Conjoint processing of time-compressed narration in multimedia instruction: The effects on recall, but not recognition

Journal of Educational Computing Research

Volumn 44, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 203-217

  Ritzhaupt, Albert ^a   Barron, Ann ^b   Kealy, William ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT GREENSBORO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79955128240     PISSN: 07356331     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2190/EC.44.2.d     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Barabasz, A. F. (1968). A study of recall and retention of accelerated lecture presentation. Journal of Communication, 18(3), 283-287.
2. Beasley, D. S., & Maki, J. E. (1976). Time- and frequency-altered speech. In N. J. Lass (Ed.), Contemporary issues in experimental phonetics (pp. 419-458). New York: Academic Press.
3. Benz, C. R. (1971). Effects of time compressed speech upon the comprehension of a visual oriented television lecture. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University.
4. Carney, R. N., & Levin, J. R. (2002). Pictorial illustrations still improve students' learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 5-26. (Pubitemid 37134415)
5. Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4), 293-332.
6. Fairbanks, G., Guttman, N., & Miron, M. S. (1957). Auditory comprehension of repeated high-speed messages. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 22, 23-32.
7. Flesh, R. (1949). The art of readable writing. New York: Harper.
8. Foulke, W., & Sticht, T. G. (1969). Review of research on the intelligibility and comprehension of accelerated speech. Psychological Bulletin, 72(1), 50-62.
9. Goldhaber, G. M. (1970). Listener comprehension of compressed speech as a function of the academic grade level of the subjects. Journal of Communication, 20(1), 167-173.
10. Griffin, M. M., & Robinson, D. H. (2000). Role of mimeticism and spatiality in textual recall. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(2), 125-149.
11. Gronlund, N. E. (1998). Assessment of student achievement. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
12. Haist, F., Shimamura, A. P., & Squire, L. R. (1992). On the relationship between recall and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(4), 691-702.
13. Hall, J. F. (1983). Recall versus recognition: A methodological note. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9(2), 346-349.
14. Hollingworth, H. L. (1913). Characteristic differences between recall and recognition. American Journal of Psychology, 24, 532-544.
15. Kealy, W. A., Alkhabbaz, S., Subramanian, C., Bunch, J., & Spears, C. (2006). Effect of task expectancy on reader motivation to study on-demand adjunct displays. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
16. Kullhavey, R. W., Lee, B. J., & Caterino, L. C. (1985). Conjoint retention of maps and related discourse. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10, 28-37.
17. Kulhavy, R. W., Stock, W. A., & Kealy, W. A. (1993). How geographic maps increase recall of instructional text. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(4), 47-62.
18. Levin, J. R. (1981). On functions of pictures in prose. In F. J. Pirozzolo & C. Wittrock (Eds.), Neuropsychological and cognitive processes in reading (pp. 203-228). New York: Academic.
19. Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32(1), 1-19.
20. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
21. McDougall, R. (1904). Recognition and recall. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Methods, 1, 229-233.
22. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 156-163.
23. Nichols, R. G., & Stevens, L. A. (1957). Are you listening? New York: McGraw-Hill.
24. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations. New York: Oxford University Press.
25. Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Barron, A. E. (2008). Effects of time-compressed narration and representational adjunct images on cued-recall, content recognition, and learner satisfaction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 39(2), 161-184.
26. Ritzhaupt, A. D., Gomes, N. D., & Barron, A. E. (2008). The effects of time-compressed audio and verbal redundancy on learner performance and satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 2434-2445.
27. Robinson, D. H., Katayama, A. D., & Fan, A. (1996). Evidence of conjoint retention of information encoded from spatial adjunct displays. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(2), 221-239. (Pubitemid 126162302)
28. Robinson, D. H., Robinson, S. L., & Katayama, A. D. (1999). When words are represented in memory like pictures: Evidence for spatial encoding of study materials. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24(1), 38-54.
29. Sadoski, M., & Paivio, A. (2004). A dual coding theoretical model of reading. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1329-1362). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
30. Schreiber, J. B., Verdi, M. P., Patock-Peckham, J., Johnson, J. T., & Kealy, W. A. (2002). Differing map construction and text organization and their effects on retention. The Journal of Experimental Education, 70(2), 114-130. (Pubitemid 41408863)
31. Schwartz, N. H., Ellsworth, L. S., Graham, L., & Knight, B. (1998). Accessing prior knowledge to remember text: A comparison of advance organizers and maps. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23(1), 65-89. (Pubitemid 128347375)
32. Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12, 185-233.
33. Winn, W. (1990). Encoding and retrieval of information in maps and diagrams. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 33(3), 103-107.