Learning science in virtual reality multimedia environments: Role of methods and media

Journal of Educational Psychology

Volumn 94, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 598-610

  Moreno, Roxana ^a   Mayer, Richard E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036741857     PISSN: 00220663     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.598     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Adobe. (1995). Photoshop 4.2 [Computer program]. San Jose: Author.
2. Barfield W., & Hendrix C.(1995). The effect of update rate on the sense of presence within virtual environments. Virtual Reality: The Journal of the Virtual Reality Society, 1, 3-16.
3. Dede, C., Salzman, M., Loftin, R. B., & Ash, K. (2000). The design of immersive virtual learning environments: Fostering deep understandings of complex scientific knowledge. In M. J. Jacobson & R. B. Kozma (Eds.), Innovations in science and mathematics education: Advanced designs for technologies of learning (pp. 361-413). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Dewey, J. (1913). Interest and effort in education. Cambridge, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
5. Durlach, N. I., & Mayor, A. S. (Eds.). (1995). Virtual reality: Scientific and technological challenges. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
6. Fleming, M. L., & Levie, W. H. (1993). Instructional message design: Principles from the behavioral and cognitive sciences. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
7. Hoffman, H. G., Prothero, J., Wells, M. J., & Groen, J. (1998). Virtual chess: Meaning enhances users' sense of presence in virtual environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 10, 251-263.
8. Jacobson, M. J., & Kozma, R. B. (Eds.). (2000). Innovations in science and mathematics education: Advanced designs for technologies of learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Johnson, L. W., Rickel, J., Stiles, R., & Munro, A. (1998). Integrating pedagogical agents into virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 7, 523-546.
10. Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
11. Kinetix. (1999). 3D Studio Max [Computer program]. San Jose: Author.
12. Lajoie, S. P. (Ed.). (2000). Computers as cognitive tools: No more walls (Vol. 2). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Lester,J.C., Stone,B.A., & Stelling,G.D. (1998). Lifelike pedagogical agents for mixed-initiative problem solving in constructivist learning environments. InA. Kobsa (Ed.), User modeling and user-adapted interaction (pp. 1-46). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.
14. Macromedia. (1997). SoundEdit 16 [Computer program]. San Francisco: Author.
15. Mayer, R.E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Mayer,R.E., Heiser,J., & Lonn,S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 187-198.
17. Mayer, R.E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 312-320.
18. McLellan,H. (1996). Virtual realities. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 457487). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.
19. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R.E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity effects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358-368.
20. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R.E. (2000). A coherence effect in multimedia learning: The case for minimizing irrelevant sounds in the design of multimedia instructional messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 117-125.
21. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R.E. (2002). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 156-163.
22. Moreno,R., Mayer,R.E., Spires,H., & Lester,J. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction, 19, 177-213.
23. Mousavi,S., Low,R., & Sweller,J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 319-334.
24. Norman, D.A. (1990). The design of everyday things. New York: Doubleday.
25. Norman, D.A. (1993). Things that make us smart. Reading, MA: Perseus Books.
26. Psotka, J. (1995). Immersive training systems: Virtual reality and education and training. Instructional Science, 23, 405-423.
27. Regian, J.W., Shebilske, W., & Monk, J. (1992). A preliminary empirical evaluation of virtual reality as an instructional medium for visual-spatial tasks. Journal of Communication, 42, 136-149.
28. Renninger, K.A., Hidi, S., & Krapp, A. (Eds.). (1992). The role of interest in learning and development. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Salomon, G. (1979). Media and symbol systems as related to cognition and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 131-148.
30. Schank, R. (1997). Virtual learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
31. Seidel, R.J., & Chatelier, P.R. (Eds.). (1997). Virtual reality, training's future? Perspectives on virtual reality and related emerging technologies. New York: Plenum.
32. Sheridan, T.B. (1992). Musings on telepresence and virtual presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 1, 375-403.
33. Slater, M., & Wilbur, S. (1997). A framework for immersive virtual environments (FIVE): Speculations on the role of presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6, 603-616.
34. Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Camberwell, Victoria, Australia: ACER Press.
35. Thurman, R.A., & Russo, T. (2000). Using virtual reality for training. In H.F. O'Neil & D.H. Andrews (Eds.), Aircrew training and assessment (pp. 85-103). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. Welch, R.B., Blackman, T.T., Liu, A., Mellers, B.A., & Stark, L.W. (1996). The effects of pictorial realism, delay of visual feedback and observer interactivity on the subjective sense of presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 5, 263-273.
37. Wetzel, D., Radtke, P., & Stern, H. (1994). Instructional effectiveness of video media. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
38. Witmer, B.G., & Singer, M.J. (1998). Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 7, 225-240