Varying Tutorial Modality and Interface Restriction to Maximize Transfer in a Complex Simulation Environment

Journal of Educational Psychology

Volumn 103, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 257-268

  Mayrath, Michael C ^a   Nihalani, Priya K ^b   Robinson, Daniel H ^b  

^a HARVARD GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Cognitive load; Modality; Redundancy effect

Indexed keywords

EID: 79957864131     PISSN: 00220663     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0022369     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Baddeley A.D. Working memory 1986, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
2. Behrens J.T., Frezzo D.C., Mislevy R.J., Kroopnick M., Wise D. Structural, functional and semiotic symmetries in simulation-based games and assessments. Assessment of problem solving using simulations 2007, 59-80. Erlbaum, New York, NY. E.L. Baker, J. Dickieson, W. Wulfeck, H.F. O'Neil (Eds.).
3. Bransford J.D., Brown A.L., Cocking R.R. How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school 2000, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
4. Chandler P., Sweller J. The split-attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology 1992, 62:233-246.
5. Chang K., Sung T., Chen S.-F. Learning through computer-based concept mapping with scaffolding aid. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2001, 17:21-33. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2729.2001.00156.x.
6. Clark R.C., Mayer R.E. E-Learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning 2003, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
7. DeLeeuw K.E., Mayer R.E. A comparison of three measures of cognitive load: Evidence for separable measures of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load. Journal of Educational Psychology 2008, 100:223-234. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.223.
8. Frezzo D.C., Behrens J.T., Mislevy R.J., West P., DiCerbo K.E. Psychometric and evidentiary approaches to simulation assessment in Packet Tracer software. ICNS 2009 Fifth International Conference on Networking and Services 2009, 555-560. Retrieved from http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/ICNS.2009.89.
9. Frezzo, D., & Stanley, K. (2005, April). Knowledge representations driving the design of computerized performance assessments in a complex simulated environment. Paper presented at the annual meting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Retrieved from http://www.education.umd.edu/EDMS/mislevy/CiscoAERA2005/AERA_KR_FrezzoStanley.pdf.
10. Gibson D., Aldrich C., Prensky M. Games and simulations in online learning 2006, Idea Group, Hershey, PA.
11. Ginns P. Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning and Instruction 2005, 15:313-331.
12. Gredler M.E. Designing and evaluating games and simulations 1992, Kogan Page, London, England.
13. Gredler M.E. Games and simulations and their relationships to learning. Educational Technology Research and Development 2003, 21:571-582.
14. Herrington J., Kervin L. Authentic learning supported by technology: Ten suggestions and cases of integration in classrooms. Educational Media International 2007, 44:219-236. doi: 10.1080/09523980701491666.
15. Hoffman B., Schraw G. Conceptions of efficiency: Applications in learning and problem solving. Educational Psychologist 2010, 45:1-14. doi: 10.1080/00461520903213618.
16. Kalyuga S. Expertise-reversal effect and its implications for learner-tailored instruction. Educational Psychological Review 2007, 19:509-539. doi: 10.1007/s10648-007-9054-3.
17. Kalyuga S., Ayres P., Chandler P., Sweller J. The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist 2003, 38:23-31. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3801_4.
18. Lave J., Wenger E. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation 1991, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
19. Mayer R. Multimedia learning 2001, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
20. Mayer R. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning 2005, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
21. Mayer R.E., Johnson C.I. Revising the redundancy principle in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology 2008, 100:380-386. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.380.
22. Miller G.A. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 1956, 63:81-97.
23. Mislevy R.J., Steinberg L.S., Almond R.G. On the structure of educational assessments. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives 2003, 1:3-62. doi: 10.1207/S15366359MEA0101_02.
24. Nihalani, P. K., Mayrath, M. C., & Robinson, D. (2010). When guidance harms and collaboration helps in computer simulation environments: An expertise reversal effect. Manuscript under review.
25. Pavio A. Mental representations: A dual coding approach 1986, Oxford University Press, Oxford, England.
26. Penney C. Modality effects and the structure of short-term verbal memory. Memory & Cognition 1989, 17:398-422.
27. Pollock E., Chandler P., Sweller J. Assimilating complex information. Learning and Instruction 2002, 12:61-86. doi: 10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00016-0.
28. Rieber L. Multimedia learning in games, simulations, and micro-worlds. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning 2005, 549-568. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. R.E. Mayer (Ed.).
29. Sweller J. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science 1988, 12:257-285. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4.
30. Sweller J. The redundancy principle in multimedia learning. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning 2005, 159-168. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. R. Mayer (Ed.).
31. Sweller J., Chandler P. Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction 1994, 12:185-233. doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci1203_1.
32. Sweller J., van Merriënboer J.J.G., Paas F. Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review 1998, 10:251-296. doi: 10.1023/A:1022193728205.
33. van Merriënboer J., Sweller J. Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review 2005, 17:147-177.