Facilitating Understanding of Movements in Dynamic Visualizations: An Embodied Perspective

Educational Psychology Review

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 501-521

  de Koning, Björn B ^a   Tabbers, Huib K ^a  

^a ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Embodied cognition; Instructional animation; Instructional design

Indexed keywords

EID: 81155133991     PISSN: 1040726X     EISSN: 1573336X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10648-011-9173-8     Document Type: Review

References (108)

1. Altmann, G. T. M., & Kamide, Y. (2004). Now you see it, now you don't: Mediating the mapping between language and the visual world. In J. M. Henderson & F. Ferreira (Eds.), The interface of language, vision, and action: Eye movements and the visual world. New York: Psychology.
2. Amorim, M. A., Isableu, B., & Jarraya, M. (2006). Embodied spatial transformations: 'Body analogy' for the mental rotation of objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 135, 327-347.
3. Arguel, A., & Jamet, E. (2009). Using video and static pictures to improve learning of procedural contents. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 354-359.
4. Atkinson, J. (2000). The developing visual brain. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK and New York.
5. Atkinson, R. K. (2002). Optimizing learning from examples using animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 416-427.
6. Ayres, P., & Paas, F. (2007). Making instructional animations more effective: A cognitive load approach. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 695-700.
7. Ayres, P., Marcus, N., Chan, C., & Qian, N. (2009). Learning hand manipulative tasks: When instructional animations are superior to equivalent static representations. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 348-353.
8. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577-660.
9. Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617-645.
10. Barsalou, L. W. (2010). Grounded cognition: Past, present, and future. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2, 716-724.
11. Barsalou, L. W., Simmons, W. K., Barbey, A., & Wilson, C. D. (2003). Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 84-91.
12. Barsalou, L. W., & Wiemer-Hastings, K. (2005). Situating abstract concepts. In D. Pecher & R. Zwaan (Eds.), Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thought (pp. 129-163). New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. Baylor, A. L., & Kim, S. (2009). Designing nonverbal communication for pedagogical agents: When less is more. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 450-457.
14. Bétrancourt, M. (2005). The animation and interactivity principles in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 287-296). New York: Cambridge University Press.
15. Bivall, P., Ainsworth, S., & Tibell, L. A. (2011). Do haptic representations help complex molecular learning? Science Education, 95, 700-719.
16. Borghi, A. M., Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2004). Putting words in perspective. Memory and Cognition, 32, 863-873.
17. Broaders, S., Cook, S. W., Mitchell, Z., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2007). Making children gesture reveals implicit knowledge and leads to learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 136, 539-550.
18. Bruner, J. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
19. Buccino, G., Binkofski, F., Fink, G. R., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., Gallese, V., et al. (2001). Action observation activates premotor and parietal areas in a somatotopic manner: An fMRI study. European Journal of Neuroscience, 13, 400-404.
20. Calvo-Merino, B., Glaser, D. E., Grezes, J., Passingham, R. E., & Haggard, P. (2005). Action observation and acquired motor skills: An fMRI study with expert dancers. Cerebral Cortex, 15, 1243-1249.
21. Calvo-Merino, B., Grezes, J., Glaser, D. E., Passingham, R. E., & Haggard, P. (2006). Seeing or doing? Influence of visual and motor familiarity in action observation. Current Biology, 16, 1905-1910.
22. Choi, S., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Cognitive and affective benefits of an animated pedagogical agent for learning English as a second language. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34, 441-466.
23. Church, R. B., Ayman-Nolley, S., & Mahootian, S. (2004). The role of gesture in bilingual education: Does gesture enhance learning? International Journal of Bilingual Education & Bilingualism, 7, 303-320.
24. Cohen, C. A., & Hegarty, M. (2007). Individual differences in use of an external visualization while performing an internal visualization task. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 701-711.
25. Cook, S. W., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2006). The role of gesture in learning: Do children use their hands to change their minds? Journal of Cognition and Development, 7, 211-232.
26. Cook, S. W., Mitchell, Z., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2008). Gesturing makes learning last. Cognition, 106, 1047-1058.
27. Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87-114.
28. Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. M. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent properties, picture features and redundancy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 428-434.
29. Dale, R., Kehoe, C. E., & Spivey, M. J. (2007). Graded motor responses in the time course of categorizing atypical exemplars. Memory and Cognition, 35, 15-28.
30. Dang, T., Annaswamy, T. M., & Srinivasan, M. A. (2001). Development and evaluation of an epidural injection simulator with force feedback for medical training. In J. D. Westwood (Ed.), Proceedings of Medicine meets virtual reality (pp. 97-102). Washington, DC: Ios.
31. Decety, J., & Grèzes, J. (2006). The power of simulation: Imagining one's own and other's behavior. Brain Research, 1079, 4-14.
32. De Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2010). Learning by generating vs. receiving instructional explanations: Two approaches to enhance attention cueing in animations. Computers and Education, 55, 681-691.
33. De Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2010). Attention guidance in learning from a complex animation: Seeing is understanding? Learning and Instruction, 20, 111-122.
34. de Vega, M., Glenberg, A. M., & Graesser, A. C. (2008). Symbols, embodiment and meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
35. Dewhurst, S. A., & Brandt, K. R. (2007). Reinstating effortful encoding operations at test enhances episodic remembering. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 543-550.
36. Dijkstra, K., & Kaschak, M. P. (2006). Encoding in verbal, enacted, and autobiographical tasks in young and older adults. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1338-1345.
37. Dijkstra, K., Kaschak, M. P., & Zwaan, R. A. (2007). Body posture facilitates retrieval of autobiographical memories. Cognition, 102, 139-149.
38. Ferguson, E. L., & Hegarty, M. (1995). Learning with real machines or diagrams: Application of knowledge to real-world problems. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 129-160.
39. Ferreira, F., Apel, J., & Henderson, J. M. (2008). Taking a new look at looking at nothing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 405-410.
40. Flanagan, J. R., & Johansson, R. S. (2003). Action plans used in action observation. Nature, 424, 769-771.
41. Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain's concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in reason and language. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22, 455-479.
42. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
43. Glenberg, A. M. (1997). What memory is for. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2, 1-55.
44. Glenberg, A. M. (2007). Language and action: Creating sensible combinations of ideas. In G. Gaskell (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 361-370). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
45. Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 558-565.
46. Glenberg, A. M., & Robertson, D. A. (1999). Indexical understanding of instructions. Discourse Processes, 28, 1-26.
47. Glenberg, A. M., Shroeder, J. L., & Robertson, D. A. (1998). Averting the gaze disengages the environment and facilitates remembering. Memory and Cognition, 26, 651-658.
48. Glenberg, A. M., Goldberg, A., & Zhu, X. (2011). Improving early reading comprehension using embodied CAI. Instructional Science, 39, 29-39.
49. Glenberg, A. M., Gutierrez, T., Levin, J. R., Japuntich, S., & Kaschak, M. P. (2004). Activity and imagined activity can enhance young children's reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 424-436.
50. Glenberg, A. M., Sato, M., Cattaneo, L., Riggio, L., Palumbo, D., & Buccino, G. (2008). Processing abstract language modulates motor system activity. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 905-919.
51. Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). Hearing gesture: How our hands help us think. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
52. Goldin-Meadow, S., Nusbaum, H., Kelly, S. D., & Wagner, S. (2001). Explaining math: Gesturing lightens the load. Psychological Science, 12, 516-522.
53. Hasler, B. S., Kersten, B., & Sweller, J. (2007). Learner control, cognitive load and instructional animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 713-729.
54. Hauk, O., Johnsrude, I., & Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron, 41, 301-307.
55. Hegarty, M., Kriz, S., & Cate, C. (2003). The role of mental animations and external animations in understanding mechanical systems. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 325-360.
56. Hegarty, M., Mayer, S., Kriz, S., & Keehner, M. (2005). The role of gestures in mental animation. Spatial Cognition and Computation, 5, 333-356.
57. Höffler, T. N., & Leutner, D. (2007). Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 17, 722-738.
58. Hoover, M. A., & Richardson, D. C. (2008). When facts go down the rabbit hole: Contrasting features and objecthood as indexes to memory. Cognition, 108, 533-542.
59. Keehner, M., Hegarty, M., Cohen, C. A., Khooshabeh, P., & Montello, D. R. (2009). Spatial reasoning with external visualizations: What matters is what you see, not whether you interact. Cognitive Science, 32, 1099-1132.
60. Kelly, S. D. (2001). Broadening the units of analysis in communication: Speech and nonverbal behaviours in pragmatic comprehension. Journal of Child Language, 28, 325-349.
61. Klahr, D., Triona, L. M., & Williams, C. (2007). Hands on what? The relative effectiveness of physical versus virtual materials in an engineering design project by middle school children. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 183-203.
62. Klatzky, R. L., Pellegrino, J. W., McCloskey, B. P., & Doherty, S. (1989). Can you squeeze a tomato? The role of motor representations in semantic sensibility judgments. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 56-77.
63. Koriat, A., & Pearlman-Avnion, S. (2003). Memory organization of action events and its relationship to memory performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 132, 435-454.
64. Laeng, B., & Teodorescu, D. (2002). Eye scanpaths during visual imagery reenact those of perception of the same visual scene. Cognitive Science, 26, 207-231.
65. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
66. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.
67. Lowe, R. K. (2004). Interrogation of a dynamic visualization during learning. Learning and Instruction, 14, 257-274.
68. Lusk, M. M., & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Varying a pedagogical agent's degree of embodiment under two visual search conditions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 747-764.
69. Manches, A., O'Malley, C., & Benford, S. (2010). The role of physical representations in solving number problems: A comparison of young children's use of physical and virtual materials. Computers in Education, 54, 622-640.
70. Marley, S. C., Levin, J. R., & Glenberg, A. M. (2007). Improving Native American children's listening comprehension through concrete representations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 537-550.
71. Mayer, R. E., & Chandler, P. (2001). When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages? Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 390-397.
72. 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.
73. Nairne, J. S. (2002). The myth of the encoding-retrieval match. Memory, 10, 389-395.
74. Perry, M., Berch, D., & Singleton, J. L. (1995). Constructing shared understanding: The role of nonverbal input in learning contexts. Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues, 6, 213-236.
75. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child. New York: Basic Books.
76. Ping, R., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2008). Hands in the air: Using ungrounded iconic gestures to teach children conservation of quantity. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1277-1287.
77. Ping, R., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2010). Gesturing saves cognitive resources when talking about non-present objects. Cognitive Science, 34, 602-619.
78. Pulvermulller, F., Hauk, O., Nikolin, V. V., & Ilmoniemi, R. J. (2005). Functional links between language and motor systems. European Journal of Neuroscience, 21, 793-797.
79. Rapp, D., & Kurby, C. A. (2008). The 'ins' and 'outs' of learning: Internal representations and external visualizations. In J. K. Gilbert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education. the Netherlands: Springer.
80. Richardson, D., & Kirkham, N. (2004). Multi-modal events and moving locations: Eye movements of adults and 6-month-olds reveal dynamic spatial indexing. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 133, 46-62.
81. Richardson, D., & Spivey, M. (2000). Representation, space and Hollywood Squares: Looking at things that aren't there anymore. Cognition, 76, 269-295.
82. Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (2004). The mirror-neuron system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27, 169-192.
83. Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). The power of testing memory. Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 181-210.
84. Schnotz, W., & Lowe, R. K. (2008). A unified view of learning from animated and static graphics. In R. K. Lowe & W. Schnotz (Eds.), Learning with animation. Research implications for design (pp. 304-356). New York: Cambridge University Press.
85. Schwan, S., & Riempp, R. (2004). The cognitive benefits of interactive videos: Learning to tie nautical knots. Learning and Instructions, 14, 293-305.
86. Schwartz, D. L., & Black, J. B. (1996). Shuttling between depictive models and abstract rules: Induction and fallback. Cognitive Science, 20, 457-497.
87. Schwartz, D. L., & Holton, D. (2000). Tool use and the effect of action on the imagination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Cognition, and Memory, 26, 1655-1665.
88. Singer, M. A., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2005). Children learn when their teacher's gestures and speech differ. Psychological Science, 16, 85-89.
89. Solomon, K. O., & Barsalou, L. W. (2001). Representing properties locally. Cognitive Psychology, 43, 129-169.
90. Spivey, M., & Geng, J. (2001). Oculomotor mechanisms activated by imagery and memory: Eye movements to absent objects. Psychological Research, 65, 235-241.
91. Spivey, M., Richardson, D. C., & Dale, R. (2009). Movements of eye and hand in language and cognition. In E. Morsella, J. Bargh, & P. M. Gollwitzer (Eds.), The psychology of action (Vol. 2, pp. 225-249). New York: Oxford University Press.
92. Stanfield, R. A., & Zwaan, R. A. (2001). The effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition. Psychological Science, 12, 153-156.
93. Tettamanti, M., Buccino, G., Saccuman, M. C., Gallese, V., Danna, M., Scifo, P., et al. (2005). Listening to action related sentences activates fronto-parietal motor circuits. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 273-281.
94. Thomas, L. E., & Lleras, A. (2009). Swinging into thought: Directed movement guides insight in problem solving. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 719-723.
95. Triona, L. M., & Klahr, D. (2003). Point and click or grab and heft: Comparing the influence of physical and virtual instructional materials on elementary school students' ability to design experiments. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 149-173.
96. Tversky, B., Bauer-Morrison, J., & Betrancourt, M. (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate? International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 57, 247-262.
97. Valenzeno, L., Alibali, M. W., & Klatzky, R. (2003). Teachers' gestures facilitate students' learning: A lesson in symmetry. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 187-204.
98. van Gog, T., Paas, F., Marcus, N., Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2009). The mirror-neuron system and observational learning: Implications for the effectiveness of dynamic visualizations. Educational Psychology Review, 21, 21-30.
99. van Gog, T., Paas, F., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Witte, P. (2005). Uncovering the problem-solving process: Cued retrospective reporting versus concurrent and retrospective reporting. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 11, 237-244.
100. Wexler, M., & Klam, F. (2001). Movement prediction and movement production. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 27, 48-64.
101. Williams, M. D. (1996). Learner-control and instructional technologies. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 957-983). New York: Macmillan.
102. Wilson, N. L., & Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (2007). Real and imagined body movement primes metaphor comprehension. Cognitive Science, 31, 721-731.
103. Wong, A., Marcus, N., Ayres, P., Smith, L., Cooper, G. A., Paas, F., et al. (2009). Instructional animations can be superior to statics when learning human motor skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 339-347.
104. Zacharia, Z., & Olympiou, G. (2010). Physical versus virtual manipulative experimentation in physics learning. Learning and Instruction, 21, 317-331.
105. Zwaan, R. A. (1999). Embodied cognition, perceptual symbols, and situation models. Discourse Processes, 28, 81-88.
106. Zwaan, R. A., Madden, C. J., Yaxley, R. H., & Aveyard, M. E. (2004). Moving words: Dynamic mental representations in language comprehension. Cognitive Science, 28, 611-619.
107. Zwaan, R. A., Stanfield, R. A., & Yaxley, R. H. (2002). Language comprehenders mentally represent the shapes of objects. Psychological Science, 13, 168-171.
108. Zwaan, R. A., & Taylor, L. J. (2006). Seeing, acting, understanding: Motor resonance in language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 135, 1-11.