Commentary 21 Information Retrieval and Comprehension in Humans and Computers by David H. Jonassen University of Colorado at Denver Assumptions In one sense, I feel that it is unfair to comment on Professor Miller's paper, since so much has changed since it was published in 1968. Technology has shrunk in size and increased in power by orders of magnitude. Theories of learning and information processing have transcended one or more paradigm shifts. So, reconciling what I know now with what Professor Miller wrote two and one half decades ago appears to give me an unfair advantage. What makes it a reasonable task, however, is that, in light of these technological and theoretical changes, so many of Professor Miller's ideas about spatial cueing and imaging for facilitating information retrieval remain cogent and plausible. So, I will assume the challenge by first stating some fundamental assumptions of my research and beliefs about learning and the future of technology and later enumerate some research conclusions related to retrieval of information and then comprehension of information, all the while trying to relate the research to Professor Miller's remarks. Second, you should know that my comments in this brief paper summarize my personal
/lp/association-for-computing-machinery/information-retrieval-and-comprehension-in-humans-and-computers-505WaMkZ4t