Expertise reversal for iconic representations in science visualizations

Instructional Science

Volumn 38, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 259-276

  Homer, Bruce D ^a   Plass, Jan L ^b  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cognitive development; Cognitive load; Expertise reversal; Multimedia learning; Science visualization; Simulation

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952098251     PISSN: 00204277     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11251-009-9108-7     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Bertin, J. (1983). Semiology of graphics: Diagrams, networks, maps. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
2. Bodemer, D., Ploetzner, R., Bruchmüller, K., & Häcker, S. (2005). Supporting learning with interactive multimedia through active integration of representations. Instructional Science, 33, 73-95.
3. Bodemer, D., Ploetzner, R., Feuerlein, I., & Spada, H. (2004). The active integration of information during learning with dynamic and interactive visualizations. Learning and Instruction, 14, 325-341.
4. Carlson, R., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). Learning and understanding science instructional material. Journal of educational psychology, 95(3), 629-640.
5. Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 55-81.
6. Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Rees, E. (1982). Expertise in problem solving. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 1, pp. 17-76). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. De Groot, A. D. (1965). Thought and choice in chess. The Hague: Mouton.
8. de Jong, T. (2005). The guided discovery principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp. 215-228). New York: Cambridge University Press.
9. de Jong, T., & van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 179-201.
10. de Koning, B., Tabbers, H., Rikers, R., & Paas, F. (2007). Attention cueing as a means to enhance learning from an animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 731-746.
11. Deacon, T. W. (1997). The symbolic species: The co-evolution of language and the brain (1st ed.). New York: W. W. Norton.
12. Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (Eds.). (1998). Metacognition in educational theory and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13. Hasler, B. S., Kersten, B., & Sweller, J. (2007). Learner control, cognitive load and instructional animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 713-729.
14. Hegarty, M., & Just, M. A. (1993). Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. Journal of Memory and Language, 32(6), 717-742.
15. Homer, B. D., & Hayward, E. (2008). Cognitive and Representational Development in Children. In K. B. Cartwright (Ed.), Literacy Processes: Cognitive Flexibility in Learning and Teaching (pp. 19-41). New York, NY: Guilford Publishing.
16. Homer, B. D., & Nelson, K. (2005). Seeing Objects as Symbols and Symbols as Objects: Language and the Development of Dual Representation. In B. D. Homer & C. Tamis-LeMonda (Eds.), The development of social cognition and communication (pp. 29-52). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17. Kalyuga, S. (2005). Prior knowledge principle in multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 325-337). New York: Cambridge University Press.
18. Kalyuga, S. (2006). Instructing and testing advance learners: A cognitive load approach. New York: Nova Science.
19. Kalyuga, S. (2007). Expertise reversal effect and its implications for learner-tailored instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 19(4), 509-539.
20. Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). Expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38, 23-31.
21. Keller, T., Gerjets, P., Scheiter, K., & Garsoffky, B. (2006). Information visualizations for knowledge acquisition: The impact of dimensionality and color coding. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(1), 43-65.
22. Lee, H., Plass, J. L., & Homer, B. D. (2006). Optimizing cognitive load for learning from computer-based science simulations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 902-913.
23. Lowe, R. (1993). Constructing a mental representation from an abstract technical diagram. Learning and Instruction, 3(3), 157-179.
24. Lowe, R. K. (2003). Animation and learning: selective processing of information in dynamic graphics. Learning and Instruction, 13, 157-176.
25. Mayer, R. E., & Sims, V. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 389-401.
26. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.
27. Moreno, R. (2004). Decreasing cognitive load for novice students: Effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery-based multimedia. Instructional Science, 32(1-2), 99-113.
28. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2005). Role of guidance, reflection, and interactivity in an agent-based multimedia game. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(1), 117-128.
29. Nelson, K. (1996). Language in cognitive development: The emergence of the mediated mind. New York: Cambridge University Press.
30. Niemiec, R., Sikorski, C., & Walberg, H. J. (1996). Learner-control effects: A review of reviews and a meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 15(2), 157-174.
31. Ollerenshaw, A., Aidman, E., & Kidd, G. (1997). Is an illustration always worth ten thousand words? Effects of prior knowledge, learning style, and multimedia illustrations on text comprehension. International Journal of Instructional Media, 24, 227-238.
32. Peirce, C. S. (1955). Logic as semiotic: The theory of signs. In J. Buchler (Ed.), The philosophical writings of Peirce (pp. 98-110). New York: Dover Books.
33. Plass, J. L., Chun, D. M., Mayer, R. E., & Leutner, D. (2003). Cognitive load in reading a foreign language text with multimedia aids and the influence of verbal and spatial abilities. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(2), 221-243.
34. Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Hayward, E. (2009a). Design Factors for Educationally Effective Animations and Simulations. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 21(1), 31-61.
35. Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., Milne, C., Jordan, T., Kalyuga, S., Kim, M., et al. (2009b). Design Factors for Effective Science Simulations: Representation of Information. International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations, 1(1), 16-35.
36. Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., Milne, C., Jordan, T., Kim, M., & Barrientos, J. (2007). Representational mode and cognitive load: Optimizing the instructional design of science simulations. Featured research paper presented at the annual convention of the Association for Educational Communication and Technology (AECT) in October, 2007 in Anaheim, CA.
37. Prins, F. J., Veenman, M. V. J., & Elshout, J. (2006). The impact of intellectual ability and metacognition on learning: New support for the threshold of problematicity theory. Learning and Instruction, 16, 374-387.
38. Rieber, L. P. (1991). Effects of visual grouping strategies of computer-animated presentations on selective attention in science. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(4), 5-15.
39. Rieber, L. P. (1996). Animation as feedback in a computer-based simulation: Representation matters. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(1), 5-22.
40. Rieber, L. P. (2005). Multimedia learning in games, simulations, and microworlds. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
41. Rieber, L. P., Smith, M., Al-Ghafry, S., Strickland, B., Chu, G., & Spahi, F. (1996). The role of meaning in interpreting graphic textual feedback during a computer-based simulation. Computers Education, 27(1), 45-58.
42. Rieber, L. P., Tzeng, S., & Tribble, K. (2004). Discovery learning, representation, and explanation within a computer-based simulation: Finding the right mix. Learning and Instruction, 14, 307-323.
43. Riek, J. M. S. (2007). The development of attention regulation in the Wisconsin Card Sorting Task. Developmental Science, 10(5), 664-680.
44. Schnotz, W. (2005). An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 49-70). New York: Cambridge.
45. Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13, 141-156.
46. Schnotz, W., Picard, E., & Hron, A. (1993). How do successful and unsuccessful learners use texts and graphics? Learning and Instruction, 3, 181-199.
47. Schnotz, W., & Rasch, T. (2005). 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. Special Issue: Research on Cognitive Load Theory and Its Design Implications for E-Learning, 53(3), 47-58.
48. Seufert, T., Jänen, I., & Brünken, R. (2006). The impact of intrinsic cognitive load on the effectiveness of graphical help for coherence formation. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1055-1071.
49. Swaak, J., & de Jong, T. (2001). Learner vs. system control in using online support for simulation-based discovery learning. Learning Environments Research, 4, 217-241.
50. van der Meij, J., & de Jong, T. (2006). Supporting students' learning with multiple representations in a dynamic simulation-based learning environment. Learning and Instruction, 16, 199-212.