{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01661631419939577, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0030211480362537764, 'mean_word_length': 5.564356435643564, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
During automatic program animation, explanations after animations have greater impact than before animations

Little is known about the effectiveness of automatic explanations in educational program visualization. We designed a study in which the order of animations and related explanations was manipulated. Two groups of a total of 18 participants interacted with either animation-first or explanation-first version of a tool. The results indicate that animation-first approach is significantly more effective. On the grounds of these findings and students' input about the explanation generation and layout, we discuss the design implications of the findings.