Drawing pictures during learning from scientific text: TESTING the generative drawing effect and the prognostic drawing effect

Contemporary Educational Psychology

Volumn 39, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 275-286

  Schmeck, Annett ^a   Mayer, Richard E ^b   Opfermann, Maria ^a   Pfeiffer, Vanessa ^a   Leutner, Detlev ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DUISBURG ESSEN   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Drawing; Generative drawing effect; Generative learning activities; Prognostic drawing effect; Text comprehension

Indexed keywords

EID: 84908311168     PISSN: 0361476X     EISSN: 10902384     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.07.003     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Ainsworth S., Prain V., Tytler R. Drawing to learn in science. Science 2011, 333:1096-1097.
2. Alesandrini K.L. Pictorial-verbal and analytic-holistic learning strategies in science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology 1981, 73:358-368.
3. Alesandrini K.L. Pictures and adult learning. Instructional Science 1984, 13:63-77.
4. Baron R.M., Kenny D.A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51:1173-1182.
5. Brünken R., Plass J.L., Leutner D. Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist 2003, 38:53-61.
6. Carney R.N., Levin J.R. Pictorial illustrations still improve students' learning from text. Educational Psychology Review 2002, 14:5-26.
7. de Jong T. The guided discovery principle in multimedia learning. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning 2005, 215-228. Cambridge University Press, New York. R.E. Mayer (Ed.).
8. de Jong T. Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: Some food for thought. Instructional Science 2010, 38:105-134.
9. Ekstrom R.B., French J.W., Harman H.H. Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests 1976, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ.
10. Greene T.R. Children's understanding of class inclusion hierarchies: The relationship between external representation and task performance. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 1989, 48:62-89.
11. Hall V.C., Bailey J., Tillman C. Can student-generated illustrations be worth ten thousand words?. Journal of Educational Psychology 1997, 89:677-681.
12. Höffler T.N. Spatial ability: Its influence on Learning with visualizations - A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychology Review 2010, 22:245-269.
13. Höffler T.N., Schmeck A., Opfermann M. Static and dynamic visual representations: Individual differences in processing. Learning through visual displays 2013, 133-163. Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, NC. G. Schraw, M.T. McCrudden, D. Robinson (Eds.).
14. Kalyuga S., Chandler P., Sweller J. Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology 1999, 13:351-371.
15. Leopold C. Lernstrategien und Textverstehen [Learning strategies and text comprehension] 2009, Waxmann, Münster.
16. Leopold C., Leutner D. Science text comprehension: Drawing, main idea selection, and summarizing as learning strategies. Learning and Instruction 2012, 22:16-26.
17. Lesgold A.M., DeGood H., Levin J.R. Pictures and young children's prose learning: A supplementary report. Journal of Reading Behavior 1977, 9:353-360.
18. Lesgold A.M., Levin J.R., Shimron J., Guttman J. Pictures and young children's learning from oral prose. Journal of Educational Psychology 1975, 67:636-642.
19. Leutner D., Leopold C., Sumfleth E. Cognitive load and science text comprehension: Effects of drawing and mentally imagining text content. Computers in Human Behavior 2009, 25:284-289.
20. Mayer R.E. Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. The American Psychologist 2004, 59:14-19.
21. Mayer R.E. Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning 2005, 31-48. Cambridge University Press, New York. R.E. Mayer (Ed.).
22. Mayer R.E. Multimedia learning 2009, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY. 2nd ed.
23. Mayer R.E., Wittrock M.C. Problem solving. Handbook of educational psychology 2006, 287-303. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. P. Alexander, P. Winne, G. Phye (Eds.).
24. Paas F. Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics-A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology 1992, 84:429-434.
25. Paas F., Tuovinen J., Tabbers H.K., Van Gerven P.W.M. Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist 2003, 38:63-71.
26. Paivio A. Mental representation: A dual coding approach 1986, Oxford University Press, New York.
27. Pashler H., Bain P., Bottage B., Graesser A., Koedinger K., McDaniel M., et al. Organizing instruction and study to improve student learning 2007, National Center for Educational Research, Washington, DC.
28. Rasco R.W., Tennyson R.D., Boutwell R.C. Imagery instructions and drawings in learning prose. Journal of Educational Psychology 1975, 67:188-192.
29. Rheinberg F., Vollmeyer R., Burns B.D. FAM: Ein fragebogen zur erfassung aktueller motivation in lern- und leistungssituationen [QCM: A questionnaire to assess current motivation in learning situations]. Diagnostica 2001, 47:57-66.
30. Schnotz W. An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning 2005, 49-70. Cambridge University Press, New York. R.E. Mayer (Ed.).
31. Schwamborn A., Mayer R.E., Thillmann H., Leopold C., Leutner D. Drawing as a generative activity and drawing as a prognostic activity. Journal of Educational Psychology 2010, 102:872-879.
32. Schwamborn A., Thillmann H., Opfermann M., Leutner D. Cognitive load and instructionally supported learning with provided and learner-generated visualizations. Computers in Human Behavior 2011, 27:89-93.
33. Scientific research in education 2002, National Academy Press, Washington, DC. R.J. Shavelson, L. Towne (Eds.).
34. Sweller J., Ayres P., Kalyuga S. Cognitive Load Theory 2011, Springer, New York.
35. Tirre W.C., Manelis L., Leicht K. The effects of imaginal and verbal strategies on prose comprehension by adults. Journal of Reading Behavior 1979, 11:99-106.
36. van Meter P. Drawing construction as a strategy for learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology 2001, 69:129-140.
37. van Meter P., Aleksic M., Schwartz A., Garner J. Learner-generated drawing as a strategy for learning from content area text. Contemporary Educational Psychology 2006, 31:142-166.
38. van Meter P., Garner J. The promise and practice of learner-generated drawings: Literature review and synthesis. Educational Psychology Review 2005, 12:261-312.
39. Van Gog T., Paas F. Instructional efficiency: Revisiting the original construct in educational research. Educational Psychologist 2008, 43:16-26.
40. Vollmeyer R., Rheinberg F. Does motivation affect learning via persistence?. Learning and Instruction 2000, 4:293-309.
41. Weinstein C.E., Mayer R.E. The teaching of learning strategies. Handbook of research on teaching 1986, 315-327. Macmillan, New York. M.C. Wittrock (Ed.).
42. Wittrock M.C. Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist 1990, 24:345-376.