SOFTENG 702 Literature Review: Presentation Software Raoul DCunha - - PDF document

SOFTENG 702 Literature Review: Presentation Software

Raoul D’Cunha ID: 1845734 UPI: rdcu001

ABSTRACT

The rising popularity of computers have resulted in the devel-

• pment of a multitude of tools that aim to simplify complex

task to the end users. Delivering effective presentations is one

• f the tasks faced by millions of users worldwide, for a wide

variety of scenarios ranging from education to business. Mi- crosoft PowerPoint is a widely used presentation tool that is used by people in a wide variety of fields to create presen-

• tations. The rising popularity and market dominance of the

Microsoft Office suite has helped boost the popularity and use of this tool in recent years. The widespread use of PowerPoint however raises multiples questions regarding its use and abuse. This literature review will aim to address two of the main ones. The first issue that will be addressed will be about how to increase the effec- tiveness of a PowerPoint presentation. This review will also look at other alternative to PowerPoint which aim to provide a dynamic and nonlinear way of creating and delivering pre- sentations.

INTRODUCTION

Microsoft PowerPoint is a widely used presentation tool that is used by people in a wide variety of fields to create presenta-

• tions. PowerPoint was developed as a replacement for tradi-

tional overhead and 35mm slides by a Silicon Valley startup named Forethought. This startup was then acquired by Mi- crosoft who bundled the tool in their popular Microsoft Office suite. The rising popularity and market dominance of the Microsoft Office suite has helped boost the popularity and use of this tool in recent years. PowerPoint has become so widespread and commonplace, that the term PowerPoint has become syn-

• nymous with presentations. The widespread use of Pow-

erPoint presentations however raise multiple questions and issues mainly about how PowerPoint presentations can be made more effective (described in [2], [6] and [4]) and also about suitable alternatives to PowerPoint, which break away from its linear and static nature to produce compelling non- linear and dynamic presentations( described in [5], [1] and [3]).

IS THERE POWER IN POWERPOINT? A FIELD TEST OF THE EFFICACY OF POWERPOINT ON MEMORY AND RE- CALL OF RELIGIOUS SERMONS

[2] evaluates the effectiveness of PowerPoint presentations in a non-classroom field setting and determines whether the use

• f this software has any impact on the learning ability of the
• audience. The context of a religious sermon was used to con-

duct an evaluative study on this topic. [2] developed two Hypothesises that were used to evaluate the problem. The first one proposed that Individuals will have greater recall of content of PowerPoint slides that incorporate visual images along with words than for PowerPoint presen- tations that use only visual images or only words. The sec-

• nd Hypothesis proposed the use of PowerPoint visual graph-

ics will have no effect on individual recall of general sermon content; subjects will not demonstrate greater recall of gen- eral information from sermons that incorporate PowerPoint graphics than from those sermons that do not make use of such support. The study tested the retention and recall of the weekly ser- mons delivered by the pastor by quizzing the subjects with the help of a questionnaire a week a week after the deliv- ery of each sermon. The study examined the effectiveness of delivering a PowerPoint presentation containing only words to presentations that contained only visual images and also with presentations containing both words and images. A con- trol group was also formed and the participants of this group were subjected to presentations without the use of PowerPoint

• Software. The questionnaires tested the recall of the content
• f the slides and of general sermon information on the sub-

jects. The results of the study provide an interesting perspective

• n the effectiveness of PowerPoint presentations.

The re- searchers concluded PowerPoint presentation form had an insubstantial effect of the recall of information from the sermons. Subjects participating in text only presentations demonstrated recall of seminar information when compared to subjects participation in visual images only and text and visual images presentations. An important finding from this study was the fact that there was no increase in the recall of the PowerPoint subjects when compared to the control group. Poorly formatted PowerPoint presentations caused a decline in the recall of the subjects. However, positive PowerPoint formats had no effect. The limitations of this study primarily stem from the context

• f the study. There is usually very little motivation for the

audience to remember the contents of a Presentation in a reli- gious sermon setting. Hence these findings cannot be applied to scenarios where the subjects are motivated to focus and re- member the presentation, such as in a classroom setting. In a classroom scenario, the students usually take down notes to supplement their learning, and it would be useful to evaluate

the effectiveness of PowerPoint presentations when coupled with student notes. This paper presents an interesting study

• f the effectiveness of PowerPoint, and it shows that a presen-

tation can deliver a lot of impact on the audience, if thought is put into its content.

THE ROLE OF INTEREST AND IMAGES IN SLIDEWARE PRESENTATIONS

[6] proposes and conducts a study on the importance and role

• f images in a slideshow presentation. The paper aimed to ad-

dress the issue of whether images played a significant part in the recognition and recall of a presentation, when compared to presentations incorporating just text. A usability study was conducted on three different kinds of presentations Im- age congruent (presentations with images that were relevant to the topic), Image Incongruent (presentations with images that were irrelevant to the topic) and text based presentations (which provided summaries of what the speaker was speaking about). The first hypothesis proposed in this paper theorised that the Image Congruent condition will lead to superior learning out- comes as measured by performance on recall, recognition and transfer questions compared to the Image Incongruent and Text Based conditions. Another hypothesis presented in the paper was the theory that participants will find both the image based presentations more interesting that the text ones. The paper also hypothesised that the text based presentation will result in superior learning outcomes that the image incongru- ent ones. The study was conducted on the test participants by testing their recognition and recall after the lecture was delivered. This was done through the use of a questionnaire, and candi- dates were also made to record their confidence level for each answer that they answered. The results of the study indicated that the participants found the image based presentations more interesting that the text based ones. However, interest does not seem to have an effect

• n the recognition and recall of the information, as candidates

exposed to the incongruent presentations performed worse than the text based ones. They also recorded a lower con- fidence level, on average, for their answers. However, there was no significant difference between the image congruent and the text based presentation results. These results support the first hypothesis that the Image Congruent condition would lead to superior learning outcomes. The study however, does not aim to test the long term recog- nition and recall of the subjects. This would have been a cru- cial metric to assess the importance and role of images in a

• slideshow. However, just like [2], this paper shows the effec-

tiveness of placing relevant images in a presentation and also

• f a text only presentation.

THE PERSUASIVE POWER OF POWERPOINT PRESENTA- TIONS

[4] performed a study on persuasive power of PowerPoint pre-

• sentations. The aim of the study conducted by this paper was

to identify if there was a difference between the persuasive effectiveness of information between PowerPoint slides that were technologically sophisticated and PowerPoint slides that were not technologically sophisticated. The context of this study was the presentation of a football scouts report on a po- tential recruit, which was then evaluated by the test subjects to judge the recruits potential success. The study asked novices and experts in the field of football to review data for a possible recruit for their university football

• team. The data that was presented to these test subjects were

displayed using three degrees of technological sophistication low (which included a typed summary of statistics), moderate (which included printed PowerPoint slides) and high (which included computer based animated PowerPoint charts). The authors proposed that in the absence of prior knowledge, novices would use source cues to validate and prioritise in- formation that is given to them. This causes a bias in the judgement of a novice, as it can cause the perception that all expert sources are valid and hence they tend to categorise the information as important. Experts, whose decision making heuristics are refined from prior evaluation of information, tend to evaluate the information based on these heuristics and thus are more likely to make better decisions. This hypothesis was tested in the study by displaying either a low, medium or high presentation to either an expert or a novice user and then recording their response by asking them to conduct an evaluation of the recruit by using a ques-

• tionnaire. The results of the study indicated that the experts

rated the projected success of the recruit much lower than the

• novices. This agreed with their proposed hypothesis, as the

novices tended to follow the views and opinions of the scouts positive rating of the recruit. The novices also rated the re- cruit higher when presented with the high mode of presenta- tion. Hence, the results of the study indicate that the technologi- cal sophistication of a presentation can have an impact on the way that the audience evaluates the presented information. Novices generally tend to positively inflate their evaluations when presented with a sophisticated presentation when com- pared to experts. This could mean that people in general tend to be more swayed when new and cutting edge technology is used to make a point. One of the significant limitations of this paper is that it doesnt evaluate the persuasiveness of technology (Microsoft Power- Point) over time. It is possible for audiences to get habituated to a certain technology, and this might cause a reduction in the persuasiveness of that technology. However, this paper presents an interesting perspective on how Microsoft Power- Point can be used to cause a much more positive impression amongst audiences, when used effectively and appropriately.

NEXTSLIDEPLEASE: AUTHORING AND DELIVERING AG- ILE MULTIMEDIA PRESENTATIONS

[5] describes NextSlidePlease, a slideware application that was created to address various challenges present in popu- lar presentation software, notably Microsoft PowerPoint. The linear presentation structure of PowerPoint presents various

navigational problems to the speaker, especially when faced with constraints such as time and structure. The contribu- tions of this paper also includes a presentation analysis al- gorithm that simplifies generation of dynamic presentations, and a time selection and a path selection algorithm that helps with the prioritisation of content in a presentation. One of the main novel features in NextSlidePlease is a Graph- based authoring tool. This tool displays a two-dimensional directed and weighted graph that lets the presenter define some of the most likely paths in a presentation. This function- ality is novel because it enables the presenter to create a effec- tive presentation by encode complex relationships right into the slide deck. The Presentation analysis algorithm include in NextSlidePlease automatically discovers sections and subsec- tions in a presentation, based on the content of the slides. The algorithm then creates meaningful edges between the slides, so as to reduce slide creation time. The Path suggestion algorithm implemented in the tool also endeavours to speed up slide creation time by suggesting time costs and edges to other relevant slides, from the current

• slide. The Time management algorithm displays suggested

paths from the path suggestion algorithm based on the over- all time left in the presentation. This enables the presenter to dynamically alter the structure of the presentation based on constraints such as time, during the presentation itself. The application was evaluated by conducting two compara- tive usability evaluations. The first one was with Microsoft PowerPoint, while the other was with CounterPoint. The par- ticipants were asked to give a presentation in both of the stud-

• ies. The participants were informed that they had 10 min-

utes to talk during the presentation, however this duration was randomly increased or decreased by approximately 2 minutes for each participant, to simulate real life conditions. The re- sults from both studies indicated that the participants found the time management functionality in NextSlidePlease to be quite useful during the presentation and they felt that it helped improve their awareness of the time that was left remaining. Evaluation was also conducted for the Time management al- gorithm and the Presentation analysis algorithm. The Time management algorithm was evaluated by getting participants to create presentation paths that created a presentation with minimal time cost, creating a presentation that maximised the priority so that all the important slides were visited and com- paring the results with the algorithm. The algorithm consis- tently outperformed the users and received favourably scores from the users during the evaluation. The Presentation anal- ysis algorithm was evaluated in a similar way and the partici- pants felt that the algorithm accurately captured the dynamics

• f the presentation in most cases.

The contributions and findings of this paper provide valuable insight with regards to creation and presentation of dynamic

• presentations. However, the NextSlidePlease tool could be

further expanded by allowing the creation of slides in the tool, instead of importing. This could enable the users to manually

• r automatically (using the algorithms described above) de-

fine relationships and paths during slide creation time, thus speeding up the slide creation process.

PRESENTATION SOFTWARE SUPPORTING VISUAL DE- SIGN: DISPLAYING SPATIAL RELATIONSHIPS WITH A ZOOMING USER INTERFACE

[1] compares and contrasts between Microsoft PowerPoint, a commonly used presentation software and Prezi, a tool which enables the creation of presentations that use an infinite can- vas and employ a zoomable user interface. The paper describes the key characteristics of these pro- grams by focusing on four major points Document layout, Presentation Sequence, Context and Animation and move- ment. Microsoft PowerPoint enforces a rigid slide based metaphor that visually separates each element or slide from each other. Prezi follows an Infinite Canvas based docu- ment layout, which frees the user from the boundaries of slide based tools. The interactive and zoomable nature of Prezi presentations breaks away from the fixed and linear sequences of Power- Point presentations, while maintaining context during smooth

• transitions. Animation and movement is afforded for in Pow-

erPoint through the use of animations, while Prezis pan and zoom feature physically moves the canvas across the screen during transitions. A case study is then done on the use of Prezi to display a Wireflow diagram for a web application. Prezis unique features are highlighted in this case study by showing how its features can be used to reinforce logical re- lationships between components of the User Interface of the application. I feel that a thorough comparison between the two tools was done by the paper. I also agree with the authors sentiment that there are different use cases for both tools, and an effec- tive presentation can be created from both depending on the scenario and context.

HYPERSLIDES: DYNAMIC PRESENTATION PROTOTYP- ING

[3] describes dynamic presentation prototyping using a pre- sentation tool called HyperSlides. HyperSlides uses a tex- tual markup language to describe and generate scenes that are structured hierarchically and are hyperlinked and designed in a consistent style. HyperSlides enables flexible rehearsal and delivery and reduces creation time when compared to linear presentation software such as Microsoft PowerPoint. HyperSlides was designed to address various issues with ex- isting Presentation Software. Slide creators are able to create HyperSlide presentations by planning with points. This is af- forded through the use of hierarchically organized scenes in the system. The system also enables the generation of slides from scenes, which automatically link to one another. These scenes are designed using general design principles, making them aesthetic and consistent. The scenes are also able to ex- pand into points, which can be furthered expanded into fur- ther details. All this can be done dynamically, without break- ing the flow of the presentation.

A research study conducted by the authors prior to the de- velopment of the tool indicated that the linear nature of Pow- erPoint presentations was too restrictive in some scenarios. There was a need for a tool that enabled dynamic prototyp- ing of presentations. The authors hypothesised that the time saved by not manipulating formatting, layout and other slides activated could be reallocated towards generating slides that told stores and enabled the presenter to be spontaneous while

• presenting. This functionality was implemented in Hyper-

Slides through the use of scenes and links. The tool was evaluated by conducting a study on the effec- tiveness on its dynamic prototyping and presentation capabil-

• ities. The candidates authored and rehearsed a HyperSlide

presentation and then took turns in delivering it. Their feed- back was collected after their presentation through the use

• f a questionnaire presented to the candidates. The results

from the study indicated that the participants found the tool to be very flexible with regards to the dynamic presentation approach offered by the tool. They felt that the resulting talks were clear in both structure and style and hence confirmed the dynamic prototyping and presentation nature of the tool. A key drawback of the tool is that It only has support for very primitive multimedia capabilities. Right now, the tool only supports text and images, and this is very restrictive to a user wanting to create a dynamic and visually appealing presenta-

• tion. Also some of the feedback gathered from the users in-

dicated that the scene functionality could use some improve- ment and that the tool should incorporate scenes made by de-

• signers. Overall, this HyperSlides seems to be a quick and

easy to use prototyping and presentation tool that can be com- plimented with PowerPoint to generate dynamic slides.

SUMMARY

The summary of the findings of this literature review project are described in this section. Results for [2] and [6] indicate that there is no significant difference between textual Pow- erPoint slides and slides with images. Adding images to a presentation increases audience interest in the presentation. However it does not help increase the recognition and recall

• f information for the audience. The relevancy of images

however does matter for recognition and recall. [2] and [6] both show that having images irrelevant to the context of the slides can cause a detriment in this area. The findings from [4] indicate that the sophistication of the slides also matter, in scenarios where evaluation might be undertaken by the audi-

• ence. It is shown that this effect is more significant on novices

than on experts, for the particular problem domain of the pre- sentation. [5] shows how the linear nature of PowerPoint slideshows can be overcome by using a directed graph based tool. The dy- namic nature of the presentations in [5], [1], and [3] also show different methods by which the linear nature of PowerPoint presentation can be overcome to deliver dynamic presenta- tion that are not only suited to the target audience, but which also comply to time constraints.

FUTURE WORK

While a lot of work has been undertaken in this topic, most

• f the studies on the effectiveness of PowerPoint were un-

dertaken using similar contexts (e.g. A Classroom). Further research in other scenarios and contexts would be useful, for e.g. more persuasive situations like the proposal for a new business plan which would help estimate the effectiveness of the presentations. Further work can also be undertaken on developing features and functionality in the PowerPoint alternatives presented above, to make them feature rich and thus even more viable alternatives to PowerPoint. Research could also be under- taken to show which tool would be more appropriate in which scenario, as there would still be a lot of places where Power- Point cannot be replaced.

REFERENCES

• 1. Bean, J. Presentation software supporting visual design:

Displaying spatial relationships with a zooming user

• interface. In Professional Communication Conference

(IPCC), 2012 IEEE International (Oct 2012), 1–6.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.ezproxy.auckland.ac. nz/xpls/icp.jsp?arnumber=6408630&tag=1.

• 2. Buchko, A. A., Buchko, K. J., and Meyer, J. M. Is there

power in powerpoint? a field test of the efficacy of powerpoint on memory and recall of religious sermons. In Computers in Human Behavior (2012), 688 – 695.

http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.auckland. ac.nz/science/article/pii/S0747563211002603.

• 3. Edge, D., Savage, J., and Yatani, K. Hyperslides:

Dynamic presentation prototyping. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ’13, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2013), 671–680. http://dl.acm.org.ezproxy.auckland.ac.

nz/citation.cfm?id=2470749.

• 4. Guadagno, R. E., Sundie, J. M., Hardison, T. A., and

Cialdini, R. B. The persuasive power of powerpoint®

• presentations. In Proceedings of the 6th International

Conference on Persuasive Technology: Persuasive Technology and Design: Enhancing Sustainability and Health, PERSUASIVE ’11, ACM (New York, NY, USA, 2011), 2:1–2:4.

http://dl.acm.org.ezproxy.auckland.ac.nz/ citation.cfm?id=2467803.2467805&coll=DL&dl=ACM.

• 5. Spicer, R., Lin, Y.-R., Kelliher, A., and Sundaram, H.

Nextslideplease: Authoring and delivering agile multimedia presentations. ACM Trans. Multimedia

• Comput. Commun. Appl. 8, 4 (Nov. 2012), 53:1–53:20.

http://dl.acm.org.ezproxy.auckland.ac.nz/ citation.cfm?id=2379790.2379795&coll=DL&dl=ACM.

• 6. Tangen, J. M., Constable, M. D., Durrant, E., Teeter, C.,

Beston, B. R., and Kim, J. A. The role of interest and images in slideware presentations. In Computers Education (2011), 865 – 872.

http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.auckland. ac.nz/science/article/pii/S0360131510003209.