Reducing verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: An undesired desirable difficulty?

Journal of Educational Psychology

Volumn 105, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 266-277

  Yue, Carole L ^a   Bjork, Elizabeth Ligon ^a   Bjork, Robert A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Desirable difficulties; Metacognitive judgments; Multimedia learning; Redundancy

Indexed keywords

EID: 84881112170     PISSN: 00220663     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0031971     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Adesope, O. O., & Nesbit, J. C. (2012). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning environments: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 250-263. doi:10.1037/a0026147
2. Apperson, J. M., Laws, E. L., & Scepansky, J. A. (2008). An assessment of student preferences for PowerPoint presentation structure in undergraduate courses. Computers & Education, 50, 148-153. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.04.003
3. Betrancourt, M. (2005). The animation and interactivity principles in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 287-296). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511816819.019
4. Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe & A. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 185-205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (in press). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology.
6. Jamet, E., & Le Bohec, O. (2007). The effect of redundant text in multimedia instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 588-598. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.07.001
7. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351-371. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199908)13:4351:: AID-ACP5893.0.CO;2-6
8. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2004). When redundant on-screen text in multimedia technical instruction can interfere with learning. Human Factors, 46, 567-581. doi:10.1518/hfes.46.3.567.50405
9. Karpicke, J. D. (2009). Metacognitive control and strategy selection: Deciding to practice retrieval during learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 469-486.
10. Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363
11. Kornell, N., & Bjork, R. A. (2008). Learning concepts and categories: Is spacing the "enemy of induction". Psychological Science, 19, 585-592.
12. 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
13. Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation, and the transient information effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 943-951. doi:10.1002/acp.1787
14. Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31-48). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511816819.004
15. Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 187-198. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.187
16. Mayer, R. E., & Johnson, C. I. (2008). Revising the redundancy principle in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 380-386. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.380
17. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358-368. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.358
18. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 156-163. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.1.156
19. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
20. Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13, 141-156. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00017-8
21. Sweller, J. (2005). The redundancy principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 159-168). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511816819.011
22. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory in perspective. In J. M. Spector & S. Lajoie, Expectations in the learning sciences, instructional systems and performance technologies (pp. 237-242). New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4_18
23. Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251-296. doi:10.1023/A:1022193728205