Raising cognitive load with linear multimedia to promote conceptual change

Science Education

Volumn 92, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 278-296

  Muller, Derek A ^a   Sharma, Manjula D ^a   Reimann, Peter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 40949149181     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20244     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
2. Carlsen, W. S. (2007). Language and science learning. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 57-74). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293-332.
4. Chi, M. T. H., & Ohlsson, S. (2005). Complex declarative learning. In K. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 371-399). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
5. Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182.
6. Chi, M. T. H., Slotta, J. D., & de Leeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 4, 27-43.
7. Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 42, 21-29.
8. Cook, M. P. (2006). Visual representations in science education: The influence of prior knowledge and cognitive load theory on instructional design principles. Science Education, 90, 1073-1091.
9. Cox, R., Mckendree, J., Tobin, R., Lee, J., & Mayes, T. (1999). Vicarious learning from dialogue and discourse. Instructional Science, 27, 431-458.
10. Diakidoy, I. N., Kendeou, P., & Ioannides, C. (2003). Reading about energy: The effects of text structure in science learning and conceptual change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 335-356.
11. diSessa, A. A. (1996). What do "just plain folk" know about physics? In D. R. Olson (Ed.), Handbook of education and human development: New models of learning, teaching and schooling (pp. 705-730). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
12. diSessa, A. A. (2006). A history of conceptual change research: Threads and fault lines. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 265-282). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
13. Gobet, F. (2005). Chunking models of expertise: Implications for education. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 183-204.
14. Greeno, J. G. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53, 5-26.
15. Guzzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V., & Gamas, W. S. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 116-159.
16. Guzzetti, B. J., Williams, W. O., Skeels, S. A., & Wu, S. M. (1997). Influence of text structure on learning counterintuitive physics concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 701-719.
17. Hake, R. R. (1992). Socratic pedagogy in the introductory physics laboratory. The Physics Teacher, 30, 546-552.
18. Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement vs. traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 64-74.
19. Halloun, I. A., & Hestenes, D. (1985). The initial knowledge state of college physics students. American Journal of Physics, 53, 1043-1055.
20. Halloun, I. A., & Hestenes, D. (1995). Interpreting the Force Concept Inventory. The Physics Teacher, 33, 502-506.
21. Henderson, C. R. (2002). Common concerns about the Force Concept Inventory. The Physics Teacher, 40, 542-547.
22. Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force Concept Inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30, 141-158.
23. Holland, J. H., Holyoak, K. J., Nisbett, R. E., & Thagard, P. R. (1986). Induction: Processes of inference, learning, and discovery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24. Holyoak, K. (2005). Analogy. In K. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 117-142). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
25. Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38, 23-31.
26. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1998). Levels of expertise and instructional design. Human Factors, 40, 1-17.
27. Langley, P., & Simon, H. A. (1995). Applications of machine learning and rule induction. Communications of the ACM, 38, 54-64.
28. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday live. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
29. Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32, 1-19.
30. Mayer, R. E. (Ed.). (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge, England; Cambridge University Press.
31. Mayer, R. E., & Jackson, J. (2005). The case for coherence in scientific explanations: Quantitative details can hurt qualitative understanding. Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied, 11, 13-18.
32. Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user's manual. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
33. McClosky, M. (1983). Intuitive physics. Scientific American, 248, 122-130.
34. McDermott, L. C. (1991). What we teach and what is learned - Closing the gap. American Journal of Physics, 59, 301-315.
35. McDermott, L. C., & Shaffer, P. S. (2001). Tutorials in introductory physics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
36. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. The Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.
37. Muller, D. A., Bewes, J., Sharma, M. D., & Reimann, P. (in press). Saying the wrong thing: Improving learning with multimedia by including misconceptions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. http://www.blackwell- synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00248.x (Online Early).
38. Muller, D. A., Sharma, M. D., Eklund, J., & Reimann, P. (2007). Conceptual change through vicarious learning in an authentic physics setting. Instructional Science, 35(6), 519-533.
39. Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. M. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38, 63-71.
40. Paas, F., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Adam, J. J. (1994). Measurement of cognitive load in instructional research. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79, 419-430.
41. Palmer, D. H. (2003). Investigating the relationship between refutational text and conceptual change. Science Education, 87, 663-684.
42. Reimann, P., & Schult, T. J. (1996). Turning examples into cases: Acquiring knowledge structures for analogical problem solving. Educational Psychologist, 31, 123-132.
43. Rieber, L. P., Tzeng, S.-C., & Tribble, K. (2004). Discovery learning, representation, and explanation within a computer-based simulation: Finding the right mix. Learning and Instruction, 14, 307-323.
44. Ronen, M., & Eliahu, M. (2000). Simulation - A bridge between theory and reality: The case of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16, 14-26.
45. Roschelle, J. (1992). Learning by collaborating: Convergent conceptual change. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 235-276.
46. Savinainen, A., Scott, P., & Viiri, J. (2005). Using a bridging representation and social interactions to foster conceptual change: Designing and evaluating an instructional sequence for Newton's third law. Science Education, 89, 175-195.
47. Schunk, D. H., & Hanson, A. R. (1985). Peer models: Influence on children's self-efficacy and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 313-322.
48. Schunk, D. H., Hanson, A. R., & Cox, P. D. (1987). Peer-model attributes and children's achievement behaviors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 54-61.
49. Scott, P., Asoko, H., & Leach, J. (2007). Student conceptions and conceptual learning in science. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 31 -56). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
50. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285.
51. Sweller, J. (2004). Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32, 9-31.
52. Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251-296.
53. Thornton, R. K., & Sokoloff, D. R. (1998). Assessing student learning of Newton's laws: The force and motion conceptual evaluation of active learning laboratory and lecture curricula. American Journal of Physics, 66, 338-352.
54. Trowbridge, D. E., & McDermott, L. C. (1980). Investigation of student understanding of the concept of velocity in one dimension. American Journal of Physics, 48, 1020-1028.
55. Trowbridge, D. E., & McDermott, L. C. (1981). Investigation of student understanding of the concept of acceleration in one dimension. American Journal of Physics, 49, 242-253.
56. Van Gerven, P. W. M., Paas, F., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Schmidt, H. G. (2004). Memory load and task-evoked pupillary responses in aging. Psychophysiology, 41, 167- 174.
57. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
58. Yeo, S., Loss, R., Zadnik, M., Harrison, A., & Treagust, D. F. (2004). What do students really learn from interactive multimedia? A physics case study. American Journal of Physics, 72, 1351-1358.