Interactive and non-interactive pictures in multimedia learning environments: Effects on learning outcomes and learning efficiency

Learning and Instruction

Volumn 19, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 411-422

  Rasch, Thorsten ^a   Schnotz, Wolfgang ^a  

^a Rheinland Pfälzische Technische Universität Kaiserslautern Landau   (Germany)

Author keywords

Animation; Interactivity; Learning efficiency; Learning from pictures; Learning from text; Multimedia learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 67449093567     PISSN: 09594752     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.008     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Amadieu F., van Gog T., Paas F., Tricot A., and Mariné C. Effects of prior knowledge and concept-map structure on disorientation, cognitive load, and learning. Learning and Instruction 19 5 (2009) 376-386
2. Amthauer R. Intelligenz-Struktur-Test 70 (IST-70) [Intelligence-Structure-Test 70] (1973), Hogrefe, Göttingen, Germany
3. Ayres P., and Paas F. Making instructional animations more effective: A cognitive load approach. Applied Cognitive Psychology 21 (2007) 695-700
4. Betrancourt M. The animation and interactivity principles in multimedia learning. In: Mayer R.E. (Ed). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2005), Cambridge University Press, New York 287-296
5. Emerging topics in cognitive load research: Using learner and information characteristics in the design of powerful learning environments. [Special issue]. In: Paas F., and Kester L. (Eds). Applied Cognitive Psychology 20 (2006) 281-285
6. Gibson J.J. The ecological approach to visual perception (1979), Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA
7. Glenberg A.M., Wilkinson A.C., and Epstein W. The illusion of knowing: Failure in the self-assessment of comprehension. Memory and Cognition 10 (1982) 597-602
8. Kalyuga S. Knowledge elaboration: A cognitive load perspective. Learning and Instruction 19 5 (2009) 402-410
9. Kinzer C., and Verhoeven L. Interactive literacy education (2008), Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ
10. Larkin J.H., and Simon H.A. Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science 11 (1987) 65-99
11. Lowe R.K. Background knowledge and the construction of a situational representation from a diagram. European Journal of Psychology of Education 11 (1996) 377-397
12. In: Lowe R.K., and Schnotz W. (Eds). Learning with animation. Research implications for design (2008), Cambridge University Press, New York
13. Mayer R.E. Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions?. Educational Psychologist 32 (1997) 1-19
14. Mayer R.E. Multimedia learning (2001), Cambridge University Press, New York
15. Mayer R.E. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2005), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
16. Miller G.A. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 63 (1956) 81-97
17. Mokros J.R., and Tinker R.F. The impact of microcomputer based labs on children's ability to interpret graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 24 (1987) 369-383
18. Paas F., Renkl A., and Sweller J. Cognitive load theory and instructional design: recent developments. Educational Psychologist 38 (2003) 1-4
19. In: Paas F., Renkl A., and Sweller J. (Eds). Advances in cognitive load theory: Methodology and instructional design. Instructional Science Vol. 32 (2004) 1-2 [Special issue]
20. Paas F., Tuovinen J., Tabbers H., and Van Gerven P.W.M. Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist 38 (2003) 63-71
21. Peterson L., and Peterson M. Short-term retention of individual verbal items. Journal of Experimental Psychology 58 (1959) 193-198
22. Pettersson R. Visual Literacy und Infologie [Visual literacy and infology]. In: Weidenmann B. (Ed). Wissenserwerb mit Bildern: Instruktionale Bilder in Printmedien, Film/Video und Computerprogrammen (1994), Huber, Bern 215-235
23. Rieber L.P. Animation, incidental learning, and continuing motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology 83 (1991) 318-328
24. Salomon G. Interaction of media, cognition, and learning (1994), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ
25. Scheiter K., Gerjets P., Vollmann B., and Catrambone R. The impact of learner characteristics on information utilization strategies, cognitive load experienced, and performance in hypermedia learning. Learning and Instruction 19 5 (2009) 387-401
26. Schnotz W. An integrated model of multimedia learning. In: Mayer R.E. (Ed). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2005), Cambridge University Press, New York 49-69
27. Schnotz W., and Bannert M. Einflüsse der Visualisierungsform auf die Konstruktion mentaler Modelle beim Bild- und Textverstehen [Influences of the visualization format on the construction of mental models during picture and text comprehension]. Zeitschrift für experimentelle Psychologie 46 (1999) 216-235
28. Schnotz W., and Bannert M. Construction and interference in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 141-156
29. Schnotz W., Boeckheler J., and Grzondziel H. Individual and co-operative learning with interactive animated pictures. European Journal of Psychology of Education 14 (1999) 245-265
30. Schnotz W., and Kürschner C. A reconsideration of cognitive load theory. Educational Psychology Review 19 (2007) 469-508
31. Schnotz W., and Kürschner C. External and internal representations in the acquisition and use of knowledge: visualization effects on mental model construction. Instructional Science 36 (2008) 175-190
32. Schnotz W., and Lowe R.K. A unified view of learning from animated and static graphics. In: Lowe R.K., and Schnotz W. (Eds). Learning with animation. Research implications for design (2008), Cambridge University Press, New York 304-356
33. Schnotz W., and Rasch T. Enabling, facilitating, and inhibiting effects of animations in multimedia learning: Why reduction of cognitive load can have negative results on learning. Educational Technology: Research and Development 53 (2005) 47-58
34. Schwan S., and Riempp R. The cognitive benefits of interactive videos: Learning to tie nautical knots. Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 293-305
35. Segers E., and Verhoeven L. Learning in a sheltered internet environment: The use of WebQuests. Learning and Instruction 19 5 (2009) 423-432
36. Sweller J. Instructional design in technical areas (1999), ACER Press, Camberwell, Australia
37. Sweller J. Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In: Mayer R.E. (Ed). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2005), Cambridge University Press, New York 19-30
38. Sweller J., and Chandler P. Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction 12 (1994) 185-223
39. Sweller J., van Merriënboer J.J.G., and Paas F. Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychological Review 10 (1998) 251-296
40. Tversky B., Heiser J., Mackenzie R., Lozano S., and Morrison J. Enriching animations. In: Lowe R.K., and Schnotz W. (Eds). Learning with animation. Research implications for design (2008), Cambridge University Press, New York 263-285
41. Tversky B., Morrison J.B., and Betrancourt M. Animation: Can it facilitate?. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 57 (2002) 247-262
42. Van Gog T., Ericsson K.A., Rikers R.M.J.P., and Paas F. Instructional design for advanced learners: Establishing connections between the theoretical frameworks of cognitive load and deliberate practice. Educational Technology, Research & Development 53 (2005) 73-81
43. Verhoeven L., and Graesser A. Cognitive and linguistic factors in interactive knowledge construction. Discourse Processes 45 (2008) 289-297
44. Weidenmann B. When good pictures fail: An information-processing approach to the effects of illustrations. In: Mandl H., and Levin J.R. (Eds). Knowledge acquisition from text and pictures (1989), North-Holland, Amsterdam 157-170