多媒體影音教材已被廣泛使用於網路學習之教學場域，並且已發展出許多不同的多媒體影音教材型態，這些不同的多媒體影音教材型態，以及教材的組成元素如何影響數位學習成效值得深入探究。本研究使用可攜式眼動追蹤儀及穩定控制之實驗環境，隨機選取某公立高中高三普通班十六位學生進行眼動實驗，由受測學生依序觀看目前被廣泛採用的圖像影音動態教學式（picture in picture, PIP）及平面講述靜態教學式（voice over presentation, VOP）二種不同型態多媒體影音教材之興趣區（頭像、投影片、字幕、標題），探討包括三個眼動指標（凝視時間、凝視次數、回視次數）與學習成效之間的相關聯性。 結果顯示受測學習者利用圖像影音動態教學式（PIP）多媒體影音教材學習具有顯著的學習成效，而平面講述靜態教學式（VOP）則無顯著的學習成效。此外；圖像影音動態教學式（PIP）多媒體影音教材學習成效顯著優於平面講述靜態教學式（VOP）多媒體影音教材。再則經由皮爾森（Pearson）積差相關係數分析結果顯示，文字型認知風格學習者，使用平面講述靜態教學式（VOP）多媒體影音教材之投影片及標題興趣區之凝視時間、凝視次數及回視次數與學習者後測成績，呈顯著高度正相關，圖像型認知風格學習者則無。圖像影音動態教學式（PIP）多媒體影音教材之投影片、頭像、字幕及標題興趣區之凝視時間、凝視次數及回視次數與學習者後測成績，皆未呈現任何顯著的相關性。最後，圖像影音動態教學式（PIP）與平面講述靜態教學式（VOP）二種不同型態多媒體影音教材，皆以投影片區獲得最多的凝視時間、凝視次數與回視次數，其次為教師的頭像，最少的為標題區。 / Multimedia audio and video materials have been broadly applied to the teaching field of web-based learning, and various multimedia audio and video materials have been developed. It is worth studying the effect of such multimedia audio and video materials and the component elements on digital learning outcome. With a portable eye tracker and stably controlled experiment environment, 16 G12 students, in a public senior high school, are randomly selected for the eye movement experiment. The participants would sequentially view the area of interests (profiles, slides, subtitles, titles) of two types of multimedia audio and video materials, picture in picture (PIP) and voice over presentation (VOP), to discuss the correlations between three eye movement indices (fixation time, number of fixation times, number of regression times) and learning outcome. The result reveals that learners using picture in picture (PIP) present significant learning outcome, while ones with voice over presentation (VOP) do not appear remarkable learning outcome. Moreover, picture in picture (PIP) notably outperforms voice over presentation (VOP). The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient analysis result shows that the learners with verbal-oriented cognitive style present notably positive correlations between the fixation time, number of fixation times, and number of regression times for slides and titles in voice over presentation (VOP) and the posttest results, while those with image-oriented cognitive style do not. The fixation time, number of fixation times, and number of regression times for slides, profile, subtitles, and titles in picture in picture (PIP) do not show significant correlations with learners’ posttest results. Finally, both picture in picture (PIP) and voice over presentation (VOP) appear the most fixation time, number of fixation times, and number of regression times for slides, followed by teachers’ profiles, and titles the least.