcomes, particularly as a function of personality traits and attentional engagement. Using FPN–SN connectivity strength as the primary neural feature, we developed a logistic regression model to classify learners into high and low learning performance groups. The model achieved significantly higher predictive accuracy among individuals with high extraversion or low neuroticism, suggesting that these personality profiles are more responsive to the cognitive and social affordances of dynamic instruction. Additionally, the model effectively distinguished learning outcomes among students with high attentional engagement, indicating that FPN–SN connectivity amplifies the beneficial effects of attention on learning performance. These findings underscore the tight coupling between behavioral learning gains and functional neural signatures associated with instructor presence. In conclusion, this research offers novel neurocognitive insights into the instructor presence effect in online learning, demonstrating that live, dynamic, and socially engaging instructors can enhance learning outcomes. These benefits are underpinned by the modulation of key neural mechanisms, particularly the strengthened connectivity between the frontoparietal network and salience network, which supports cognitive processing and attentional focus. By linking behavioral and neural evidence, this study highlights the importance of integrating socially interactive instructors into online learning environments to optimize engagement and performance.參考文獻 Abrams, R. A., & Christ, S. E. (2003). Motion onset captures attention. Psychological science, 14(5), 427-432. Amadieu, F., Mariné, C., & Laimay, C. (2011). The attention-guiding effect and cognitive load in the comprehension of animations. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 36-40. Amalric, M., & Cantlon, J. F. (2022). Common neural functions during children's learning from naturalistic and controlled mathematics paradigms. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 34(7), 1164-1182. Andel, S. A., de Vreede, T., Spector, P. E., Padmanabhan, B., Singh, V. K., & De Vreede, G. J. (2020). Do social features help in video-centric online learning platforms? A social presence perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 113, 106505. Anderson, D. R., & Davidson, M. C. (2019). Receptive versus interactive video screens: A role for the brain's default mode network in learning from media. Computers in Human Behavior, 99, 168-180. Atherton, M., & Bart, W. M. (2002). What the neurosciences can tell educators about reading and arithmetic: A review of current research. In annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Baruth, O., & Cohen, A. (2023). Personality and satisfaction with online courses: The relation between the Big Five personality traits and satisfaction with online learning activities. Education and Information Technologies, 28(1), 879-904. Beege, M., Schroeder, N. L., Heidig, S., Rey, G. D., & Schneider, S. (2023). The instructor presence effect and its moderators in instructional video: A series of meta-analyses. Educational Research Review, 100564. Bevilacqua, D., Davidesco, I., Wan, L., Chaloner, K., Rowland, J., Ding, M., ... & Dikker, S. (2019). Brain-to-brain synchrony and learning outcomes vary by student–teacher dynamics: Evidence from a real-world classroom electroencephalography study. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 31(3), 401-411. Bhagat, K. K., Wu, L. Y., & Chang, C. Y. (2019). The impact of personality on students' perceptions towards online learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4). Brandman, T., Malach, R., & Simony, E. (2021). The surprising role of the default mode network in naturalistic perception. Communications biology, 4(1), 79. Buckner, R. L., & Carroll, D. C. (2007). Self-projection and the brain. Trends in cognitive sciences, 11(2), 49-57. Burdina, G. M., Krapotkina, I. E., & Nasyrova, L. G. (2019). Distance learning in elementary school classrooms: An emerging framework for contemporary practice. International journal of instruction, 12(1), 1-16. Cai, W., Chen, T., Ryali, S., Kochalka, J., Li, C. S. R., & Menon, V. (2016). Causal interactions within a frontal-cingulate-parietal network during cognitive control: Convergent evidence from a multisite–multitask investigation. Cerebral cortex, 26(5), 2140-2153. Cantlon, J. F., Libertus, M. E., Pinel, P., Dehaene, S., Brannon, E. M., & Pelphrey, K. A. (2009). The neural development of an abstract concept of number. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 21(11), 2217-2229. Cantlon, J. F., & Li, R. (2013). Neural activity during natural viewing of Sesame Street statistically predicts test scores in early childhood. PLoS biology, 11(1), e1001462. Cohen, A., & Baruth, O. (2017). Personality, learning, and satisfaction in fully online academic courses. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 1-12. Cole, M., & Bart, W. M. (2001, April). Education and fMRI: Promise and cautions. In: Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA. Cole, M. W., Bassett, D. S., Power, J. D., Braver, T. S., & Petersen, S. E. (2014). Intrinsic and task-evoked network architectures of the human brain. Neuron, 83(1), 238-251. Cole, M. W., Reynolds, J. R., Power, J. D., Repovs, G., Anticevic, A., & Braver, T. S. (2013). Multi-task connectivity reveals flexible hubs for adaptive task control. Nature neuroscience, 16(9), 1348-1355. Cox, R. W. (1996). AFNI: software for analysis and visualization of functional magnetic resonance neuroimages. Computers and Biomedical research, 29(3), 162-173. Cui, G., Lockee, B., & Meng, C. (2013). Building modern online social presence: A review of social presence theory and its instructional design implications for future trends. Education and information technologies, 18, 661-685. Dastjerdi, M., Ozker, M., Foster, B. L., Rangarajan, V., & Parvizi, J. (2013). Numerical processing in the human parietal cortex during experimental and natural conditions. Nature communications, 4(1), 2528. Dikker, S., Wan, L., Davidesco, I., Kaggen, L., Oostrik, M., McClintock, J., ... & Poeppel, D. (2017). Brain-to-brain synchrony tracks real-world dynamic group interactions in the classroom. Current biology, 27(9), 1375-1380. Dimitrov, D. M., & Rumrill Jr, P. D. (2003). Pretest-posttest designs and measurement of change. Work, 20(2), 159-165. Domagk, S. (2010). Do pedagogical agents facilitate learner motivation and learning outcomes?: The role of the appeal of agent’s appearance and voice. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 22(2), 84. Dosenbach, N. U., Fair, D. A., Miezin, F. M., Cohen, A. L., Wenger, K. K., Dosenbach, R. A., ... & Petersen, S. E. (2007). Distinct brain networks for adaptive and stable task control in humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(26), 11073-11078. Fan, S., Dal Monte, O., & Chang, S. W. (2021). Levels of naturalism in social neuroscience research. IScience, 24(7). Fraser, K. L., Meguerdichian, M. J., Haws, J. T., Grant, V. J., Bajaj, K., & Cheng, A. (2018). Cognitive load theory for debriefing simulations: implications for faculty development. Advances in Simulation, 3, 1-8. Gao, Y., Shuai, D., Bu, X., Hu, X., Tang, S., Zhang, L., ... & Huang, X. (2019). Impairments of large-scale functional networks in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a meta-analysis of resting-state functional connectivity. Psychological medicine, 49(15), 2475-2485. Gu, C., Peng, Y., Nastase, S. A., Mayer, R. E., & Li, P. (2024). Onscreen presence of instructors in video lectures affects learners’ neural synchrony and visual attention during multimedia learning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(12), e2309054121. Gray, J. A., & DiLoreto, M. (2016). The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1), n1. Gomez, K., & Lee, U. S. (2015). Situated cognition and learning environments: Implications for teachers on-and offline in the new digital media age. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(5), 634-652. Jiang, R., Zuo, N., Ford, J. M., Qi, S., Zhi, D., Zhuo, C., ... & Sui, J. (2020). Task-induced brain connectivity promotes the detection of individual differences in brain-behavior relationships. NeuroImage, 207, 116370. John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). Big five inventory. Journal of personality and social psychology. Kim, Y., & Baylor, A. L. (2016). based design of pedagogical agent roles: A review, progress, and recommendations. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26, 160-169. Knörzer, L., Brünken, R., & Park, B. (2016). Emotions and multimedia learning: The moderating role of learner characteristics. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(6), 618-631. Kwok, S. C., Shallice, T., & Macaluso, E. (2012). Functional anatomy of temporal organisation and domain-specificity of episodic memory retrieval. Neuropsychologia, 50(12), 2943-2955. Li, W., Mai, X., & Liu, C. (2014). The default mode network and social understanding of others: what do brain connectivity studies tell us. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 8, 74. Lowenthal, P. R. (2010). The evolution and influence of social presence theory on online learning. In Social computing: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 113-128). IGI Global. Lusk, M. M., & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Animated pedagogical agents: Does their degree of embodiment impact learning from static or animated worked examples?. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 21(6), 747-764. Marek, S., & Dosenbach, N. U. (2018). The frontoparietal network: function, electrophysiology, and importance of individual precision mapping. Dialogues in clinical neuroscience, 20(2), 133-140. Mayer, R. E. (2002). Multimedia learning. In Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 41, pp. 85-139). Academic Press. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 43-52. Mayer, R. E. (2014). Principles based on social cues in multimedia learning: Personalization, voice, image, and embodiment principles. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 16, 345-370. Menon, V. (2011). Large-scale brain networks and psychopathology: a unifying triple network model. Trends in cognitive sciences, 15(10), 483-506. Moon, J., & Ryu, J. (2021). The effects of social and cognitive cues on learning comprehension, eye-gaze pattern, and cognitive load in video instruction. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 33, 39-63. Mutlu-Bayraktar, D., Cosgun, V., & Altan, T. (2019). Cognitive load in multimedia learning environments: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 141, 103618. Ng, C. T., Huang, P. H., Cho, Y. C., Lee, P. H., Liu, Y. C., & Chang, T. T. (2024). Frontoparietal and salience network synchronizations during nonsymbolic magnitude processing predict brain age and mathematical performance in youth. Human Brain Mapping, 45(11), e26777. Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. (2016). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. In Cognitive Load Theory (pp. 63-71). Routledge. Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford university press. Pan, Y., Dikker, S., Goldstein, P., Zhu, Y., Yang, C., & Hu, Y. (2020). Instructor-learner brain coupling discriminates between instructional approaches and predicts learning. NeuroImage, 211, 116657. Park, B., Flowerday, T., & Brünken, R. (2015). Cognitive and affective effects of seductive details in multimedia learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 267-278. Park, S. (2015). The effects of social cue principles on cognitive load, situational interest, motivation, and achievement in pedagogical agent multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(4), 211-229. Rolls, E. T., Huang, C. C., Lin, C. P., Feng, J., & Joliot, M. (2020). Automated anatomical labelling atlas 3. Neuroimage, 206, 116189. Redcay, E., & Moraczewski, D. (2020). Social cognition in context: A naturalistic imaging approach. NeuroImage, 216, 116392. Saylik, R., Szameitat, A. J., & Cheeta, S. (2018). Neuroticism related differences in working memory tasks. PloS one, 13(12), e0208248. Schimmelpfennig, J., Topczewski, J., Zajkowski, W., & Jankowiak-Siuda, K. (2023). The role of the salience network in cognitive and affective deficits. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 17, 1133367. Schroeder, N. L., Adesope, O. O., & Gilbert, R. B. (2013). How effective are pedagogical agents for learning? A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(1), 1-39. Schroeder, N. L., & Gotch, C. M. (2015). Persisting issues in pedagogical agent research. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(2), 183-204. Schneider, S., Beege, M., Nebel, S., Schnaubert, L., & Rey, G. D. (2022). The cognitive-affective-social theory of learning in digital environments (CASTLE). Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 1-38. Sher, A. (2009). Assessing the relationship of student-instructor and student-student interaction to student learning and satisfaction in web-based online learning environment. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2). Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. Singh, J., & Arya, R. (2023). Examining the relationship of personality traits with online teaching using emotive responses and physiological signals. Education and Information Technologies, 28(9), 11193-11219. Smith, E. R., & Semin, G. R. (2004). Socially situated cognition: Cognition in its social context. Advances in experimental social psychology, 36, 57-121. Spreng, R. N., & Grady, C. L. (2010). Patterns of brain activity supporting autobiographical memory, prospection, and theory of mind, and their relationship to the default mode network. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 22(6), 1112-1123. Sundararajan, N., & Adesope, O. (2020). Keep it coherent: A meta-analysis of the seductive details effect. Educational Psychology Review, 32(3), 707-734. Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational psychology review, 10, 251-296. Theobald, M., Bellhäuser, H., & Imhof, M. (2018). Identifying individual differences using log-file analysis: Distributed learning as mediator between conscientiousness and exam grades. Learning and Individual Differences, 65, 112-122. Tikka, P., Kauttonen, J., & Hlushchuk, Y. (2018). Narrative comprehension beyond language: Common brain networks activated by a movie and its script. PLoS One, 13(7), e0200134. Tlili, A., Sun, T., Denden, M., Kinshuk, Graf, S., Fei, C., & Wang, H. (2023). Impact of personality traits on learners’ navigational behavior patterns in an online course: A lag sequential analysis approach. Frontiers in psychology, 14, 1071985. Tokiwa, E. (2025). Who excels in online learning in Japan?. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1420996. Tseng, C. H., Lin, H. C. K., Chen, Y. H., Lin, J. R., & Huang, A. C. W. (2022). Do students with different personality traits demonstrate different physiological signals in video-based learning?. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2138052. Tu, C. H. (2000). On-line learning migration: From social learning theory to social presence theory in a CMC environment. Journal of network and computer applications, 23(1), 27-37. Uddin, L. Q., Supekar, K. S., Ryali, S., & Menon, V. (2011). Dynamic reconfiguration of structural and functional connectivity across core neurocognitive brain networks with development. Journal of neuroscience, 31(50), 18578-18589. Wang, H., Pi, Z., & Hu, W. (2019). The instructor's gaze guidance in video lectures improves learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(1), 42-50. Watjatrakul, B. (2020). Intention to adopt online learning: The effects of perceived value and moderating roles of personality traits. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 37(1/2), 46-65. Wen, T., Liu, D. C., & Hsieh, S. (2018). Connectivity patterns in cognitive control networks predict naturalistic multitasking ability. Neuropsychologia, 114, 195-202. Whelan, R. R. (2007). Neuroimaging of cognitive load in instructional multimedia. Educational Research Review, 2(1), 1-12. Yu, Z. (2021). The effects of gender, educational level, and personality on online learning outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 14. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
心理學系
111752013資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111752013 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 張葶葶 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Chang, Ting-Ting en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 葉冠廷 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Ye, Guan-Ting en_US dc.creator (作者) 葉冠廷 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Ye, Guan-Ting en_US dc.date (日期) 2024 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-Sep-2025 16:12:53 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-Sep-2025 16:12:53 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Sep-2025 16:12:53 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0111752013 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/159272 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 心理學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 111752013 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 隨著線上學習的重要性日益提升，教育者愈發傾向採用虛擬教學作為傳統面授課程的替代方案。儘管過去已有大量行為研究探討線上學習的成效，但有關其背後神經機制的理解仍相對有限，特別是在教師在場效應（instructor presence effect）方面更是鮮少著墨。本研究運用功能性磁振造影（fMRI），探討線上學習中所涉及的認知與神經歷程，聚焦於教師在場效應如何影響注意力、工作記憶以及神經連結性。 在第一項研究中，我們透過自然情境實驗設計，檢驗教師在場效應。受試者觀看兩段材料科學教學影片，一段呈現動態教師影像（具有動作表情與社交線索），另一段則僅顯示教師的靜態照片，期間同時進行 fMRI 掃描。所有受試者皆為非自然科學背景學生。行為結果顯示，相較於靜態教師條件，動態教師條件下的學習成效顯著提升，學習者的參與程度與學習表現亦大幅提高，顯示社會臨場感在數位教學中的關鍵角色。 第二項研究進一步透過任務狀態下的功能性連結分析，探討教師在場對大腦網絡活動的影響。我們聚焦於動態與靜態教師條件對功能性網絡連結之影響，特別是前額頂葉網絡（frontoparietal network, FPN）與顯著性網絡（salience network, SN）之間的連結。結果顯示，動態教師條件顯著增強 FPN 與 SN 間的功能性連結，此網絡組合被認為能夠促進學習者的認知處理與注意力調控。此外，FPN–SN 的連結強度亦調節了注意力與學習成效之間的關係，高連結強度的個體其注意力對學習表現的正向影響更加顯著，進一步揭示教師在場效應背後的神經基礎。 在第三項研究中，我們進一步探討由動態教師所引發的功能性連結是否能有效預測個體在學習成效上的差異，特別是人格特質與注意力參與程度的作用。我們以 FPN–SN 的連結強度作為主要神經特徵，建構邏輯斯回歸模型，將學習者分類為高學習成效與低學習成效兩組。結果顯示，模型在高外向性或低神經質的學習者中預測準確率顯著較高，顯示這些人格特質更容易回應動態教學中所蘊含的社交與認知資源。同時，該模型亦能有效區分高注意力參與者的學習表現，顯示 FPN–SN 網絡的連結強度可增強注意力對學習成效的影響。這些結果突顯了學習行為增益與教師在場所誘發的神經特徵之間的密切關聯。 總結而言，本研究提供了有關線上學習中教師在場效應的嶄新神經認知觀點。研究結果顯示，具有社交互動性與動態表現的教師能有效提升學習成效，其益處來自於強化了前額頂葉網絡與顯著性網絡之間的功能性連結，進而支持學習者的認知處理與注意力維持。透過整合行為數據與神經證據，本研究強調在設計線上學習環境時應納入具社會臨場感的教學策略，以優化學習者的參與度與學習成果。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) With the growing importance of online learning, educators increasingly turn to virtual online approaches as alternatives to traditional in-person instruction. However, while numerous behavioral studies have explored the effectiveness of online learning, the underlying neural mechanisms remain largely unexamined, particularly regarding the role of instructor presence. This thesis uses fMRI to investigate the cognitive and neural processes involved in online learning, focusing on the instructor presence effect and its influence on attention, working memory, and neural connectivity. In Study 1, we conducted a naturalistic experiment to assess the "instructor presence effect" by comparing a live instructor with a static instructor during student watching a science video. We recruited students with non-natural science backgrounds, who then participated in two materials science lectures during fMRI scanning: one featuring a live instructor who employed dynamic expressions and social cues, and the other displaying only a static image of the instructor. Analysis of behavioral data revealed significantly better learning outcomes in the live instructor condition compared to the static image condition. Moreover, the live instructor condition significantly enhanced student engagement and learning performance, underscoring the importance of social presence in online education. In Study 2, we further examined this presence effect by analyzing task-based functional connectivity via fMRI. Specifically, we compared the neural impact of a live instructor versus a static instructor, investigating how instructor presence influences neural network connectivity and subsequently improves learning outcomes. Neuroimaging results indicated that students in the live instructor condition exhibited stronger functional connectivity between the frontoparietal network (FPN) and the salience network (SN), which facilitates cognitive processing and attentional focus. Additionally, connectivity between the FPN and SN moderated the relationship between attention and learning outcomes; higher connectivity strengthened the positive effects of attention on learning performance, highlighting the neural mechanisms that underpin the instructor presence effect. In Study 3, we investigated whether the enhanced functional connectivity elicited by live instructor lectures could reliably predict individual differences in learning outcomes, particularly as a function of personality traits and attentional engagement. Using FPN–SN connectivity strength as the primary neural feature, we developed a logistic regression model to classify learners into high and low learning performance groups. The model achieved significantly higher predictive accuracy among individuals with high extraversion or low neuroticism, suggesting that these personality profiles are more responsive to the cognitive and social affordances of dynamic instruction. Additionally, the model effectively distinguished learning outcomes among students with high attentional engagement, indicating that FPN–SN connectivity amplifies the beneficial effects of attention on learning performance. These findings underscore the tight coupling between behavioral learning gains and functional neural signatures associated with instructor presence. In conclusion, this research offers novel neurocognitive insights into the instructor presence effect in online learning, demonstrating that live, dynamic, and socially engaging instructors can enhance learning outcomes. These benefits are underpinned by the modulation of key neural mechanisms, particularly the strengthened connectivity between the frontoparietal network and salience network, which supports cognitive processing and attentional focus. By linking behavioral and neural evidence, this study highlights the importance of integrating socially interactive instructors into online learning environments to optimize engagement and performance. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents Abstract i Contents iii List of Tables v List of Figures vi Chapter 1 Background and introduction 1 1.1 Cognitive model of online learning 2 1.1.1 The cognitive-affective-social theory of learning in digital environments (CASTLE) model 3 1.1.2 Learner characteristics as moderators of cognitive processing in online learning 7 1.2 Instructor presence effect 11 1.3 Neural mechanism of online learning 13 1.3.1 The function of triple brain network model 14 1.3.2 Neuroimaging perspectives on the instructor presence effect in online learning environments 16 1.4 Overview of the current thesis 20 Chapter 2 Learning effect of live instructor vs. static instructor 22 2.1 Rationale 22 2.2 Methods 22 2.2.1 Participants 22 2.2.2 Stimuli and task design 23 2.2.3 Behavioral analysis 26 2.3 Results 27 2.3.1 Stronger learning effectiveness with live lnstructor lecture 27 2.3.2 Greater engagement in live instructor lecture leads to enhanced learning effectiveness 30 2.4 Discussions 31 Chapter 3 Investigation of instructor presence effect on brain networks 34 3.1 Rationale 34 3.2 Methods 34 3.2.1 Participants 34 3.2.2 Stimuli and task design 35 3.2.3 fMRI data acquistion 35 3.2.4 fMRI data preprocessing 36 3.2.5 fMRI analysis 36 3.3 Results 39 3.3.1 Live instructor lecture generate stronger connectivity strength than static instructor lecture 39 3.3.2 Connectivity strength moderate the impact of engagement on learning performance 41 3.4 Discussions 42 Chapter 4 Classification of instructor presence effects on different groups using functional connectivity, machine learning and logistic regression 46 4.1 Rationale 46 4.2 Methods 47 4.2.1 Participants 47 4.2.2 Stimuli and task design 47 4.2.3 fMRI data acquistion and preprocessing 48 4.2.4 Machine learning and logistic regression 48 4.3 Results 50 4.3.1 Stronger neural connectivity from the live instructor lecture differentiates learning performance across personality traits 51 4.3.2 Stronger neural connectivity from the live instructor lecture effectively distinguishes groups with different attention levels. 54 4.4 Discussions 56 Chapter 5 Summary and Implication 60 Reference 64 Appendix A 71 Appendix B 73 Appendix C 74 zh_TW dc.format.extent 2292219 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111752013 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 教師在場 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 社會線索 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 功能性磁振造影 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 線上學習 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 自然情境實驗 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 任務狀態功能性連結 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 前額頂葉網絡 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 顯著性網絡 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 人格特質 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 機器學習 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 邏輯斯回歸 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Instructor presence en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Social cue en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) fMRI en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Online learning en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Naturalistic experiment en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Task-state functional connectivity en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Frontoparietal network en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Salience network en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Personality traits en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Machine learning en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Logistic regression en_US dc.title (題名) 以功能性磁振造影技術探討線上課程中學習者對於教師在場與否之學習效果與神經機制 zh_TW dc.title (題名) An fMRI investigation of neural mechanisms underlying instructor presence effect during online learning en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Abrams, R. A., & Christ, S. E. (2003). Motion onset captures attention. Psychological science, 14(5), 427-432. Amadieu, F., Mariné, C., & Laimay, C. (2011). The attention-guiding effect and cognitive load in the comprehension of animations. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 36-40. Amalric, M., & Cantlon, J. F. (2022). Common neural functions during children's learning from naturalistic and controlled mathematics paradigms. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 34(7), 1164-1182. Andel, S. A., de Vreede, T., Spector, P. E., Padmanabhan, B., Singh, V. K., & De Vreede, G. J. (2020). Do social features help in video-centric online learning platforms? A social presence perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 113, 106505. Anderson, D. R., & Davidson, M. C. (2019). Receptive versus interactive video screens: A role for the brain's default mode network in learning from media. Computers in Human Behavior, 99, 168-180. Atherton, M., & Bart, W. M. (2002). What the neurosciences can tell educators about reading and arithmetic: A review of current research. In annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Baruth, O., & Cohen, A. (2023). Personality and satisfaction with online courses: The relation between the Big Five personality traits and satisfaction with online learning activities. Education and Information Technologies, 28(1), 879-904. Beege, M., Schroeder, N. L., Heidig, S., Rey, G. D., & Schneider, S. (2023). The instructor presence effect and its moderators in instructional video: A series of meta-analyses. Educational Research Review, 100564. Bevilacqua, D., Davidesco, I., Wan, L., Chaloner, K., Rowland, J., Ding, M., ... & Dikker, S. (2019). Brain-to-brain synchrony and learning outcomes vary by student–teacher dynamics: Evidence from a real-world classroom electroencephalography study. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 31(3), 401-411. Bhagat, K. K., Wu, L. Y., & Chang, C. Y. (2019). The impact of personality on students' perceptions towards online learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4). Brandman, T., Malach, R., & Simony, E. (2021). The surprising role of the default mode network in naturalistic perception. Communications biology, 4(1), 79. Buckner, R. L., & Carroll, D. C. (2007). Self-projection and the brain. Trends in cognitive sciences, 11(2), 49-57. Burdina, G. M., Krapotkina, I. E., & Nasyrova, L. G. (2019). Distance learning in elementary school classrooms: An emerging framework for contemporary practice. International journal of instruction, 12(1), 1-16. Cai, W., Chen, T., Ryali, S., Kochalka, J., Li, C. S. R., & Menon, V. (2016). Causal interactions within a frontal-cingulate-parietal network during cognitive control: Convergent evidence from a multisite–multitask investigation. Cerebral cortex, 26(5), 2140-2153. Cantlon, J. F., Libertus, M. E., Pinel, P., Dehaene, S., Brannon, E. M., & Pelphrey, K. A. (2009). The neural development of an abstract concept of number. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 21(11), 2217-2229. Cantlon, J. F., & Li, R. (2013). Neural activity during natural viewing of Sesame Street statistically predicts test scores in early childhood. PLoS biology, 11(1), e1001462. Cohen, A., & Baruth, O. (2017). Personality, learning, and satisfaction in fully online academic courses. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 1-12. Cole, M., & Bart, W. M. (2001, April). Education and fMRI: Promise and cautions. In: Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA. Cole, M. W., Bassett, D. S., Power, J. D., Braver, T. S., & Petersen, S. E. (2014). Intrinsic and task-evoked network architectures of the human brain. Neuron, 83(1), 238-251. Cole, M. W., Reynolds, J. R., Power, J. D., Repovs, G., Anticevic, A., & Braver, T. S. (2013). Multi-task connectivity reveals flexible hubs for adaptive task control. Nature neuroscience, 16(9), 1348-1355. Cox, R. W. (1996). AFNI: software for analysis and visualization of functional magnetic resonance neuroimages. Computers and Biomedical research, 29(3), 162-173. Cui, G., Lockee, B., & Meng, C. (2013). Building modern online social presence: A review of social presence theory and its instructional design implications for future trends. Education and information technologies, 18, 661-685. Dastjerdi, M., Ozker, M., Foster, B. L., Rangarajan, V., & Parvizi, J. (2013). Numerical processing in the human parietal cortex during experimental and natural conditions. Nature communications, 4(1), 2528. Dikker, S., Wan, L., Davidesco, I., Kaggen, L., Oostrik, M., McClintock, J., ... & Poeppel, D. (2017). Brain-to-brain synchrony tracks real-world dynamic group interactions in the classroom. Current biology, 27(9), 1375-1380. Dimitrov, D. M., & Rumrill Jr, P. D. (2003). Pretest-posttest designs and measurement of change. Work, 20(2), 159-165. Domagk, S. (2010). Do pedagogical agents facilitate learner motivation and learning outcomes?: The role of the appeal of agent’s appearance and voice. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 22(2), 84. Dosenbach, N. U., Fair, D. A., Miezin, F. M., Cohen, A. L., Wenger, K. K., Dosenbach, R. A., ... & Petersen, S. E. (2007). Distinct brain networks for adaptive and stable task control in humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(26), 11073-11078. Fan, S., Dal Monte, O., & Chang, S. W. (2021). Levels of naturalism in social neuroscience research. IScience, 24(7). Fraser, K. L., Meguerdichian, M. J., Haws, J. T., Grant, V. J., Bajaj, K., & Cheng, A. (2018). Cognitive load theory for debriefing simulations: implications for faculty development. Advances in Simulation, 3, 1-8. Gao, Y., Shuai, D., Bu, X., Hu, X., Tang, S., Zhang, L., ... & Huang, X. (2019). Impairments of large-scale functional networks in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a meta-analysis of resting-state functional connectivity. Psychological medicine, 49(15), 2475-2485. Gu, C., Peng, Y., Nastase, S. A., Mayer, R. E., & Li, P. (2024). Onscreen presence of instructors in video lectures affects learners’ neural synchrony and visual attention during multimedia learning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(12), e2309054121. Gray, J. A., & DiLoreto, M. (2016). The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1), n1. Gomez, K., & Lee, U. S. (2015). Situated cognition and learning environments: Implications for teachers on-and offline in the new digital media age. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(5), 634-652. Jiang, R., Zuo, N., Ford, J. M., Qi, S., Zhi, D., Zhuo, C., ... & Sui, J. (2020). Task-induced brain connectivity promotes the detection of individual differences in brain-behavior relationships. NeuroImage, 207, 116370. John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991). Big five inventory. Journal of personality and social psychology. Kim, Y., & Baylor, A. L. (2016). based design of pedagogical agent roles: A review, progress, and recommendations. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26, 160-169. Knörzer, L., Brünken, R., & Park, B. (2016). Emotions and multimedia learning: The moderating role of learner characteristics. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(6), 618-631. Kwok, S. C., Shallice, T., & Macaluso, E. (2012). Functional anatomy of temporal organisation and domain-specificity of episodic memory retrieval. Neuropsychologia, 50(12), 2943-2955. Li, W., Mai, X., & Liu, C. (2014). The default mode network and social understanding of others: what do brain connectivity studies tell us. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 8, 74. Lowenthal, P. R. (2010). The evolution and influence of social presence theory on online learning. In Social computing: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 113-128). IGI Global. Lusk, M. M., & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Animated pedagogical agents: Does their degree of embodiment impact learning from static or animated worked examples?. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 21(6), 747-764. Marek, S., & Dosenbach, N. U. (2018). The frontoparietal network: function, electrophysiology, and importance of individual precision mapping. Dialogues in clinical neuroscience, 20(2), 133-140. Mayer, R. E. (2002). Multimedia learning. In Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 41, pp. 85-139). Academic Press. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 43-52. Mayer, R. E. (2014). Principles based on social cues in multimedia learning: Personalization, voice, image, and embodiment principles. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 16, 345-370. Menon, V. (2011). Large-scale brain networks and psychopathology: a unifying triple network model. Trends in cognitive sciences, 15(10), 483-506. Moon, J., & Ryu, J. (2021). The effects of social and cognitive cues on learning comprehension, eye-gaze pattern, and cognitive load in video instruction. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 33, 39-63. Mutlu-Bayraktar, D., Cosgun, V., & Altan, T. (2019). Cognitive load in multimedia learning environments: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 141, 103618. Ng, C. T., Huang, P. H., Cho, Y. C., Lee, P. H., Liu, Y. C., & Chang, T. T. (2024). Frontoparietal and salience network synchronizations during nonsymbolic magnitude processing predict brain age and mathematical performance in youth. Human Brain Mapping, 45(11), e26777. Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. (2016). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. In Cognitive Load Theory (pp. 63-71). Routledge. Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford university press. Pan, Y., Dikker, S., Goldstein, P., Zhu, Y., Yang, C., & Hu, Y. (2020). Instructor-learner brain coupling discriminates between instructional approaches and predicts learning. NeuroImage, 211, 116657. Park, B., Flowerday, T., & Brünken, R. (2015). Cognitive and affective effects of seductive details in multimedia learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 267-278. Park, S. (2015). The effects of social cue principles on cognitive load, situational interest, motivation, and achievement in pedagogical agent multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(4), 211-229. Rolls, E. T., Huang, C. C., Lin, C. P., Feng, J., & Joliot, M. (2020). Automated anatomical labelling atlas 3. Neuroimage, 206, 116189. Redcay, E., & Moraczewski, D. (2020). Social cognition in context: A naturalistic imaging approach. NeuroImage, 216, 116392. Saylik, R., Szameitat, A. J., & Cheeta, S. (2018). Neuroticism related differences in working memory tasks. PloS one, 13(12), e0208248. Schimmelpfennig, J., Topczewski, J., Zajkowski, W., & Jankowiak-Siuda, K. (2023). The role of the salience network in cognitive and affective deficits. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 17, 1133367. Schroeder, N. L., Adesope, O. O., & Gilbert, R. B. (2013). How effective are pedagogical agents for learning? A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(1), 1-39. Schroeder, N. L., & Gotch, C. M. (2015). Persisting issues in pedagogical agent research. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(2), 183-204. Schneider, S., Beege, M., Nebel, S., Schnaubert, L., & Rey, G. D. (2022). The cognitive-affective-social theory of learning in digital environments (CASTLE). Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 1-38. Sher, A. (2009). Assessing the relationship of student-instructor and student-student interaction to student learning and satisfaction in web-based online learning environment. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2). Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. Singh, J., & Arya, R. (2023). Examining the relationship of personality traits with online teaching using emotive responses and physiological signals. Education and Information Technologies, 28(9), 11193-11219. Smith, E. R., & Semin, G. R. (2004). Socially situated cognition: Cognition in its social context. Advances in experimental social psychology, 36, 57-121. Spreng, R. N., & Grady, C. L. (2010). Patterns of brain activity supporting autobiographical memory, prospection, and theory of mind, and their relationship to the default mode network. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 22(6), 1112-1123. Sundararajan, N., & Adesope, O. (2020). Keep it coherent: A meta-analysis of the seductive details effect. Educational Psychology Review, 32(3), 707-734. Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational psychology review, 10, 251-296. Theobald, M., Bellhäuser, H., & Imhof, M. (2018). Identifying individual differences using log-file analysis: Distributed learning as mediator between conscientiousness and exam grades. Learning and Individual Differences, 65, 112-122. Tikka, P., Kauttonen, J., & Hlushchuk, Y. (2018). Narrative comprehension beyond language: Common brain networks activated by a movie and its script. PLoS One, 13(7), e0200134. Tlili, A., Sun, T., Denden, M., Kinshuk, Graf, S., Fei, C., & Wang, H. (2023). Impact of personality traits on learners’ navigational behavior patterns in an online course: A lag sequential analysis approach. Frontiers in psychology, 14, 1071985. Tokiwa, E. (2025). Who excels in online learning in Japan?. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1420996. Tseng, C. H., Lin, H. C. K., Chen, Y. H., Lin, J. R., & Huang, A. C. W. (2022). Do students with different personality traits demonstrate different physiological signals in video-based learning?. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2138052. Tu, C. H. (2000). On-line learning migration: From social learning theory to social presence theory in a CMC environment. Journal of network and computer applications, 23(1), 27-37. Uddin, L. Q., Supekar, K. S., Ryali, S., & Menon, V. (2011). Dynamic reconfiguration of structural and functional connectivity across core neurocognitive brain networks with development. Journal of neuroscience, 31(50), 18578-18589. Wang, H., Pi, Z., & Hu, W. (2019). The instructor's gaze guidance in video lectures improves learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(1), 42-50. Watjatrakul, B. (2020). Intention to adopt online learning: The effects of perceived value and moderating roles of personality traits. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 37(1/2), 46-65. Wen, T., Liu, D. C., & Hsieh, S. (2018). Connectivity patterns in cognitive control networks predict naturalistic multitasking ability. Neuropsychologia, 114, 195-202. Whelan, R. R. (2007). Neuroimaging of cognitive load in instructional multimedia. Educational Research Review, 2(1), 1-12. Yu, Z. (2021). The effects of gender, educational level, and personality on online learning outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 14. zh_TW
