Do learner characteristics moderate the seductive-details-effect? A cognitive-load-study using eye-tracking

Educational Technology and Society

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 24-36

  Park, Babette ^a   Korbach, Andreas ^a   Brünken, Roland ^a  

^a SAARLAND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Eye tracking; Multimedia learning; Prior knowledge; Seductive details; Spatial ability

Indexed keywords

EID: 84948140884     PISSN: 11763647     EISSN: 14364522     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Canham, M., & Hegarty, M. (2010). Effects of knowledge and display design on comprehension of complex graphics. Learning and Instruction, 20, 155-166.
2. Dewhurst, R., Nyström, M., Jarodzka, H., Foulsham, T., Johansson, R., & Holmqvist, K. (2012). It depends on how you look at it: Scanpath comparison in multiple dimensions with MultiMatch, a vector-based approach. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 1079-1100.
3. Ekstrom, R. B., French, J. W., Harman, H. H., & Dermen, D. (1976). Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Services.
4. Garner, R., & Gillingham, M. G. (1991). Topic knowledge, cognitive interest, and text recall: A Microanalysis. Journal of Experimental Education, 59, 310-319.
5. Garner, R., Gillingham, M. G., & White, C. S. (1989). Effects of ''seductive details" on macroprocessing and microprocessing in adults and children. Cognition and Instruction, 6, 41-57.
6. Glenberg, A. M., Wilkinson, A. C., & Epstein, W. (1982). The Illusion of knowing: Failure in the self-assessment of comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 10(6), 597-602. doi:10.3758/BF03202442
7. Harp, S. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1998). How seductive details do their damage: A Theory of cognitive interest in science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 414-434.
8. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A Regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
9. Hidi, S., & Baird, W. (1988). Strategies for increasing text-based interest and students' recall of expository texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 465-483.
10. Holsanova, J., Holmberg, N., & Holmqvist, K. (2009). Reading information graphics: The Role of spatial contiguity and dual attentional guidance. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1215-1226.
11. Hyöna, J. (2010). The Use of eye movements in the study of multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 172-176.
12. Jian, Y. C., Wu, C. J., & Su, J. H. (2014). Learners' eye movements during construction of mechanical kinematic representations from static diagrams. Learning and Instruction, 32, 51-62.
13. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1976). Eye fixations and cognitive processes. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 441-480.
14. Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The Expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38, 23-31.
15. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1998). Levels of expertise and instructional design. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 40, 1 - 17.
16. Lehman, S., Schraw, G., McCrudden, M. T., & Hartley, K. (2007). Processing and recall of seductive details in scientific text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 569-587.
17. Leppink, J., Paas, F., Van Gog, T., Van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2014). Effects of pairs of problems and examples on task performance and different types of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 30, 32-42.
18. Magner, U. I. E., Schwonke, R., Aleven, V., Popescu, O., & Renkl, A. (2014). Triggering situational interest by decorative illustrations both fosters and hinders learning in computer-based learning environments. Learning and Instruction, 29, 141-152.
19. Mayer, R. E. (2010). Unique contributions of eye-tracking research to the study of learning with graphics. Learning and Instruction, 20, 167-171.
20. Mayer, R. E., & Sims, V. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 389-401.
21. McCrudden, M. T., & Corkill, A. J. (2010). Verbal ability and the processing of scientific text with seductive detail sentences. Reading Psychology, 31(3), 282-300.
22. McInerney, D. M., & Sinclair, K. E. (1991). Cross cultural model testing: Inventory of school motivation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51, 123-133.
23. Meneghetti, C., Gyselinck, V., Pazzaglia, F., & De Beni, R. (2009). Individual differences in spatial text processing: High spatial ability can compensate for spatial working memory interference. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 577-589.
24. Münzer, S., Seufert, T., & Brünken, R. (2009). Learning from multimedia presentations: Facilitation function of animations and spatial abilities. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(4), 481-485.
25. Oberauer, K., Süß, H. M., Schulze, R., Wilhelm, O., & Wittmann, W. W. (2000). Working memory capacity - Facets of a cognitive ability construct. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 1017-1045.
26. Paas, F. G. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 429-434.
27. Park, B., & Brünken, R. (2015). The Rhythm method: A New method for measuring cognitive load - an experimental dual-task study. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 29, 232-243. doi:10.1002/acp.3100
28. Park, B., Flowerday, T., & Brünken, R. (2015). Cognitive and affective effects of seductive details in multimedia learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 267-278.
29. Park, B., Knörzer, L, Plass, J. L., & Brünken, R. (2015). Emotional design and positive emotions in multimedia learning: An eyetracking study on the use of anthropomorphisms. Computers & Education, 86, 30-42.
30. Park, B., Moreno, R., Seufert, T., & Brünken, R. (2011). Does cognitive load moderate the seductive details effect? A multimedia study. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 5-10.
31. Park, B., Plass, J. L., & Brünken, R. (2014). Cognitive and affective processes in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 125-127.
32. Plass, J. L., Heidig, S., Hayward, E. O., Homer, B. D., & Um, E. (2014). Emotional design in multimedia learning: Effects of shape and color on affect and learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 128-140.
33. Plass, J., Moreno, R., & Brünken, R. (Eds.) (2010). Cognitive load theory. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
34. Rayner, K., Li, X., Williams, C. C., Cave, K. R., & Well, A. D. (2007). Eye movements during information processing tasks: Individual differences and cultural effects. Vision Research, 47, 2714-2726.
35. Sanchez, C. A., & Wiley, J. (2006). An Examination of the seductive details effect in terms of working memory capacity. Memory & Cognition, 34(2), 344-355.
36. Schmidt-Weigand, F., Kohnert, A., & Glowalla, U. (2010). A Closer look at split visual attention in system- and self-paced instruction in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 100-110.
37. Seufert, T., Schütze, M., & Brünken, R. (2009). Memory characteristics and modality in multimedia learning: An Aptitude-treatment-interaction study. Learning and Instruction, 19, 28-42.
38. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4
39. Tsai, M. J., Hou, H. T., Lai, M. L., Liu, W. Y., & Yang, F. Y. (2012). Visual attention for solving multiple-choice science problem: An Eye-tracking analysis. Computers & Education, 58(1), 375-385.