3.2 Practical experiment

### 3.2.1 Quantitative analyses

#### 3.2.1.1 Comparison of traits for information processing I

As we have mentioned in Section 3.1, from the results of prototype experiments, we have proved the reliability and the reproducibility of our measurement system. Then, in a practical experiment, we have used them and gathered data, with the similar way of procedures and conditions applied in the prototype experiments. As the standard deviation of response time presented by letters was larger than those of sound voice, we have checked individual differences of the correlation coefficients between response time and the number of words. Along with the categorization of those correlation coefficients, we have divided students' types as traits of information processing I, Visual type and Auditory type. And then, comparing the average of reaction time between Visual and Auditory type (Figure 8), in the case of letters, Visual type (=2.01, SD = 0.92, N = 13) responded significantly faster than Auditory type (=2.65, SD = 0.98, (N = 31)) (Table 5) (t = 21.05, r < 0.001).

#### 3.2.1.2 Comparison of traits for information processing II

Figure 9 shows the different patterns of distributed response time (intermediate type of information processing I) between eidetic (N = 8 of 11) and adjusting type

Figure 8.

Comparison of reaction time between Visual and Auditory types (left: presented by sound voice; right presented by letters).

(N = 6 of 10), which were categorized traits by the differences of correlation coefficients between emotional and non-emotional contexts (eidetic type; X ≤ μ-σ, Adjusting type; X ≥ μ + σ) (Table 2). In the case of Adjusting type (N = 10), the average of response time of emotional contexts was significantly faster than those of

Results of tests, the significant differences of reaction time between visual and auditory types.

Comparison of reaction time between emotion and non-emotion (upper: Eidetic type; lower: Adjusting type).

Dual Loop Theory: Eidetic Feedback Control and Predictive Feedback Control

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89681

Figure 9.

Table 5.

61

Dual Loop Theory: Eidetic Feedback Control and Predictive Feedback Control DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89681

#### Figure 9.

larger. This means that there might be individual differences of information

As we have mentioned in Section 3.1, from the results of prototype experiments, we have proved the reliability and the reproducibility of our measurement system. Then, in a practical experiment, we have used them and gathered data, with the similar way of procedures and conditions applied in the prototype experiments. As the standard deviation of response time presented by letters was larger than those of sound voice, we have checked individual differences of the correlation coefficients between response time and the number of words. Along with the categorization of those correlation coefficients, we have divided students' types as traits of information processing I, Visual type and Auditory type. And then, comparing the average of reaction time between Visual and Auditory type (Figure 8), in the case of letters, Visual type (=2.01, SD = 0.92, N = 13) responded significantly faster than Auditory

Figure 9 shows the different patterns of distributed response time (intermediate type of information processing I) between eidetic (N = 8 of 11) and adjusting type

Comparison of reaction time between Visual and Auditory types (left: presented by sound voice; right presented

processing among students.

Assistive and Rehabilitation Engineering

Table 4.

Figure 8.

by letters).

60

3.2 Practical experiment

3.2.1 Quantitative analyses

3.2.1.1 Comparison of traits for information processing I

Examination of comparison between the first and the second response time.

type (=2.65, SD = 0.98, (N = 31)) (Table 5) (t = 21.05, r < 0.001).

3.2.1.2 Comparison of traits for information processing II

Comparison of reaction time between emotion and non-emotion (upper: Eidetic type; lower: Adjusting type).


#### Table 5.

Results of tests, the significant differences of reaction time between visual and auditory types.

(N = 6 of 10), which were categorized traits by the differences of correlation coefficients between emotional and non-emotional contexts (eidetic type; X ≤ μ-σ, Adjusting type; X ≥ μ + σ) (Table 2). In the case of Adjusting type (N = 10), the average of response time of emotional contexts was significantly faster than those of

Appendix 1 shows descriptive answers to the questionnaire about the comparison between auditory and visual presentation of testing. Two of four students, who are visual type, said that it was easier for them to decide responses or image by sound voice than by letters. On the other hand, all three students of Adjusting type

In Appendix 2, regarding interpersonal communication, which students are required to obtain in practical field for nursing, all three Adjusting type students have described that they think it is important. The others have described about the

All four members of Team B were interviewed on September 9th in 2018. SubB-2, however, did not appear at the appointment time. After getting appointment again, she appeared for the interview. She said that similar cases have repeatedly happened because it was nothing unusual to make misread message (which caused missing appointment). Concerning interpersonal communication, it has been difficult for her in collaborative working in the practical field and it was the best condition in 2015

In the case of SubB-1 and SubB-4, they both have talked about their strategies to communicate interactively in collaborative working, even at the specialized treatment department. It seemed that they were able to cope with any persons and cases.

There are a significant number of studies, which have been conducted about human information processing in the world [17, 18]. Every study is very important for us; on the other hand, most of them are still vague and unclear, because we need to observe real time while it is working, from outside. It should be difficult, however, to see inside of our mind directly. Therefore, we have developed the measurement of individual traits from cognitive aspects so that we can clarify human information processing and predict their behaviors. I would like to make it a meaningful measurement; however, it is still exploratory research and data analysis. Although there might be a lot of methods to find out the mechanism of human information processing [21, 22], there should be different approaches from each other to achieve a goal, depending on their own purposes. The end of this study is to improve personalized education, however, both the environments in society and educational field have been changing, which must be a lot of elements and always impact on our cognitive system, in other words, on the way of human information processing. This means that we always need to find out the problems which might

For instance, in our study case, we have supported collaborative learning in nursing class, which has been introduced for cutting age electronic equipment. It must help students when they start to work at hospital, coping with electronic equipment. On the other hand, they are required to obtain the skill of interactive communication with patients and coworkers. For this reason, the instructors have introduced the method of collaborative learning, which needs to divide students into teams with four members in each. It seems cumbersome to decide the members of teams, if instructors seek for effective learning, because they would be required to predict students' behaviors by analyzing their data, for instance, individual traits

have described their responses through self-evaluation by testing.

Dual Loop Theory: Eidetic Feedback Control and Predictive Feedback Control

interactive communication a little more subjectively.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89681

4.1 Meaning of clarifying human information processing

be courses of ill-success in education.

3.2.2.2 Interview

with Team B members.

4. Discussion

63

Figure 10. Comparison of scores first and second semester.

non-emotional contexts. This tendency is found in the patterns of the scatter diagram, which shows distributions of each response time how they diff between emotional and non-emotional contexts. On the other hand, in the case of Eidetic type (N = 11), there are no differences between them.

Figure 10 shows the quantitative interaction between two types of students, comparing their scores between the first and the second semesters (F = 5.3, p< 0.01). The average of Eidetic type in the first semester was better than that of Adjusting type; however, in the second semester, it was reversed.

#### 3.2.1.3 Comparison of team performance

This phenomenon should be examined in detail, checking whether the statistical results are right or not by seeing individual performances practically. Therefore, we have chosen team members whose team was success or ill-success in low- and highstakes' assessments. In the case of low-stakes assessments, Team B members' records were shown the best improvement among teams, comparing pre-post test scores. On the other hand, in the case of Team C, their records were the worst in class. Those tests conducted in the first semester, and the average of Team C (=77.5) was lower than Team B (=87.3). In the second semester, traits of the whole tendency of teams were the same; however, looking into individual performances, their tendencies were also the same as Figure 10. For instance, both scores of eidetic type; SubB-2 and SubC-2 in the second semester were lower than in the first semester, on the other hand, in the case of Adjusting type, SubB-1 and SubC-3, their scores in the second semester, became much better than those of the first semester.

#### 3.2.2 Qualitative analyses

#### 3.2.2.1 Description

In order to check them from another viewpoint practically, their descriptions of answering questionnaires were compared among types of information processing (Appendix 1 and 2).

#### Dual Loop Theory: Eidetic Feedback Control and Predictive Feedback Control DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89681

Appendix 1 shows descriptive answers to the questionnaire about the comparison between auditory and visual presentation of testing. Two of four students, who are visual type, said that it was easier for them to decide responses or image by sound voice than by letters. On the other hand, all three students of Adjusting type have described their responses through self-evaluation by testing.

In Appendix 2, regarding interpersonal communication, which students are required to obtain in practical field for nursing, all three Adjusting type students have described that they think it is important. The others have described about the interactive communication a little more subjectively.

#### 3.2.2.2 Interview

All four members of Team B were interviewed on September 9th in 2018. SubB-2, however, did not appear at the appointment time. After getting appointment again, she appeared for the interview. She said that similar cases have repeatedly happened because it was nothing unusual to make misread message (which caused missing appointment). Concerning interpersonal communication, it has been difficult for her in collaborative working in the practical field and it was the best condition in 2015 with Team B members.

In the case of SubB-1 and SubB-4, they both have talked about their strategies to communicate interactively in collaborative working, even at the specialized treatment department. It seemed that they were able to cope with any persons and cases.
