Social cues in multimedia learning: Role of speaker's voice

Journal of Educational Psychology

Volumn 95, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 419-425

  Mayer, Richard E ^a   Sobko, Kristina ^a   Mautone, Patricia D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038609678     PISSN: 00220663     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.419     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Beck, I., McKeown, M. G., Sandora, C, Kucan, L., & Worthy, J. (1996). Questioning the author: A yearlong classroom implementation to engage students in text. Elementary School Journal, 96, 385-414.
2. Cassell, J., Sullivan, J., Prevost, S., & Churchill, E. (2000). Embodied conversational agents. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293-332.
4. Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. C. (1982). Educational outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 237-248.
5. Graesser, A. C., Bowers, C., Olde, B., & Pomeroy, V. (1999). Who said what? Source memory for narrative and character agents in literary short stories. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 284-300.
6. Graesser, A. C., Person, N. K., & Magliano, J. P. (1995). Collaborative dialogue patterns in naturalistic one-to-one tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 495-522.
7. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation, In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics (Vol. 3, pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
8. Lester, J. C., Towns, S. G., Callaway, C. B., Voerman, J. L., & Fitzgerald, P. J. (2000). Deictic and emotive communication in animated pedagogical agents. In J. Cassell, J. Sullivan, S. Prevost, & E. Churchill (Eds.), Embodied conversational agents (pp. 123-154). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Lester, J. C., Voerman, J. L., Towns, S. G., & Callaway, C. B. (1999). Deitic believability: Coordinating gesture, locomotion, and speech in lifelike pedagogic agents. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 13, 383-414.
10. Macromedia, (1997). Director 6.0 [Computer program], San Francisco: Author.
11. Mayer, R. E. (1999). The promise of educational psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
12. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. 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.
14. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). Engaging students in active learning: The case for personalized multimedia messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 724-733.
15. 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.
16. Nass, C., Isbister, K., & Lee, E. (2000). Truth is beauty: Researching embodied conversational agents. In J. Cassell, J. Sullivan, S. Prevost, & E. Churchill (Eds.), Embodied conversational agents (pp. 374-402). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17. Nass, C., & Lee, K. M. (2001). Does computer-synthesized speech manifest personality? Experimental tests of recognition, similarity-attraction, and consistency-attraction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 171-181.
18. Oviatt, S., & Adams, B. (2000). Developing and evaluating conversational agents. In J. Cassell, J. Sullivan, S. Prevost, & E. Churchill (Eds.), Embodied conversational agents (pp. 287-318). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Paas, F., & Van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (1993). The efficiency of instructional conditions: An approach to combining mental-effort and performance measures. Human Factors, 35, 737-743.
20. Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
21. Rickel, J., & Johnson, W. L. (1999). Animated agents for procedural training in virtual reality: Perception, cognition, and motor control. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 13, 343-382.
22. Rickel, J., & Johnson, W. L. (2000). Task-oriented collaboration with embodied agents in virtual worlds. In J. Cassell, J. Sullivan, S. Prevost, & E. Churchill (Eds.), Embodied conversational agents (pp. 95-122). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. Schraw, G., & Brunning, R. (1996). Readers' implicit models of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 290-305.
24. Sweller, J. C. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Camberwell, Australia: ACER Press.
25. Zahn, C. J., & Hopper, R. (1985). Measuring language attitudes: The speech evaluation instrument. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 4, 113-122.