In the course of a teaching and learning process, different cognitive skills are required for a student. Attention is an important variable to be measured, since it plays a fundamental role in the accumulation of information with the stimulus of the learner’s memory in the course of the assimilation of knowledge. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the influence of augmented reality (AR) used as a tool for educational content in student concentration when compared with the use of traditional teaching and learning technologies. User attention was monitored through an electroencephalography sensor while performing an educational task using either an AR or a traditional interface. This presented favorable results, since it was possible to identify an increase in student attention during the interaction with the AR application, as opposed to its conventional counterpart.
Aranha, G. (2012). Neuroeducation Paths G. Aranha & A. S. Franco (Eds.). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Ciências e Cognição.
2.
AusubelD. (2003) Acquisition and retention of knowledge: A cognitive perspective, Lisbon, Portugal: Editora Plátano.
3.
Azuma, R., Baillot, Y., Behringer, R., Feiner, S., Julier, S., & MacIntyre, B. (2001). Recent Advances in Augmented Reality. IEEE Computer Graphics And Applications, 21(6), 34–47.
4.
BroadbentD. E. (1958) Perception and communication, London, England: Pergamon.
5.
BrunerJ. (1986) Actual minds, possible worlds, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6.
BrunerJ. (2001) The culture of education, Porto Alegre, Brazil: Artmed.
7.
Chen, C., & Tsai, Y. (2012). Interactive augmented reality system for enhancing library instruction in elementary schools. Computers & Education, 59(2), 638–652.
8.
Chen, C. M., & Lin, Y. J. (2014). Effects of different text display types on reading comprehension, sustained attention and cognitive load in mobile reading contexts (Interactive Learning Environments). doi:10.1080/10494820.2014.891526.
9.
CohenR.Sparling-CohenY.O’DonnellB. (1993) The neuropsychology of attention (Critical issues in neuropsychology), New York, NY: Plenum PressRetrieved from http://books.google.com.br/books?id=rPtqAAAAMAAJ>.
FelderR. M.SilvermanL. K. (1988) Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering Education78(7): 674–681.
13.
FittsP. M.PosnerM. I. (1967) Human performance, Belmont, CA: Brooks/Colemann.
14.
GardnerH. (1974) The shattered mind, New York, NY: Knopf Vintage Paperback.
15.
HardyJ. L.DrescherD.SarkarK.KellettG.ScanlonM. (2011) Enhancing visual attention and working memory with a web-based cognitive training program. Mensa Research Journal42(2): 13–20.
16.
HerpichF.GuareseR. L. M.TaroucoL. M. R. (2017) A comparative analysis of augmented reality frameworks aimed at the development of educational applications. Creative Education8(9): 1433–1451.
17.
JangS. J. (2008) Innovations in science teacher education: Effects of integrating technology and team-teaching strategies. Computers & Education51(2): 646–659.
18.
LadewigI. (2000) The importance of attention in learning motor skills. Revista Paulista de Educação Física20(3): 62–71.
19.
Lent, R. (2015). Neuroplasticity. In R. Lent (Ed.), Neurociência da mente e do comportamento (pp. 241–252). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Guanabara Koogan.
20.
Liarokapis, F., & Anderson, E. F. (2010). Using augmented reality as a medium to assist teaching in higher education. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the European Association for Computer Graphics (Eurographics 2010), 9–16. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group. doi:10.1336/0313351651.
21.
MilgramP.KishinoF. (1994) Taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Transactions on Information and SystemsE77–D(12): 1321–1329. doi:10.1.1.102.4646.
Moodle. (2019). Official site of Moodle. Retrieved from http://moodle.org.
24.
Mora, F. (2013). Neuroeducation, You can only learn what you love. Madrid, Spain: Alianza Editorial.
25.
Rebolledo-MendezG.DunwellI.Martínez-MironE.Vargas-Cerd anM.de FreitasS.LiarokapisF.García-GaonaA. R. (2009) Assessing NeuroSky's usability to detect attention levels in an assessment exercise. In: JackoJ. A. (ed) Human-computer interaction. New trends, Berlin, Germany: Springer, pp. 149–158.
26.
SantosM. E. C.ChenA.TaketomiT.YamamotoG.MiyazakiJ.KatoH. (2014) Augmented reality learning experiences: Survey of prototype design and evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies7(1): 38–56. doi:10.1109/TLT.2013.37.
27.
Tokuhama-EspinosaT. N. (2008) The scientifically substantiated art of teaching: A study in the development of standards in the new academic field of neuroeducation (mind, brain, and education science), Minneapolis, MN: Capella University.
28.
Velloso, B. P. (2014). Atenção como critério de avaliação de objetos de ensino e aprendizagem baseado em suas características. (333 f. Tese, Doutorado em Engenharia e Gestão do conhecimento). Centro Tecnológico, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil.
29.
Welford, A. T. (1952). The ‘psychological refractory period’ and the timing of high-speed performance – a review and a theory. British Journal of Psychology, 43, 2–19.
