Boundary conditions and constraints of the modality effect

Zeitschrift fur Padagogische Psychologie

Volumn 25, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 211-220

  Schüler, Anne ^a   Scheiter, Katharina ^a   Schmidt Weigand, Florian ^b  

^a KNOWLEDGE MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KASSEL   (Germany)

Author keywords

Boundary conditions; Interpretation of null effects; Modality effect; Multimedia learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 80054685387     PISSN: 10100652     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1024/1010-0652/a000046     Document Type: Review

References (58)

1. Baddeley, A. D. (1999). Essentials of human memory. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
2. Chan, S. S, Sacks, H. S & Chalmers, T. C. (1982). The epidemiology of published randomized control trials (abstract). Clinical Research, 30, 234A.
3. Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293-332.
4. Clarebout, G. & Elen, J. (2007). In search of pedagogical agents' modality and dialogue effects in open learning environments. Journal of Instructional Science and Technology, 10, 1-15.
5. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
6. Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design & Analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
7. Cortina, J. M. & Folger, R. G. (1998). When is it acceptable to accept a null hypothesis: no way, Jose? Organizational Research Methods, 1, 334-350. (Pubitemid 128543601)
8. De Beni, R., Pazzaglia, F., Gyselinck, V. & Meneghetti, C. (2005). Visuospatial working memory and mental representation of spatial description. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 77-95.
9. De Westelinck, K., Valcke, M., De Craene, B. & Kirschner, P. (2005). Multimedia learning in social sciences: limitations of external graphical representations. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 555-573. (Pubitemid 40183434)
10. Doolittle, P. E., Terry, K. P. & Mariano, G. J. (2009). Multimedia learning and working memory capacity. In R. Zheng (Ed.). Cognitive effects of multimedia learning (pp. 17-33). London: Premier Reference Source.
11. Dunsworth, Q. & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Fostering multimedia learning of science: Exploring the role of an animated agent's image. Computers & Education, 49, 677-690. (Pubitemid 46783969)
12. Elen, J. & Van Gorp, E. (2008). The effects of multimedia design features on primary school learning materials. International Journal of Instructional Media, 35, 7-15.
13. Field, A. (2009). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS (and sex and drugs and rock'n'roll)(3th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
14. Gerjets, P., Scheiter, K., Opfermann, M., Hesse, F. W. & Eysink, T. H. S. (2009). Learning with hypermedia: The influence of representational formats and different levels of learner control on performance and learning behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 360-370.
15. Ginns, P. (2005). Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning & Instruction, 15, 313-331. (Pubitemid 41288290)
16. Gyselinck, V., Jamet, E. & Dubois, V. (2008). The role of working memory components in multimedia comprehension. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 353-374. (Pubitemid 351560009)
17. Hannus, M. & Hyönä, J. (1999). Utilization of illustrations during learning of science: textbook passages among low- and high-ability children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 95-123.
18. Harcum, E. (1990). Methodological versus empirical literature: Two views on casual acceptance of the null hypothesis. American Psychologist, 45, 404-405.
19. Hegarty, M. & Just, M. A. (1993). Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 717-742.
20. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (2000). Incorporating learner experience into the design of multimedia instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 126-136.
21. Lane, D. M. & Dunlap, W. P. (1978). Estimating effect size: Bias resulting from the significance citerion in editorial decisions. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 31, 107-112.
22. Leahy, W., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). When auditory presentations should and should not be a component of multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 401-418. doi:10.1002/acp.877 (Pubitemid 39517259)
23. Leahy, W. & Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation and the transient information effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology. Advance online publication. http:// onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acp. 1787/pdf (Accessed on 23 Feb. 2011).
24. Levine, T. R., Asada, K. J. & Carpenter, C. (2009). Sample size and effect size are negatively correlated in meta-analysis: Evidence and implications of a publication bias against non-significant findings. Communication Monographs, 76, 286-302.
25. Light, R. J. & Pillemer, D. B. (1984). Summing up: The science of reviewing research. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
26. Lindow, S., Fuchs, H. M., Fürstenberg, A., Kleber, J., Schweppe, J. & Rummer, R. (2011). On the robustness of the modality effect: Attempting to replicate a basic finding. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 25, 231-243.
27. Mann, B., Newhouse, P., Pagram, J., Campbell, A. & Schulz, H. (2002). A comparison of temporal speech and text cueing in educational multimedia. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 296-308. (Pubitemid 36836940)
28. Mayer, R. E. (2005). Principles for managing essential processing in multimedia learning: segmenting, pretraining, and modality principles. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 169-182). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge: University Press.
30. Mayer, R. E. & Moreno R. (1998). A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 312-320.
31. Mayrath, M. C., Nihalani, P. K. & Robinson, D. H. (2011). Varying tutorial modality and interface restrictions to maximize transfer in a complex simulation environment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 257-268.
32. Moreno, R. (2006). Does the modality principle hold for different media? A test of the method-affects-learning hypothesis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 149-158. (Pubitemid 43937507)
33. Moreno, R. & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358-368.
34. Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R. & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by micing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 319-334.
35. Penney, C. G. (1989). Modality effects and the structure of shortterm verbal memory. Memory & Cognition, 17, 398-422.
36. Postle, B. R., Idzikowski, Z., Della Sala, S., Logie R. H. & Baddeley, A. (2006). The selective disruption of spatial working memory by eye movements. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 100-120. (Pubitemid 43421098)
37. Rosenthal, R. (1979). The "File Drawer Problem" and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 638-641.
38. Rosenthal, R. & DiMatteo, M. R. (2001). Meta-Analysis: Recent developments in quantitative methods for literature reviews. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 59-82. (Pubitemid 33705567)
39. Rummer, R., Schweppe, J., Fürstenberg, A., Scheiter, K., & Zindler, A. (2011). The perceptual basis of the modality effect in multimedia learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17, 159-173.
40. Rummer, R., Schweppe, J., Fürstenberg, A., Seufert, T. & Brünken, R. (2010). Working memory interference during process ing texts and pictures: Implications for the explanation of the modality effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24, 164-176.
41. Rummer, R., Schweppe, J., Scheiter, K. & Gerjets, P. (2008). Lernen mit Multimedia: Die kognitiven Grundlagen des Modalitätseffekts. Psychologische Rundschau, 59, 98-107.
42. Schmidt-Weigand, F. (2011). Does animation amplify the modality effect - or is there any modality effect at all? Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 25, 245-256.
43. Schmidt-Weigand, F., Kohnert, A. & Glowalla, U. (2010a). A closer look at split visual attention in system- and self-paced instruction in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 100-110.
44. Schmidt-Weigand, F., Kohnert, A. & Glowalla, U. (2010b). Explaining the modality and contiguity effects: New insights from investigating students' viewing behavior. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24, 226-237.
45. Schüler, A., Scheiter, K. & Gerjets, P. (2011). Does the modality effect in multimedia learning appear only with text containing spatial information? Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 25, 257-267.
46. Schüler, A., Scheiter, K., Rummer, R. & Gerjets, P. (in press). Explaining the modality effect in multimedia learning: Is it due to a lack of temporal contiguity with written text and pictures? Learning and Instruction.
47. Schüler, A., Scheiter, K. & van Genuchten, E. (2011). The role of working memory in multimedia instruction: Is work ing memory working during learning from text and pictures? Educational Psychology Review, 23, 389-411.
48. Shadish, W. R., Doherty, M. & Montgomery, L. M. (1989). How many studies are in the file drawer? An estimate from the family/ marital psychotherapy literature. Clinical Psychology Review, 9, 589-603.
49. Smith, M. L. (1980). Publication bias and meta-analysis. Evaluation and Education, 4, 22-24.
50. Stiller, K. D., Freitag, A., Zinnbauer, P. & Freitag, C. (2009). How pacing of multimedia instructions can influence modality effects: A case of superiority of visual texts. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25, 184-203.
51. Sweller, J., van Merriëboer, J. J. G. & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251-296.
52. Tabbers, H. K. (2002). The modality of text in multimedia instructions - refining the design guidelines. Unpublished Dissertation, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen. Retrieved December 16, 2004 from the World Wide Web: http://www.ou.nl/Docs/Expertise/OTEC/Publicaties/huib%20tabbers/ doctoral%20dissertation%20Huib%20Tabbers%20-%20web%20version.pdf.
53. Tabbers, H. K., Martens, R. L. & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2004). Multimedia instructions and cognitive load theory: Effects of modality and cueing. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 71-81. (Pubitemid 38422580)
54. Tabbers, H. K. & van der Spoel, W. (2011). Where did the modality principle in multimedia learning go? A double replication failure that questions both theory and practical use. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 25, 221-230.
55. Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (1997). When two sensory modes are better than one. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 3, 257-287. (Pubitemid 127462889)
56. Witteman, M. J. & Segers, E. (2010). The modality effect tested in children in a user-paced multimedia environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 132-142.
57. Wouters, P., Paas, F. G. W. C. & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2009). Observational learning from multimedia based expert models: The relation between modality, pacing and segmentation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 1-8.
58. Zolna, J. S. & Catrambone, R. (2008). Constraining Presentation Pace and Using Multimodal Materials: Intertwined Design Considerations? Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Proceedings, 52, 552-556.