Cognitive consequences of segmentation and modality methods in learning from instructional animations

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences

Volumn 30, Issue , 2011, Pages 1481-1487

  Hassanabadi, Hamidreza ^a   Robatjazi, Effat Sadat ^b   Savoji, Azar Pakdaman ^b  

^a KHARAZMI UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

^b ISLAMIC AZAD UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

Author keywords

Cognitive load; Instructional animations; Multimedia learning; Segmentation; Working memory

Indexed keywords

EID: 84855678623     PISSN: 18770428     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.10.287     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (38)

1. Baddeley, A. D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559.
2. Betrancourt, M. (2005). The animation and interactivity principles in multimedia Learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 254-287). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
3. Chandler, P. (2009). Dynamic visualisations and hypermedia: Beyond the "Wow" factor. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 389-392.
4. Chung, W. (2006). The effects of presentation pace and modality on learning a multimedia science lesson. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas, Austin.
5. Clark, R.C., & Mayer, R.E. (2008). E-learning and the science of instruction proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning, second edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
6. Florax, M., & ploetzner, R. (2010). What contributes to the split - attention effect? the role of text segmentation, picture labeling, and spatial proximity. learning and instruction, 20, 216-224.
7. Ginns, P. (2005). Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning and Instruction, 15, 313-331. (Pubitemid 41288290)
8. Hasler, B. S., kersten, B., & sweller, J. (2007). Learner control, cognitive load and instructional Animation. Applied cognitive psychology, 21, 713 - 729. (Pubitemid 47490404)
9. Hassanabadi, H. R. (1387/2008). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia learning environments: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory, Journal of Iranian Psychologists, 5, 27-41. (in Persion)
10. Höffler, T. N., & Leutner, D. (2007). Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 17, 722-738.
11. Jeun, H., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). The role of visual indicators in dual sensory mode instruction. Eduational psychology, 17, 329-343.
12. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351-371.
13. 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. (Pubitemid 39517259)
14. Lowe, R. K. (1999). Extracting information from an animation during complex visual learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 225-244.
15. Lowe, R. K. (2004). Interrogation of a dynamic visualization during learning. Learning and Instruction, 14, 257-274.
16. Mayer, R. E. (1999). Multimedia aids to problem solving transfer. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 611-623. (Pubitemid 41167987)
17. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
18. Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31-48). New York: Cambridge University Press.
19. 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.
20. Mayer, R. E., Dow, G. T., & Mayer, S. (2003). Multimedia learning in an interactive self-explaining environment: What works in the design of agent-based microworlds? Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 806-813. (Pubitemid 37514218)
21. Mayer, R. E., Hegarty, M., Mayer, S., & Campbell, J. (2005). When Static Media Promote Active Learning: Annotated Illustrations Versus Narrated Animations in Multimedia Instruction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11, 256-265. (Pubitemid 43089584)
22. 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.
23. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 43-52. (Pubitemid 36400003)
24. Mayer, R. E., Moreno, R., Boire, M., & Vagge, S. (1999). Maximizing constructivist learning from multimedia communications by minimizing cognitive load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 638-643.
25. Moreno, R. (2007). Optimizing learning from animations by minimizing cognitive load: Cognitive and affective consequences of signaling and segmentation methods. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 1-17.
26. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358-368.
27. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2007). Interactive multimodal learning environments special issue on interactive learning environments: Contemporary issues and trends. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 309-326.
28. Moreno, R., & Valdez, A. (2005). Cognitive load and learning effect of having students organize picture and words in multimedia environments: The role of student interactivity and feedback. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53, 35-45. (Pubitemid 41137732)
29. Mousavi, S., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 319-334.
30. Perez, E. C. & White, M. A. (1985). Student evaluation of motivational and learning attributes of microcomputer software. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 12, 39-43.
31. Schwan, S., & Riempp, R. (2004). The cognitive benefits of interactive videos: Learning to tie moutical knots. Learning and Instruction, 14, 293-305. (Pubitemid 39216290)
32. Sweller, J. (2004). Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32, 9-31. (Pubitemid 39045928)
33. Sweller, J. (2005). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 19-30). New York: Cambridge University Press.
34. Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251-296.
35. Tabbers, H.K. (2002). The modality of text in multimedia instructions: Refining the design guidelines. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen.
36. Tabbers, H. K., Martens, R. L., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2004). Multimedia instructions and cognitive load theory: Effect of modality and cueing. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 71-81. (Pubitemid 38422580)
37. Tversky, B., Morrison, J. B., & Betrancourt, M. (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57, 247-262.
38. Wouters, P., Tabbers, H. K., & Paas, F. (2007). Interactivity in video- based models. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 327-342.