The modality effect tested in children in a user-paced multimedia environment

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 132-142

  Witteman, M J ^a,b   Segers, E ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHOLINGUISTICS   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Individual differences; Long term effects; Modality effect; Multimedia learning; Primary school; User paced

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954381930     PISSN: 02664909     EISSN: 13652729     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00335.x     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Baddeley AD. The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Science 2000, 4:417-423.
2. Baddeley AD, Gathercole SE, Papagno C. The phonological loop as a language learning device. Psychological Review 1998, 105:158-173.
3. van Boxtel HW, Snijders JTh, Welten VJ. Voorlopige verantwoording en handleiding [Temporary Account and Manual] 1980, Vorm III ISI-Reeks Wolters-Noordhoff, Groningen/Swets & Zeitlinger, Lisse
4. Brunken R, Plass JL, Leutner D. Assessment of cognitive load in multimedia learning with dual-task methodology: auditory load and modality effects. Instructional Science 2004, 32:115-132.
5. Dean RS, Yekovich FR, Gray JW. The effect of modality on long-term recognition memory. Contemporary Educational Psychology 1988, 13:102-115.
6. Ginns P. Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning and Instruction 2005, 15:313-331.
7. van Hoorn W, van der Kamp L, den Brinker W. Nederlandse Differentiatie Testserie NDT-2003 2003, Swets & Zeitlinger, Lisse
8. Jeung HJ, Chandler P, Sweller J. The role of visual indicators in dual sensory mode instruction. Educational Psychology 1997, 17:329-343.
9. Kozhevnikov M, Hegarty M, Mayer RE. Revising the visualizer-verbalizer dimension: evidence for two types of visualizers. Cognition and Instruction 2002, 20:47-77.
10. Low R, Sweller J. The modality principle in multimedia learning. The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning 2005, 147-158. Mayer RE, In, ed., pp., Cambridge University Press, New York
11. van der Lubbe M. Terugblik en resultaten Eindtoets Basisonderwijs 2008 2008, Cito, Arnhem
12. Mann B, Newhouse P, Pagram J, Campbell A, Schulz H. A comparison of temporal speech & text cueing in educational multimedia. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2002, 18:296-308.
13. Mann BL. The evolution of multimedia sound. Computers & Education 2008, 50:1157-1173.
14. Mayer RE. Multimedia learning: are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist 1997, 32:1-19.
15. Mayer RE. Multimedia Learning 2001, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
16. Mayer RE. The promise of multimedia learning: using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction 2003, 13:125-139.
17. Mayer RE, Massa LJ. Three facets of visual & verbal learners: cognitive ability, cognitive style, and learning preference. Journal of Educational Psychology 2003, 95:833-846.
18. Mayer RE, Moreno R. A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology 1998, 90:312-320.
19. Mayer RE, Heiser J, Lonn S. Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: when presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology 2001, 93:187-198.
20. McLelland JL, McNaughton BL, O'Reilly RC. Why there are complementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory. Psychological Review 1995, 102:419-457.
21. Mousavi S, Low R, Sweller J. Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology 1995, 87:319-334.
22. Nelson JR, Balass M, Perfetti CA. Differences between written and spoken input in learning new words. Written Language & Literacy 2005, 8:25-44.
23. Paas F, Renkl A, Sweller J. Cognitive load theory and instructional implications of the interactions between information structures and cognitive architecture. Instructional Science 2004, 32:1-8.
24. Paivio A. Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach 1986, Oxford University Press, Oxford
25. Penney CG. Modality effects in short-term verbal memory. Psychological Bulletin 1975, 82:68-84.
26. Rickheit G, Strohner H, Musseler J, Nattkemper D. Recalling oral and written discourse. Journal of Educational Psychology 1987, 97:438-444.
27. Segers E, Verhoeven L, Hulstein-Hendrikse N. Cognitive processes in children's multimedia text learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology 2008, 22:375-387.
28. Slykhuis DA, Wiebe EN, Annetta LA. Eye-tracking students' attention to PowerPoint photographs in a science education setting. Journal of Science Education and Technology 2005, 14:509-520.
29. Stanovich KE. Matthew effects in reading: some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly 1986, 21:360-406.
30. Tabbers HK, Martens RL, Van Merrienboer JJG. Multimedia instructions and cognitive load theory: effects of modality and cueing. British Journal of Educational Psychology 2004, 74:71-81.
31. Verhoeven LTW. Drie-Minuten-Toets [Three Minute Test] 1995, Cito, Arnhem
32. Wechsler D. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children 1992, Vol. 3, Psychological Corporation, London