Repetition and dual coding in procedural multimedia presentations

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 22, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 877-895

  Brunyé, Tad T ^a,b   Taylor, Holly A ^b   Rapp, David N ^c  

^a US Army Research Development and Engineering Command   (United States)

^b TUFTS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 60849125432     PISSN: 08884080     EISSN: 10990720     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/acp.1396     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Baddeley, A. D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559.
2. Blaxton, T. A. (1989). Investigating dissociations among memory measures: Support for a transfer-appropriate processing framework. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 15, 657-668.
3. Brunyé, T., Taylor, H. A., Rapp, D. N., & Spiro, A. B. (2006). Learning procedures: The role of working memory in multimedia learning experiences. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 917-940.
4. Brunyé, T. T., Taylor, H. A., & Rapp, D. N. (2003). When do you put on Snoopy's hat? Influences of presentation modality on memory for procedural instructions. Presentation at the 44th annual meeting of the Psychonomics Society, Vancouver, Canada.
5. Carlson, N. R. (2001). Physiology of behavior. Needham Heights, MA: Allen & Bacon.
6. Diehl, V. V., & Mills, C. B. (1995). The effects of interaction with the device described by procedural text on recall, true/false, and task performance. Memory & Cognition, 23, 675-688.
7. Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Über das gedächtnis: Intersuchungen zur experimentellen psychologie. Translated by H. A. Ruger and C. E. Bussenius, 1913 and reissued by Dover Publications, 1964.
8. Garner, R., Gillingham, M., & White, C. (1989). Effects of seductive details on macroprocessing and microprocessing in adults and children. Cognition and Instruction, 6, 41-4157.
9. Glenberg, A. M., & Langston,W. E. (1992). Comprehension of illustrated text: Pictures help to build mental models. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 129-151.
10. Guthrie, E. R. (1935). The psychology of learning. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
11. Gyselinck, V., Cornoldi, C., Dubois, V., De Beni, R., & Ehrlich, M. F. (2002). Visuospatial memory and phonological loop in learning from multimedia. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 665-685.
12. Harp, S. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1998). How seductive details do their damage: A theory of cognitive interest in science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 414-434.
13. Kalat, J. W. (2003). Biological psychology. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
14. Levie, W. H., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research. Educational Communication & Technology Journal, 30, 195-232.
15. Marcus, N., Cooper, M., & Sweller, J. (1996). Understanding instructions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 49-63.
16. Mayer, R. E. (1989). Systematic thinking fostered by illustrations in scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 240-246.
17. Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32, 1-19.
18. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
19. Mayer, R. E., Bove, W., Bryman, A., Mars, R., & Tapangco, L. (1995). A generative theory of textbook design: Using annotated illustrations to foster meaningful learning of scientific text. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43, 31-44.
20. Mayer, R. E., & Gallini, J. K. (1990). When is an illustration worth ten thousand words? Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 715-726.
21. Mayer, R. E., Hegarty, M., Mayer, S., & Campbell, J. (2005). When static media promote active learning: Annotated illustrations versus narrated animations in multimedia instruction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11, 256-265.
22. Mayer, R. E., Steinhoff, K., Bower, G., & Mars, R. (1995). A generative theory of textbook design: Using annotated illustrations to foster meaningful learning of science text. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43, 31-44.
23. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2002). Aids to computer-based multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 12, 107-119.
24. Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 16, 519-533.
25. Novick, L. R., & Morse, D. L. (2000). Folding a fish, making a mushroom: The role of diagrams in executing assembly procedures. Memory & Cognition, 28, 1242-1256.
26. Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38, 1-4.
27. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
28. Peeck, J. (1994). Enhancing graphic-effects in instructional texts: Influencing learning activities. In W. Schnotz, & R. W. Kulhavy (Eds.), Comprehension of graphics. Advances in psychology (pp. 291-301). Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland/Elsevier Science.
29. Schnotz, W. (2001). Sign systems, technologies, and the acquisition of knowledge. In J. F. Rouet, J. Levonen, & A. Biardeau (Eds.), Multimedia learning: Cognitive and instructional issues (pp. 9-29). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
30. Smith, H. C. (1992). The illustrated guide to aerodynamics. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
31. Stone, D. E., & Glock, M. D. (1981). How do young adults read directions with and without pictures? Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 419-426.
32. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285.
33. Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Camberwell, Victoria, Australia: ACER Press.
34. Sweller, J., Chandler, P., Tierney, J., & Cooper, M. (1990). Cognitive load as a factor in the structuring of technical material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 176-192.
35. Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kester, L. (2003). Taking the load off a learner's mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 5-13.
36. Zacks, J. M., & Tversky, B. (2003). Structuring information interfaces for procedural learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9, 88-100.