Cognitive activities in complex science text and diagrams

Contemporary Educational Psychology

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 59-74

  Cromley, Jennifer G ^a   Snyder Hogan, Lindsey E ^a   Luciw Dubas, Ulana A ^b  

^a TEMPLE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NATIONAL BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS   (United States)

Author keywords

Comprehension; Diagrams; Inference; Knowledge level; Strategy use

Indexed keywords

EID: 74749084624     PISSN: 0361476X     EISSN: 10902384     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.10.002     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Ainsworth S. DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction 16 3 (2006) 183-198
2. Ainsworth S., and Burcham S. The impact of text coherence on learning by self-explanation. Learning and Instruction 17 3 (2007) 286-303
3. Ainsworth S., and Loizou A.T. The effects of self-explaining when learning with text or diagrams. Cognitive Science. A Multidisciplinary Journal 27 4 (2003) 669-681
4. Aleven V.W.M.M., and Koedinger K. An effective metacognitive strategy: Learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based cognitive tutor. Cognitive Science 26 2 (2002) 147-179
5. Alexander P.A., Sperl C.T., Buehl M.M., Fives H., and Chiu S. Modeling domain learning: Profiles from the field of special education. Journal of Educational Psychology 96 3 (2004) 545-557
6. Azevedo R., and Cromley J. Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students' learning with hypermedia?. Journal of Educational Psychology 96 (2004) 523-535
7. Bartholomé T., and Bromme R. Coherence formation when learning from text and pictures: What kind of support for whom?. Journal of Educational Psychology 101 2 (2009) 282-293 10.1037/a0014312
8. Bereiter C., and Scardamalia M. Education for the knowledge age: Design-centered models of teaching and instruction. In: Alexander P.A., and Winne P.H. (Eds). Handbook of educational psychology (2006), Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ 695-714
9. Berthold K., and Renkl A. Instructional aids to support a conceptual understanding of multiple representations. Journal of Educational Psychology 101 1 (2009) 70-87
10. Bodemer D., and Faust U. External and mental referencing of multiple representations. Computers in Human Behavior 22 1 (2006) 27-42
11. Bodemer D., Ploetzner R., Bruchmüller K., and Häcker S. Supporting learning with interactive multimedia through active integration of representations. Instructional Science 33 1 (2005) 73-95
12. Butcher K. Learning from text with diagrams: Promoting mental model development and inference generation. Journal of Educational Psychology 98 1 (2006) 182-197
13. Cain K., Oakhill J.V., Barnes M.A., and Bryant P.E. Comprehension skill, inference making ability and their relation to knowledge. Memory and Cognition 29 (2001) 850-859
14. Campbell N.A., and Reece J.B. Biology. 6th ed. (2001), Benjamin Cummings, San Francisco, CA
15. Canham, M., & Hegarty, M. (in press). Effects of knowledge and display design on comprehension of complex graphics. Learning and Instruction, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.014.
16. Carlson R., Chandler P., and Sweller J. Learning and understanding science instructional material. Journal of Educational Psychology 95 3 (2003) 629-640
17. Cerdan R., and Vidal-Abarca E. The effects of tasks on integrating information from multiple documents. Journal of Educational Psychology 100 1 (2008) 209
18. Chi M.T.H. Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 6 3 (1997) 271-315
19. Chi M.T.H., Bassok M., Lewis M.W., Reimann P., and Glaser R. Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science 13 (1989) 145-182
20. Chi M., Feltovich P.J., and Glaser R. Categorization and representations of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science 5 2 (1981) 121-152
21. Chi M.T.H., deLeeuw N., Chiu M., and LaVancher C. Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science 18 3 (1994) 439-477
22. Crain-Thoreson C., Lippman M., and McClendon-Magnuson D. Windows on comprehension: Reading comprehension processes as revealed by two think-aloud procedures. Journal of Educational Psychology 89 4 (1997) 579-591
23. Cromley J., and Azevedo R. Self-report of reading comprehension strategies: What are we measuring?. Metacognition and Learning 1 3 (2006) 229-247
24. Edmonds C.J., and Pring L. Generating inferences from written and spoken language: A comparison of children with visual impairment and children with sight. British Journal of Developmental Psychology 24 (2006) 337-351
25. Fehrenbach C.R. Gifted/average readers: Do they use the same reading strategies?. Gifted Child Quarterly 35 3 (1991) 125-127
26. Florax, M., & Ploetzner, R. (in press). What contributes to the split-attention effect? The role of text segmentation, picture labeling, and spatial proximity. Learning and Instruction, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.021.
27. Fox E. The role of reader characteristics in processing and learning from informational text. Review of Educational Research 79 1 (2009) 197-261
28. Graesser A.C. An introduction to strategic reading comprehension. In: McNamara D.S. (Ed). Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies (2007), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, NJ, US 3-26
29. Graesser A., Lu S., Olde B., Cooper-Pye E., and Whitten S. Question asking and eye tracking during cognitive disequilibrium: Comprehending illustrated texts on devices when the devices break down. Memory & Cognition 33 7 (2005) 1235-1247
30. Griffin T.D., Wiley J., and Thiede K.W. Individual differences, rereading, and self-explanation: Concurrent processing and cue validity as constraints on metacomprehension accuracy. Memory & Cognition 36 1 (2008) 93-103
31. Grosse C.S., and Renkl A. Effects of multiple solution methods in mathematics learning. Learning and Instruction 16 2 (2006) 122-138
32. Hannus M., and Hyönä J. Utilization of illustrations during learning of science textbook passages among low- and high-ability children. Contemporary Educational Psychology 24 2 (1999) 95-123
33. Hegarty M., and Just M. Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. Journal of Memory & Language 32 6 (1993) 717-742
34. Hegarty M., Kriz S., and Cate C. The roles of mental animations and external animations in understanding mechanical systems. Cognition and Instruction 21 4 (2003) 325-360
35. Heiser J., and Tversky B. Arrows in comprehending and producing mechanical diagrams. Cognitive Science 30 3 (2006) 581-592
36. Kastens K., and Liben L. Eliciting self-explanations improves children's performance on a field-based map skills task. Cognition and Instruction 25 1 (2007) 45-74
37. Kintsch W. Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition (1998), Cambridge University Press, New York, NY
38. Kriz S., and Hegarty M. Top-down and bottom-up influences on learning from animations. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 65 11 (2007) 911-930
39. Laing S., and Kamhi A. The use of think-aloud protocols to compare inferencing abilities in average and below-average readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities 35 5 (2002) 436-447
40. Larkin J., and Simon H. Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science 11 1 (1987) 65-100
41. Lewalter D. Cognitive strategies for learning from static and dynamic visuals. Learning and Instruction 13 2 (2003) 177-189
42. Linn M.C. The knowledge integration perspective on learning and instruction. In: Sawyer R.K. (Ed). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2006), Cambridge University Press, NY 243-264
43. Löhner S., van Joolingen W.R., Savelsbergh E.R., and van Hout-Wolters B. Students' reasoning during modeling in an inquiry learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior 21 3 (2005) 441-461
44. Lowe R.K. Animation and learning: Selective processing of information in dynamic graphics. Learning and Instruction 13 2 (2003) 157-176
45. Mayer R.E. The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction 13 2 (2003) 125-139
46. Mayer R.E. Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In: Mayer R.E. (Ed). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2005), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 31-48
47. Mayer R., Hegarty M., Mayer S., and Campbell J. When static media promote active learning: Annotated illustrations versus narrated animations in multimedia instruction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 11 4 (2005) 256
48. Mayer R., and Sims V. For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology 86 3 (1994) 389-401
49. McNamara D.S. Reading both high-coherence and low-coherence texts: Effects of text sequence and prior knowledge. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 55 1 (2001) 51-62
50. Meece J.L., and Miller S.D. A longitudinal analysis of elementary school students' achievement goals in literacy activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology 26 4 (2001) 454-480
51. Moore P.J., and Scevak J.J. Learning from texts and visual aids: A developmental perspective. Journal of Research in Reading 20 3 (1997) 205-223
52. Moreno R., and Valdez A. Cognitive load and learning effects of having students organize pictures and words in multimedia environments: The role of student interactivity and feedback. Educational Technology Research & Development 53 3 (2005) 1042-1629
53. Muis K. Epistemic profiles and self-regulated learning: Examining relations in the context of mathematics problem solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology 33 2 (2008) 177-208
54. Narayanan N.H., and Hegarty M. On designing comprehensible interactive hypermedia manuals. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 48 2 (1998) 267-301
55. Panel National.Reading. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (2000), National Institute for Child Health and Human Development, Washington, DC
56. Neuman S. Assessing children's inferencing strategies. In: Zutell J., and McCormick J. (Eds). Literacy theory and research: Analyses from multiple paradigms thirty-ninth yearbook of the national reading conference (1990), National Reading Conference, Chicago, IL 267-274
57. Otero J., León J., and Graesser A. The psychology of science text comprehension (2002), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, NJ, US
58. Ozuru Y., Dempsey K., and McNamara D. Prior knowledge, reading skill, and text cohesion in the comprehension of science texts. Learning and Instruction 19 3 (2009) 228-242
59. Paas F., Renkl A., and Sweller J. Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist 38 1 (2003) 1-4
60. Pintrich P. The role of goal orientation and self-regulated learning. In: Boekaerts M., Pintrich P., and Zeidner M. (Eds). Handbook of self-regulation (2000), Academic Press, San Diego 452-494
61. Pozzer L., and Roth W. Prevalence, function, and structure of photographs in high school biology textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 40 10 (2003) 1089-1114
62. Pressley M., and Harris K.R. Cognitive strategies instruction: From basic research to classroom instruction. In: Alexander P.A., and Winne P.H. (Eds). Handbook of educational psychology. 2nd ed. (2006), Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ 265-286
63. Robertson W.C. Detection of cognitive structure with protocol data: Predicting performance on physics transfer problems. Cognitive Science. A Multidisciplinary Journal 14 2 (1990) 253-280
64. Samuelstuen M., and Braten I. Examining the validity of self-reports on scales measuring students' strategic processing. British Journal of Educational Psychology 77 (2007) 351-378
65. Sanchez C., and Wiley J. An examination of the seductive details effect in terms of working memory capacity. Memory & Cognition 34 2 (2006) 344-355
66. Schellings G., Aarnoutse C., and van Leeuwe J. Third-grader's think-aloud protocols: Types of reading activities in reading an expository text. Learning and Instruction 16 6 (2006) 549-568
67. Schmidt-Weigand, F., Kohnert, A., & Glowalla, U. (in press). A closer look at split visual attention in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.011.
68. Schnotz W., and Bannert M. Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning & Instruction 13 2 (2003) 141-156
69. Schwonke R., Berthold K., and Renkl A. Applied Cognitive Psychology 23 9 (2009) 1227-1243 10.1002/acp.1526
70. 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, Cambridge 19-30
71. Wade S.E., Trathen W., and Schraw G. An analysis of spontaneous study strategies. Reading Research Quarterly 25 2 (1990) 147-166
72. Weinstein C.E., Husman J., and Dierking D.R. Self-regulation interventions with a focus on learning strategies. In: Boekaerts M., Pintrich P.R., and Zeidner M. (Eds). Handbook of self-regulation (2000), Academic Press, San Diego, CA, US 727-747
73. Wittrock M.C. Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist 24 (1990) 345-376
74. Zwaan R., and Brown C. The influence of language proficiency and comprehension skill on situation-model construction. Discourse Processes 21 3 (1996) 289-327