The attention directed toward computer software research has been sparse which is quite evident in particular facets such as learning methods, specifically towards tutorials. Some authors have identified various important issues which include cognitive factors, reduction of presentation of superfluous information, and the importance of interaction with software and hardware. The present . study examined two tutorials which were similar except in their level of required user behaviors. Tutorial A required only user manipulation of disk stored data. Tutorial B required the user to enter the data into the computer, design the screen format, and then to manipulate it. It was predicted that the extra task of entering data and designing the screen format would provoke more positive scores for Tutorial B as measured by two independent questionnaires, would require fewer requests for assistance than for those using Tutorial A, and require a comparative duration period to complete. The results obtained supported all hypotheses except for the duration period which took longer for Tutorial B. The implication is that there should be development of improved Tutorial options utilizing research based methods such as these presented.
","abstract_html":"<p>The attention directed toward computer software research has been sparse which is quite evident in particular facets such as learning methods, specifically towards tutorials. Some authors have identified various important issues which include cognitive factors, reduction of presentation of superfluous information, and the importance of interaction with software and hardware. The present . study examined two tutorials which were similar except in their level of required user behaviors. Tutorial A required only user manipulation of disk stored data. Tutorial B required the user to enter the data into the computer, design the screen format, and then to manipulate it. It was predicted that the extra task of entering data and designing the screen format would provoke more positive scores for Tutorial B as measured by two independent questionnaires, would require fewer requests for assistance than for those using Tutorial A, and require a comparative duration period to complete. The results obtained supported all hypotheses except for the duration period which took longer for Tutorial B. The implication is that there should be development of improved Tutorial options utilizing research based methods such as these presented.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Steil, Toni L."],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Master of Arts (M.A.)","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":"Graduate School","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Doug Matheson"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":1986,"date_issued":"1986-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"1986-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:36:28Z","subjects":["Computer-assisted instruction Authoring programs","Computer software","Computer Sciences","Physical Sciences and Mathematics","Psychology","Social and Behavioral Sciences"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NKC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/491","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Doug Matheson"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Steil, Toni L."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["1986-01-01T08:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Graduate School"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts (M.A.)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Computer-assisted instruction Authoring programs","Computer software","Computer Sciences","Physical Sciences and Mathematics","Psychology","Social and Behavioral Sciences"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NKC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/491"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The attention directed toward computer software research has been sparse which is quite evident in particular facets such as learning methods, specifically towards tutorials. Some authors have identified various important issues which include cognitive factors, reduction of presentation of superfluous information, and the importance of interaction with software and hardware. The present . study examined two tutorials which were similar except in their level of required user behaviors. Tutorial A required only user manipulation of disk stored data. Tutorial B required the user to enter the data into the computer, design the screen format, and then to manipulate it. It was predicted that the extra task of entering data and designing the screen format would provoke more positive scores for Tutorial B as measured by two independent questionnaires, would require fewer requests for assistance than for those using Tutorial A, and require a comparative duration period to complete. The results obtained supported all hypotheses except for the duration period which took longer for Tutorial B. The implication is that there should be development of improved Tutorial options utilizing research based methods such as these presented.
"]},{"key":"dc:source","label":"Dc Source","values":["46"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Tutorials for software : a comparison of the Appleworks software tutorial with pre-entered data and an experimental tutorial with user entered data"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Doug Matheson"],"dc:creator":["Steil, Toni L."],"dc:date.available":["1986-01-01T08:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["The attention directed toward computer software research has been sparse which is quite evident in particular facets such as learning methods, specifically towards tutorials. Some authors have identified various important issues which include cognitive factors, reduction of presentation of superfluous information, and the importance of interaction with software and hardware. The present . study examined two tutorials which were similar except in their level of required user behaviors. Tutorial A required only user manipulation of disk stored data. Tutorial B required the user to enter the data into the computer, design the screen format, and then to manipulate it. It was predicted that the extra task of entering data and designing the screen format would provoke more positive scores for Tutorial B as measured by two independent questionnaires, would require fewer requests for assistance than for those using Tutorial A, and require a comparative duration period to complete. The results obtained supported all hypotheses except for the duration period which took longer for Tutorial B. The implication is that there should be development of improved Tutorial options utilizing research based methods such as these presented.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/491"],"dc:rights":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NKC/1.0/"],"dc:source":["46"],"dc:subject":["Computer-assisted instruction Authoring programs","Computer software","Computer Sciences","Physical Sciences and Mathematics","Psychology","Social and Behavioral Sciences"],"dc:title":["Tutorials for software : a comparison of the Appleworks software tutorial with pre-entered data and an experimental tutorial with user entered data"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Graduate School"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts (M.A.)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:36:28Z"}