本論文研究大學生對候選人形象與視覺圖像認知的評估，並分析大學生對候選人視覺圖像興趣區（Region of Interest，本研究以下同稱ROI）眼動情形如何影響大學生的投票傾向。本研究從政治傳播與政治心理學的角度，討論候選人形象特質對投票傾向的影響。候選人形象特質與臉部外貌特質在大學生的投票行為中，各有其研究觀點。形象特質與候選人情感溫度計的總體評價，藉由不同面向影響投票傾向；而臉部的外貌特質，從眼動的軌跡、注視次數、凝視的時間來影響投票抉擇。有別於一般政治傳播對於候選人形象的研究設計，本研究採用創新研究工具結合準實驗研究法，以紅外線眼動儀的眼球追蹤技術來蒐集大學生最直接的視覺反應。為了檢驗大學生眼動視覺反應對投票傾向的研究假設，本研究以2012年台灣第八屆立法委員選舉中，北部地區區域立委候選人的照片圖像，作為眼動實驗的材料，進行科學性的實證研究。
實驗研究發現，大學生對於候選人形象特質的評價分數愈高，對於候選人情感溫度計的評價分數也會愈高；反之則愈低。而在對於候選人形象特質的評價分數愈高，在候選人外貌特質ROI興趣區的第一時間優先注視時間、注視次數、凝視時間並不會隨之增高。且大學生對於候選人外貌特質ROI興趣區的第一時間優先注視時間、注視次數、凝視時間愈高，對於候選人情感溫度計的評價分數並不會產生影響。
再者，大學生對候選人外貌興趣區ROI的注視順序會影響投票傾向，優先注視的時間愈長，愈會投票支持該候選人，依序是眼睛、鼻子及嘴巴。其次，選民對候選人外貌興趣區ROI的注視次數會影響投票傾向，注視ROI的累積次數愈多，愈會投票支持該候選人，其中以眼睛的次數最多。第三，大學生對候選人外貌興趣區ROI的凝視時間會影響投票傾向，凝視ROI的累積時間愈長，愈會投票支持該候選人，累積時間依序的排名為眼睛、鼻子、嘴巴。
最後，本論文也嘗試以政治心理學途徑解釋大學生的投票行為。透過大學生對於視覺實驗反應的結果檢證，本研究認為影響大學生投票行為的因素，應是在對於候選人外貌特質ROI興趣區上，眼球第一時間注視時間、注視累積次數、凝視總時間最直接的反應，成為判斷是否支持該候選人的重要因素。以此，本文認為大學生在發展出以「外貌特質」為重要投票參考依據的來源時，在尚未形成政治上投票行為的生命週期時是最好的觀察時機。而本文透過紅外線眼動儀追蹤大學生眼動情形，探究候選人形象特質與外貌特質對於投票行為的影響，或許能為未來投票行為的研究開闢一條創新的路徑。

This study focused on college students assess candidate's image and perception of visual images, and analyzed visual images of the candidates college Region of Interest ( hereinafter referred ROI with) eye on how the situation affects the tendency of college students to vote.This study was from politicalcommunication and political psychology perspective, discussed the impact of the image qualities of the candidates voting tendencies.Image characteristics and overall evaluation of the candidate feeling thermometer, with different voting intention for the impact; facial appearance and characteristics were from eye movement trajectory, fixation times, gaze time to influence the voting decision.Unlike the general image of the candidates for the study of political communication design.In this study,authorcombined with innovative research tools quasi-experimental method with an infrared eye tracker's eye-tracking technology to gather college students the most direct visual response.In this study, in 2012eighth Taiwan legislators’election, legislative candidates’the photo image in northern region, as eye movement test materials, conduct scientific empirical research.
The research found that for the evaluation of candidate scores were higher image qualities for a candidate feeling thermometer evaluation score will be higher; otherwise lower.For the evaluation of candidate scores higher image qualities, the first time a candidate looks interesting area of priority attention to the characteristics of the time, watching the number of gaze time and will not have increased.And college students for the first time a candidate region of interest appearance traits priority fixation duration, fixation times, gaze times higher emotional thermometer for candidate evaluation score will not have an impact.
Furthermore,collegestudents watched the order of candidates’the Region of Interestof appearance will affect the tend to vote.The longer the priority attention, the more will vote for the candidate,order of the eyes, nose and mouth. Secondly, the appearance of the candidates voters watched the number of regions of interest tends to affect voting.The cumulative ROI watched more times, the more will vote for the candidate, among the most eyes.Third, the college students looks for a candidate region of interest gaze time will affect the voting tendencies. The ROI gaze longer cumulative time, more will vote for the candidate, cumulative time ranking order for the eyes, nose, mouth.
Finally, we also try to explain the way the political psychology of college students voting behavior.For college students through visual inspection certificate experimental reaction results. This study suggests that factors that affect voting behavior of college students,should be in the region of interest candidate appearance qualities, eye gaze first time, watching the cumulative number of the most direct gaze total reaction time, become an important factor in determining whether the candidate's support.With this, the paper argues that students in the development of "appearance qualities" as an important source of reference when voting, when voting behavior has not yet formed a political life cycle is the best time to observe.In this study, using infrared eye tracker to track eye movement situations college students to explore the characteristics of the candidate image and appearance characteristics influence the voting behavior,may be able to open up a path of innovation for future research voting behavior.

一、中文部分
朱瀅（2002）。實驗心理學。台北：五南。
吳昭容、游皓翔（2009）。大學生閱讀幾何證明文本之眼動現象。第48屆台灣心理學會年會。台北：國立台灣大學。
何宏發（2013）。低價眼動儀硬體與軟體之開發與研究。教育部邁向頂尖大學研究成果報告，未出版。
李培榮（2008）。由眼動資料探討中文成語詞及組合詞在心理辭典中的表徵方式。國立政治大學心理學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
沈勤譽（1997）。總統候選人與新聞媒體之角力—以一九九六年首次總統大選為例。政治大學新聞研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
卓淑玲、楊聰財、陳學志（2009）。精神分裂症患者對臉孔表情辨識之眼動訊息處理研究。第48屆台灣心理學會年會。台北：國立台灣大學。
邱郁秀（2009）。目擊證人辨認臉孔之眼動分析。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
邱國鈞（2006）。追瞳系統之研製及其應用。國立中央大學碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
侯永全(2014.03.18)。 抗議服貿學生占據立院主席台，聯合新聞網。檢索日期：2014年3月18日。
柯華葳、陳明蕾、廖家寧（2005）。詞頻、詞彙類型與眼球運動型態：來自篇章閱讀的證據。中華心理學刊，47（4），381-398。
胡佛、游盈隆（1983）。選民的投票取向：結構與類型的分析〉。政治學報，11：225-279。
張春興（1989）。張氏心理學辭典。台北：東華。
張格瑜（2009）。運用眼動儀探討不同學科背景大學生之細胞擴散和滲透作用的心智表徵建構。國立交通大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。
張繼文（1995）。從認知心理觀點探討記號設計。屏東師院學報，8，417-502。
梁世武（1994）。一九九四年台北市長選舉之預測：候選人形象指標預測模式之驗證。選舉研究，1（2）：97-130。
盛治仁（2000）。總統選舉預策探討—以情感溫度計預測未表態選民的應用。選舉研究，7 (2)，75-105。
陳春富(2002)。探討商業行銷與政治行銷之異同。南亞學報，22，75-89。
陳美蓉（1992）。應用符號學理論探討圖像符號的意義建構與解讀之特質。交通大學應用藝術研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。
陳陸輝、鄭夙芬、劉嘉薇（2005）。2004年總統選舉中的候選人因素。台灣民主季刊，2(2)，31-70。
陳照明、陳春富(2002)。政治行銷模式之建構─商業行銷模式之修飾。產業論壇，4(1)，81-102。
陳義彥（1986）。我國投票行為研究的回顧與展望。思與言，23（6）：557-585。
陳義彥（1994）。我國選民的集群分析及其投票傾向的預測：以八十一年立委選舉探討。選舉研究，1（1）：1-38。
陳學志、邱發忠、賴惠德（2010）。眼球追蹤技術在學習與教育上的應用。科學教育學刊，55（4），39-68。
陳學志、彭淑玲、曾千芝、邱皓政（2008）。藉由眼動追蹤儀器探討平均掃視幅度大小與創造力之關係。教育心理學報，39，127-149。
陳學志、黃博聖、林正昌（2010）。男、女國中生在自然科解題歷程的眼動軌跡差異分析。第49屆台灣心理學年會。台灣嘉義：國立中正大學。
陳學志、鄭昭明、曾千芝、蘇雅靜、詹雨臻（2010，11 月）。幽默文句中逆溯推論步驟對眼動軌跡之影響。論文發表於國立中正大學舉辦之「臺灣心理學會第四十九屆年會」，嘉義市。
傅明穎（1998）。北市選民的候選人評價與投票決定。台灣政治學刊，3：195-243。
曾千芝（2009）。頓悟性問題解題歷程之眼動分析。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
游清鑫（2003）。探索台灣選民心目中理想的候選人：以二○○○年總統選舉為例。東吳政治學報，17，93-120。
黃秀端（2005）。候選人形象、候選人情感溫度計、與總統選民投票行為。臺灣民主季刊，2(4)，1-30。

葉素玲（1999）。視覺空間注意力。載於李江山（主編），視覺與認知：視覺知覺與視覺運動系統。台北：遠流。
劉念夏（2007）。政黨投票與候選人投票理論模型的對話與評估：以台灣的總統選舉為例（1996-2004）。世新大學傳播研究所博士論文，未出版，台北市。
蔡介立（2000）。從眼動控制探討中文閱讀的訊息處理歷程：應用眼動誘發呈現技術之系列研究。國立政治大學心理學研究所博士論文，未出版，台北市。
蔡介立、顏妙璇、汪勁安（2005）。眼球移動測量及在中文閱讀研究之應用。應用心理研究，28，91-104。
鄭昭明（1993）。認知心理學。台北：桂冠圖書出版。
鄭麗玉（1993）。認知心理學。台北：五南圖書出版。
戴聖耀（2010）。視譜能力與樂譜難度對樂譜時眼動型態的影響。亞洲大學心理學研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。
蘇文清（2004）。符號學理論運用於平面視覺設計“形”、“義” 結構之研究。馬敏元（主持人）。2004 中華民國設計論壇暨第九屆中華民國設計學會學術研討會，國立成功大學工業設計學系，台南。

二、外文部分
Atkinson, R. L., Atkinson, R. C., Smith, E. E.,Bem, D.J., Hilgard, E. R.（1990）. Introduction to Psychology.,Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich.
Bartels, L. M. (2002). The Impact of candidate traits in American presidential election.In Anthony King (Ed.), Leadership Personalities and the Outcomes of Democratic Elections (pp.44-69). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bartle, J. & Crewe, I. (2002). The Impact of party leaders in Britain: Strongassumptions, weak evidence. In Anthony King (Eds.), Leadership Personalities and the Outcomes of Democratic Elections (pp.70-95). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bean, Clive (1993). “The Electoral Influence of Party Leader Images in Australia and New Zealand.”Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 26, No. 1:111-32.
Bednarik, R., Tukiainen, M. (2007) . Analysing and Interpreting Quantitative Eye-Tracking Data in Studies of Programming: Phases of Debugging with Multiple Representations. Proc. of the 19th Annual Workshop of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group (PPIG'07), Joensuu, Finland, July 2-6, 2007, pp. 158–172.
Berelson, B. F., Lazarsfeld, P. F., & McPhee, W. N. (1954) .Voting : a study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Boudreau, C. (2009). Making citizens smart: When do institutions improve
unsophisticated citizens’ decisions? Political Behavior, 31, 287-306.
Christopher P. S. &Todorov, A.(2011).A Statistical Model of Facial Attractiveness.Psychological Science,22,1183-1190.
Christopher Y. O. & Todorov,A.(2010). Elected in 100 milliseconds: Appearance-Based TraitInferences and Voting.Nonverbal Behav ,34,83–110
Clarke, H. D., Sanders, D., Stewart, M. C. & Whiteley, P. (2004).Political Choice in Britain.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cooper, K.A.(2013).Visual processing associated with making judgments of political affiliation : an eye-tracking study(Master's thesis).Retrieved from http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/wcu/listing.aspx?id=14953
Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992).Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. In J. H. Barkhow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind and the generation of culture (pp. 163–228). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Druckman, J. N. (2003). The power of television images: The first Kennedy-Nixon debate revisited. The Journal of Politics, 65(2), 559-571.
Duchowski, A. T. (2002). A breadth-first survey of eye-tracking applications.Behavior Research Methods Instruments and Computers, 34(4), 455-470.
Duchowski, A. T. (2003). Eye Tracking Methodology: Theory and Practive. Verlag London Limited, 186-187.
Duchowski, A. T. (2007). Eye-tracking methodology : theory and practice / AndrewDuchowski. London: Springer, c2007.
Funk, C. L. (1997). “Implications of Political Expertise in Candidate Trait Evaluations.”Political Research Quarterly, 50(3):657-97.
Fiorina, M. P. (1981). Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Gagne', E. D., Yekovich, C. W. & Yekovich, K. R.（1993）.The cognitive psychology of school learning (2nded.). New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.
Geise, S. (2010). Insights in processes of visual perception and its effects: Results of an experimental eye-tracking study using the example of election posters. Conference Papers -- International Communication Association, 1.
Graber, D. A. (2001).Processing politics: Learning from television in the Internet age. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Griffin, M. (2001). Camera as witness, image as sign: The study of visual communication in communication research. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Communication Yearbook, 24 (pp. 433-463). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hacker, K.（1995）.Candidates Images in Presidential Elections. N.Y.: Praeger.
Hart, R. P. (1999). Seducing America: How television charms the modern voter. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Hastie, R., & Park, B. (1986). The Relationship between Memory and Judgment Depends on Whether the Task is Memory-based or on-Line. Psychological Review, 93(3) ,258-68.
Hellweg, S. A., Dionispoulos, G. N. & Kulger, D. B.（1989）. Political Candidates Image: A State- of –the –art Review in Progress. In B. Dervin & M. J. Voigt (eds.). Political in Communication Sciences IX, pp.43-78.

Henderson, J. M., & Hollingworth, A. (1998). Eye movement during scene viewing:An overview. In Eye Guidance in Reading and Scene Perception,G.Underwood, Ed. Elsevier Science Ltd., Pp.269-293.
Ho, H. F., Huang, C. W., Jiang, Z. S., & Kuo, S. W.(2012). Do Function Tables Affect Reading Process of Timing Diagram of Digital Sequential Logic Circuits? Evidence from Eye Movements.Proc.of the International Conference of Educational Innovation through Technology, Beijing.
Huang, C. W., Ho, H. F., Kuo, S. W., & Jiang, Z. S.(2012). A Model of Reading Process of Timing Diagram of Digital Sequential Logic Circuits Based on Eye-Tracking Evidence. Proc. of the International Conference of Educational Innovation through Technology, Beijing.
Just, M. A. & Carpenter, P. A.(1976). Eye fixations and cognitive processes, Cognitive Psychology 8:441-480.
Just, M. A. & Carpenter, P. A.(1980). A Theory of Reading: From Eye Fixations to Comprehension, Psychological Review 87 (4): 329-354.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1987).The psychology of reading and language comprehension.Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Kelley, S., Jr., & Mirer, T. W. (1974).The Simple act of voting.American Political Science Review, 68,572-591.
Kinder, D. R. (1986). Presidential character revisited. In Richard R. Lau andDavid O. Sears (Eds.), Political Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Knoblich, G., Ohlsson, S., & Raney, G. E. (2001). An eye movement study of insight problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 29(7), 1000-1009.
Kowler, E., Anderson, E., Dosher, B., & Blaser, E. (1995).The role of attention in the programming of saccade.Vision Research, 35(13), 1897-1916.
Langton, S. R. H., Watt, R. J., & Bruce, V. (2000). Do the eyes have it? Cues to the direction of social attention.Trends in cognitive sciences, 4(2), 50-59.
Lawson, C., Lenz, G. S., Baker, A., & Myers, M. (2010). Looking like a winner: Candidate appearance and electoral success in new democracies. World Politics, 62, 561–593
Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Hazel G. (1944).The People,s choice. New York:Columbia University Press.

Leadership effects in the 1997 British General Election. No. 128 Essex Papers in Politics and Government.Department of Government, University of Essex, UK.
Lenz, G. S., & Lawson, C. (2011).Looking the Part: Television Leads Less Informed Citizens to Vote Based on Candidates' Appearance.AmericanJournal Of Political Science, 55(3), 574-589. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00511.x
Lodge, M. & Stroh, P. (1995).Inside the mental voting booth: An impression-driven process model of candidate evaluation. In Shanto Iyengar and William J. McGurire (Eds.), Explorations in Political Psychology (pp.225-263).Duke University Press.
Lodge, M., Steenbergen , M. R., & Brau, S. (1995). The Responsive Voter: Campaign Information and the Dynamics of Candidate Evaluation. American Political Science Review, 89(2), 309-36.
Louden, A.（1994）. Voter Rationality and Media Excess: Image in the 1992 Presidential Campaign. In Robert E. Denton, Jr.(ed.). The 1992 Presidential Campaign. London: Praeger.
Luttbeg, N. R., & Grant, M. M. (1995).American Electoral Behavior, 1952-1992.2nd ed. Itasca, Illinois: F.E. Peacock.
Mano, M. M. & Ciletti, M. D. (2012).Digital Design, 5/E, Pearson Education International.
Mattes, K., Spezio, M., Kim, H., Todorov, A., Adolphs, R., & Alvarez, R. (2010). Predicting Election Outcomes from Positive and Negative Trait Assessments of Candidate Images. Political Psychology, 31(1), 41-58. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2009.00745.x
Miller, A. H., Wattenberg, M. P., & Malanchuk, O. (1986).Schematic assessment for presidential candidates.American Political Science Review, 80,521-540.
Miller, W. E., & Shanks, J. M. (1996).The New American Voter. Cambridge, Mass:Havard University Press.
Mughan, A. (2000). Media and the Presidentialization of Parliamentary Elections.Basingstoke, Hants: Palgrave.
Newman, B. (1994). The Marketing of The President: Political Marketing as Campaign Strategy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Niemi, R. G., &Weisberg , H. F., ed. (1993). Controversies in Voting Behavior, 3rd ed. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.

Nimmo,D.D.& Savage,R.L.（1976）. Candidates and Their Images: Concepts, Method, and Findings. Santa Monica, California: Goodyear Publishing.
Olivola, C. Y., & Todorov, A. (2010). Elected in 100 milliseconds: Appearance-based trait inferences and voting. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 34, 83–110.
Oosterhof, N. N., & Todorov, A. (2009).Shared perceptual basis of emotional expressions and trustworthiness from faces.Emotion, 9(1), 128-133.
Page, B. I. (1978).Choices and Echoes in Presidential Elections. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Page, B. I.,& Calvin C. J. (1979).“Reciprocal Effects of Policy Preferences, Party Loyalties and the Vote.”American Political Science Review, 73(4):1071-89.
Patterson,T.E.（1980）. The Mass Media Election: How Americans choose their President. New York: Praeger.
Pieters, R., & Warlop, L. (1999). Visual attention during brand choice: the impact of time pressure and task motivation. International Journal of Research inMarketing, 16(1), 1-16.
Pietinen, S., Bednarik, R., & Tukiainen, M. (2010). Shared Visual Attention in Collaborative Programming:A Descriptive Analysis. Proc. of CHASE'10, May 2, 2010, Cape Town, South Africa.
Poole, A., & Ball, L. J. (2005). Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research: Current status and future prospects. In C. Ghaoui (Ed.).Encyclopedia of human computer interaction, 211-219.
Popkin, Samuel L. (1991). The Reasoning Voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Porter, S., England, L., Juodis, M., ten Brinke, L., & Wilson, K. (2008). Is the face a window to the soul? Investigation of the accuracy of intuitive judgments of the 55 trustworthiness of human faces.Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 40(3), 171-177.
Putnam, R. D.( 2000). Bowling Alone. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Radach, R., Inhoff, A., & Heller, D. (2002).The role of attention and spatial selection in fluent reading. In E.Witruk, A. D. Friederici, & T. Lachmann (Eds.), Basic functions of language, reading, and reading disability (pp. 137-153). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.
Rayner, K.(2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search.The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457-1506.
Rayner, K., Smith, T., Malcolm, G. L., & Henderson, J. M. (2009).Eye movements and visual encoding during scene perception.Psychological Science, 20(1), 6-10.
Rosenberg, S. W., Bohan, L., McCafferty, P. & Harris, K. (1986). TheImage and the vote: The Effects of candidate presentation on voter preference. American Journal of Political Science, 30, 108-127.
Rosenberg, S., & Andrea S. (1972).“Structural Representations of Implicit Personality Theory.” In L. Berkowita (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 6 (pp. 235-97). New York: Academic Press.
Samochowiec, J., Wanke, M., & Fiedler, K. (2010).Political ideology at face value.Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1, 206-213.
Schiessl, M., Duda, S., Tholke, A., & Fischer, R. (2003).Eye-tracking and its application in usability and media research.MMIInteraktiv, 6, 41-50
Schill, D. (2008). The Visual Image and the Political Image: Finding a Place for Visual Communication in the Study of Political Communication. Paper presented at the 56 2008 International Communication Association Annual Convention. Montreal, Canada.
Stokes, D. E.(1966). Some dynamic elements of contests for the Presidency.American Political Science Review, 60,19-28.
Sussman, R. S., Campana, E., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Carlson, G. M. (2002). Verb-based access to instrument roles: Evidence from eye movements. Poster presented at the 8th annual Architectures and Mechanisms of Language Processing Conference, Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain.
Todorov, A., Mandisodza, A., Goren, A., & Hall, C. (2005). Inferences of competence from faces predict election outcomes. Science, 308(5728), 1623-1626.
Treisman, A. M. (1960). Contextual cues in selective listening.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 242-248.
Vassallo, S., Cooper, S. L., & Douglas, J. M. (2009). Visual scanning in the recognition of facial affect: Is there an observer sex difference? Journal of Vision, 9(3), 1–10.

Wänke, M., Samochowiec, J., & Landwehr, J. (2012). Facial politics: Political judgment based on looks. In J. Forgas, K. Fiedler, & C. Sedikides (Eds.), Social thinking and interpersonal behavior: Proceedings of the 14th Sydney symposium of social psychology. New York: Psychology Press.
Wattenberg, M. P. (1996). The Rise of Candidate-Centered Politics: Presidential Elections of The 1980. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
Whitely, Paul F. (1988). “The Causal Relationships between Issues Candidate Evaluations Party Identification and Vote Choice-The View From Rolling Thunder.”Journal of Politics, 50(4): 961-84.
Wu, C. J., & Cheng, Y. H. (2011). Eye movement in reading geometric texts: Allocating on text and figures.B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of the 35rd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 1, p. 516. Ankara, Turkey: PME.
Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.