Attention distribution and cognitive load in a subtitled academic lecture: L1 vs. L2

In multilingual classrooms, subtitling can be used to address the language needs of students from different linguistic backgrounds. The way students distribute their visual and cognitive resources during a lecture is important in educational design. Students have to shift their attention between sources of information of varying density and relevance. If there is redundancy between these sources, there will be competition and possible cognitive overload. This paper compares visual attention distribution between subtitles and other sources of information through eye tracking and relates this to academic comprehension and cognitive load as measured through self-report questionnaires and EEG. The study provides promising results for the use of both first and second language subtitles in academic contexts

Reading first and second language subtitles: Sesotho viewers reading in Sesotho and English

Subtitling can offer valuable support in multilingual countries by giving people access to materials in the language(s) of their choice. Within the South African context and its known problems with literacy, this article poses the following questions: How useful are second language (L2) English subtitles compared to first language (L1) subtitles, and how effective is the practice of subtitling in South Africa? This study examined the effectiveness of L2 English subtitles by presenting native speakers of Sesotho with a video clip containing L1 Sesotho and L2 English subtitles while monitoring their eye movements. The hypothesis was that there would be a difference in L1 and L2 subtitle reading in terms of processing. Statistically significant differences were found, but they were more extensive than anticipated. Participants were unable to finish reading the L1 Sesotho subtitles within the given display time, whereas the L2 English subtitles were read with seemingly more ease. However, their reading of the L2 English subtitles was still not optimal. The findings point towards literacy as an important problem – many South Africans do not possess the reading skills to interact with written materials offered by the media. This exacerbates challenges related to subtitling in South Africa. If people are unable to read the subtitles presented to them on television, subtitling is failing its purpose to facilitate the communication of information.http://dx.doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2013.837610http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.2989/16073614.2013.83761

Reading second language subtitles: a case study of Afrikaans viewers reading in Afrikaans and English

In South Africa subtitles are predominantly received as second language (L2) text. This poses questions as to how people perceive these subtitles, and if and how their reading of L2 subtitles differs from their reading of L1 subtitles. This study examined the effectiveness of English L2 subtitles by presenting native speakers of Afrikaans with subtitles displayed in Afrikaans and L2 English while recording their eye movements, and comparing the data to that of English L1 speakers reading English subtitles. The initial hypothesis was that there would be a difference in L1 and L2 subtitle reading in terms of processing. Statistically significant differences were found for dwell time, fixation time and fixation count. Other possible influencing factors were considered, but none had a statistically significant effect on the results; one group processed the English L2 subtitles with more difficulty. Afrikaans L1 speakers have a high level of proficiency in Afrikaans and English to the extent that they are near or fully bilingual. If this unique group of viewers experienced difficulty reading English L2 subtitles, the implications of English L2-only subtitles are even greater for other language groups in South Africa who do not share similar levels of English proficiency.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2012.722652http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/0907676X.2012.72265

Reading second language subtitles : a case study of South African viewers reading in their native language and L2–English

North-West University (South Africa). Vaal Triangle Campus.Most South African subtitles are produced and broadcast in English despite the fact that English is the first language of only 8.2% of the entire population (Statistics South Africa, 2004). Therefore, current English subtitles are predominantly received as second language text. This poses questions as to how people perceive these subtitles, and if and how their reading of English second language (L2) subtitles differs from their reading of L1 (non-English) subtitles. In recent years, eye tracking has proven to be a valuable method in observing and measuring the eye movements of people watching and reading subtitles. In order to explain the use of eye tracking and in order to answer the question at hand, this study comprises a literature review and an empirical study. The literature review gives an in-depth account of previous studies that used eye tracking to study reading and elaborates on the parameters used to account for various findings. The two empirical components of this study examined the accessibility and effectiveness of English L2 subtitles by presenting native speakers of Afrikaans and Sesotho with subtitles displayed (a) in their native language, Afrikaans or Sesotho, and (b) in L2 English, while monitoring their eye movements with an SMI iViewX™ Hi-Speed eye tracker and comparing the data with that of English L1 speakers reading English subtitles. Participants were also given static text to read (accompanied by a corresponding comprehension test) in order to see if there was a relation between participants’ first and second language reading of static text and that of subtitling. Additionally, participants were given a questionnaire on their reading behaviour, reading preferences, access to subtitled television programming and reading of subtitles in order to find explanations for occurrences in the data. The initial hypothesis was that there would be a difference in L1 and L2 subtitle reading and attention allocation as measured by key eye-tracking parameters. Using ANOVAs, statistically significant differences were indeed found, but the differences were much more significant for the Sesotho L1 than the Afrikaans L1 speakers. After excluding possible confounding factors that were analysed in attempt to refute this hypothesis, the conclusion was that participants inherently read L1 and L2 subtitles differently. The hypothesis is therefore supported. However, the difference in L1 and L2 subtitle reading was not the only significant finding – the Sesotho L1 speakers’ reading data revealed a greater underlying issue, namely literacy. The problem of low literacy levels can be attributed to the participants’ socioeconomic background and history, and needs to be addressed urgently. Recommendations for future research include that the current study be broadened in terms of scope, sampling size, representativeness and experimental material; that the focus be shifted to the rest of the languages spoken in South Africa for which the users do not have a shared sense of bilingualism and for which the L1 skills and levels of L1 literacy vary; and to further explore the relation between the reading of static text and subtitle reading in order to ensure adequate subtitle reading in terms of proportional attention allocation. However, the issue of low literacy levels will have to be addressed urgently; only then will the South African viewing public be able to gain full access to any form of broadcast communicative material or media, and only then will they be able to benefit from subtitling and all that it offers.Doctora

Measuring the impact of subtitles on cognitive load : eye tracking and dynamic audiovisual texts

In educational design literature, it is often taken as fact that subtitles increase cognitive load (CL). This paper investigates this assumption experimentally by comparing various measures of CL when students watch a recorded academic lecture with or without subtitles. Since the measurement of cognitive load is by no means a simple matter, we first provide an overview of the different measurement techniques based on causality and objectivity. We measure CL by means of eye tracking (pupil dilation), electroencephalography (EEG), self-reported ratings of mental effort, frustration, comprehension effort and engagement, as well as performance measures (comprehension test). Our findings seem to indicate that the subtitled condition in fact created lower CL in terms of percentage change in pupil diameter (PCPD) for the stimulus, approaching significance. In the subtitled condition PCPD also correlates significantly with participants' self-reported comprehension effort levels (their perception of how easy or difficult it was to understand the lecture). The EEG data, in turn, shows a significantly higher level of frustration for the unsubtitled condition. Negative emotional states could be caused by situations of higher CL (or cognitive overload) leading to learner frustration and dissatisfaction with learning activities and own performance [16]. It could therefore be reasoned that participants had a higher CL in the absence of subtitles. The self-reported frustration levels correlate with the frustration measured by the EEG as well as the self-reported engagement levels for the subtitled group. We also found a significant correlation between the self-reported engagement levels and both the short- and long term comprehension for the unsubtitled condition but not for the subtitled condition. There was no significant difference in either short-term or long-term performance measures between the two groups, which seems to suggest that subtitles at the very least, do not result in cognitive overload.5 page(s