Does animation enhance learning? A meta-analysis

Computers and Education

Volumn 101, Issue , 2016, Pages 150-167

  Berney, Sandra ^a   Bétrancourt, Mireille ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Animation; Instructional design, teaching learning strategies; Meta analysis; Moderator factors; Static graphics

Indexed keywords

ANIMATION; MODERATORS; RANDOM PROCESSES;

CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS; META ANALYSIS; PAIR-WISE COMPARISON; RANDOM EFFECTS MODEL; STATIC GRAPHICS; SYSTEMATIC SEARCHES; TEACHING/LEARNING STRATEGY;

FACTOR ANALYSIS;

EID: 84976514381     PISSN: 03601315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.06.005     Document Type: Article

References (127)

1. Adesope, O.O., Nesbit, J.C., Animated and static concept maps enhance learning from spoken narration. Learning and Instruction 27 (2013), 1–10, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.02.002.
2. Adesope, O.O., Nesbit, J.C., Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning environments: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology 104:1 (2012), 250–263, 10.1037/a0026147.
3. Ainsworth, S., How do animations influence learning?. Robinson, N.D., Schraw, G., (eds.) Current perspectives on cognition, learning, and Instruction: Recent innovations in educational technology that facilitate student learning, 2008, Information Age Publishing, 37–67.
4. Ainsworth, S., How should we evaluate complex multimedia environments?. Rouet, J.-F., Lowe, R., Schnotz, W., (eds.) Understanding multimedia comprehension, 2008, Springer, New York, New York, USA, 249–265.
5. Ainsworth, S., VanLabeke, N., Multiple forms of dynamic representation. Learning and Instruction 14:3 (2004), 241–255, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.002.
6. Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. 2001, Longman, New York, New York, USA.
7. Ayres, P., Marcus, N., Chan, C., Qian, N., Learning hand manipulative tasks: When instructional animations are superior to equivalent static representations. Computers in Human Behavior 25:2 (2009), 348–353, 10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.013.
8. Baddeley, A.D., Working memory and conscious awareness. Theories of Memory, 1, 1993, 11.
9. Baddeley, A.D., Hitch, G., Working memory. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation 8 (1974), 47–89.
10. Baek, Y.K., Layne, B.H., Color, graphics, and animation in a computer-assisted learning tutorial lesson. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction 15:4 (1988), 131–135.
11. Bauer-Morrison, J., Tversky, B., Bétrancourt, M., Animation: Does it facilitate learning?. AAAI spring symposium on smart graphics, 2000 (pp. 53–59).
12. Beijersbergen, M.J., van Oostendorp, H., Static or animated diagrams: Their effect on understanding, confidence and mental effort. 12th biennal Conference for research on learning and instruction. Budapest, 2007, EARLI, Hungary.
13. Bétrancourt, M., Bauer-Morrison, J., Tversky, B., Les animations sont-elles vraiment plus efficaces . Revue D'intelligence Artificielle 14:1–2 (2001), 149–166.
14. Bétrancourt, M., Dillenbourg, P., Clavien, L., Reducing cognitive load in learning from animations: Impact of delivery features. Rouet, J.-F., Schnotz, W., Lowe, R.K., (eds.) Understanding multimedia documents, 2008, Springer (p. 61.78).
15. Bétrancourt, M., Realini, N., Le contrôle sur le déroulement de l'animation. Journée d'Etudes sur le Traitement Cognitif des Systèmes d'Informations Complexes, 2005, JETCSIC 2005, Nice, France, 1–6.
16. Bétrancourt, M., Tversky, B., Effect of computer animation on user's performance: A review. Le Travail Humain 63:4 (2000), 311–330.
17. Blankenship, J., Dansereau, D.F., The effect of animated node-link displays on information recall. The Journal of Experimental Education 68:4 (2000), 293–308, 10.1080/00220970009600640.
18. Bloom, B.S., Mastery learning. Block, J.H., (eds.) Master learning: Theory and practice, 1971, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York, 47–63.
19. Bloom, B.S., Krathwohl, D.R., Taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of educational goals - Handbook I: Cognitive domain. 1956, McKay, New York, New York, USA.
20. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L.V., Higgins, J.P.T., Rothstein, H.R., Introduction to meta-analysis. 2009, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, West Sussex, UK.
21. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L.V., Rothstein, H., Fixed effect vs. random effects models. Retrieved from, 2007 https://www.meta-analysis.com/downloads/Meta-analysis.fixed.effect.vs.random.effects.072607.pdf.
22. Boucheix, J.-M., Guignard, H., What animated illustrations conditions can improve technical document comprehension in young students? Format, signaling and control of the presentation. European Journal of Psychology of Education 10:4 (2005), 369–388.
23. Boucheix, J.-M., Lowe, R.K., An eye tracking comparison of external pointing cues and internal continuous cues in learning with complex animations. Learning and Instruction 20:2 (2010), 123–135, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.015.
24. Boucheix, J.-M., Lowe, R.K., Putri, D.K., Groff, J., Cueing animations: Dynamic signaling aids information extraction and comprehension. Learning and Instruction 25 (2013), 71–84, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.11.005.
25. Byrne, M.D., Catrambone, R., Stasko, J.T., Evaluating animations as student aids in learning computer algorithms. Computers and Education 33:4 (1999), 253–278.
26. Carney, R.N., Levin, J.R., Pictorial Illustrations still improve students’ learning from text. Educational Psychology Review 14:1 (2002), 5–26.
27. Catrambone, R., Seay, F.A., Using animation to help students learn computer algorithms. Human Factors 44:3 (2002), 495–511.
28. Chandler, P., Sweller, J., Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction 8:4 (1991), 293–332.
29. ChanLin, L.-J., Animation to teach students of different knowledge levels. Journal of Instructional Psychology 25:3 (1998), 166–175.
30. ChanLin, L.-J., Formats and prior knowledge on learning in a computer-based lesson. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 17:4 (2001), 409–419, 10.1046/j.0266-4909.2001.00197.x.
31. Cooper, H.M., Integrating research: A guide for literature review. (Sage, Ed.) (2nd ed.), 2nd ed., 1989, Sage Publications Inc, Newbury Park, CA, USA.
32. Craig, S.D., Gholson, B., Driscoll, D.M., Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational Environments: Effects of agent properties, picture features, and redundancy. Journal of Educational Psychology 94:2 (2002), 428–434, 10.1037//0022-0663.94.2.428.
33. de Koning, B.B., Tabbers, H.K., Rikers, R.M.J.P., Paas, F., Attention guidance in learning from a complex animation: Seeing is understanding?. Learning and Instruction 20:2 (2010), 111–122, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.010.
34. Dubois, M., Tajariol, F., Présentation multimodale de l'information et apprentissage: Le cas d'une leçon d'aéronautique. Cinquième colloque hypermédias et apprentissages, 2001, 197–209.
35. Fischer, S., Lowe, R.K., Schwan, S., Effects of presentation speed of a dynamic visualization on the understanding of a mechanical system. Applied Cognitive Psychology 22:8 (2007), 1126–1141, 10.1002/acp.
36. Gagné, R.M., Learning outcomes and their effects. American Psychologist, 1982, 377–385.
37. Ginns, P., Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning and Instruction 15:4 (2005), 313–331, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.07.001.
38. Hays, T.A., Spatial abilities and the effects of computer animation on short-term and long-term comprehension. Journal of Educational Computing Research 14:2 (1996), 139–155.
39. Hedges, L.V., Olkin, I., Statistical methods for meta-analysis. 1985, Academic Press, Inc, New York, New York, USA.
40. Hegarty, M., Dynamic visualizations and learning: Getting to the difficult questions. Learning and Instruction 14:3 (2004), 343–351, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.007.
41. Hegarty, M., Mechanical reasoning by mental simulation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8:6 (2004), 280–285.
42. Hegarty, M., Canham, M.S., Fabrikant, S.I., Thinking about the weather: How display salience and knowledge affect performance in a graphic inference task. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 36:1 (2010), 37–53, 10.1037/a0017683.
43. Hegarty, M., Just, M.A., Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. Journal of Memory and Language 32:6 (1993), 717–742.
44. Hegarty, M., Kriz, S., Effect of knowledge and spatial ability on learning from animation. Lowe, R.K., Schnotz, W., (eds.) Learning with animation: Research implications for design, 1st ed., 2008, Cambridge Univ Press, New York, New York, USA, 3–29.
45. Hegarty, M., Kriz, S., Cate, C., The roles of mental animations and external animations in understanding mechanical systems. Cognition and Instruction 21:4 (2003), 325–360.
46. Hegarty, M., Sims, V.K., Individual differences in mental animation during mechanical reasoning. Memory & Cognition 22:4 (1994), 411–430.
47. Höffler, T.N., Animation, Simulation oder Standbilder? Wirkung interaktiver Animationen auf das Verstaendnis komplexer biologischer Prozesse. (Unpublished master thesis). Psychology, 2003, Christian-Albrechts Universität, Kiel, Germany.
48. Höffler, T.N., Spatial ability: Its influence on learning with visualizations - A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychology Review 22:3 (2010), 245–269, 10.1007/s10648-010-9126-7.
49. Höffler, T.N., Leutner, D., Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction 17:6 (2007), 722–738, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.013.
50. Höffler, T.N., Leutner, D., The role of spatial ability in learning from instructional animations – Evidence for an ability-as-compensator hypothesis. Computers in Human Behavior 27:1 (2011), 209–216, 10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.042.
51. Höffler, T.N., Prechtl, H., Nerdel, C., The influence of visual cognitive style when learning from instructional animations and static pictures. Learning and Individual Differences 20:5 (2010), 479–483, 10.1016/j.lindif.2010.03.001.
52. Höffler, T.N., Schwartz, R.N., Effects of pacing and cognitive style across dynamic and non-dynamic representations. Computers & Education 57:2 (2011), 1716–1726, 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.03.012.
53. Imhof, B., Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., Realism in dynamic, static-sequential, and static-simultaneous visualizations during knowledge acquisition on locomotion patterns. Knowledge Acquisition, 2007, 2962–2967 2002.
54. Jones, S., Scaife, M., Animated diagrams: An investigation into the cognitive effects of using animation to illustrate dynamic processes. Anderson, M., Cheng, P., (eds.) Theory & applications of diagrams. Lecture notes in artificial intelligence, 2000, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 231–244.
55. Kalyuga, S., Relative effectiveness of animated and static diagrams: An effect of learner prior knowledge. Computers in Human Behavior 24:3 (2008), 852–861, 10.1016/j.chb.2007.02.018.
56. Krathwohl, D.R., A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice 41:4 (2002), 212–218, 10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2.
57. Kriz, S., Hegarty, M., Constructing and revising mental models of a mechanical system: The role of domain knowledge in understanding external visualizations. Associates, L.E., (eds.) Proceedings of the 26th annual conference of the cognitive science society, 2004, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, USA.
58. Kriz, S., Hegarty, M., Top-down and bottom-up influences on learning from animations. Lowe, R., Schnotz, W., (eds.) International journal of human-computer studies, Vol. 65, 2007, Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, England, 911–930, 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2007.06.005.
59. Kühl, T., Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., Enhancing learning from dynamic and static visualizations by means of cueing. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia 21:1 (2012), 71–88.
60. Lai, S.-L., Increasing associative learning of abstract concepts through audiovisual redundancy. Journal of Educational Computing Research 23:3 (2000), 275–289, 10.2190/XKLM-3A96-2LAV-CB3L.
61. Levin, J.R., Anglin, G.J., Carney, R.N., On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. Willows, D.M., Houghton, H.A., (eds.) The psychology of illustrations Basic research, Vol. 1, 1987, Springer, New York, New York, USA, 1–50.
62. Lewalter, D., Cognitive strategies for learning from static and dynamic visuals. Learning and Instruction 13:2 (2003), 177–189, 10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00019-1.
63. Lin, L., Atkinson, R.K., Using animations and visual cueing to support learning of scientific concepts and processes. Computers & Education 56:3 (2011), 650–658, 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.007.
64. Lipsey, M.W., Wilson, D., Practical meta-analysis. Thousand. 2001, Sage Publications Inc, Oaks, California, USA.
65. Lowe, R.K., Extracting information from an animation during complex visual learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education 14:2 (1999), 225–244, 10.1007/BF03172967.
66. Lowe, R.K., Animation and learning: Selective processing of information in dynamic graphics. Learning and Instruction 13 (2003), 157–176.
67. Lowe, R.K., Boucheix, J.-M., Learning from animated diagrams: How are mental model built?. Diagrammatic representation and inference, 1st ed., 2008, Springer, Berlin, 266–281.
68. Lowe, R.K., Boucheix, J.-M., Complex animations: Cues foster better knowledge structures. 13th EARLI conference, research paper, 2009 (Amsterdam).
69. Marbach-Ad, G., Rotbain, Y., Stavy, R., Using computer animation and illustration activities to improve high school students ’ achievement in molecular genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 45:3 (2008), 273–292, 10.1002/tea.
70. Mautone, P.D., Mayer, R.E., Cognitive aids for guiding graph comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 2007, 640652, 10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.640.
71. Mayer, R.E., Multimedia learning : Are we asking the right questions . Educational Psychologist 32:1 (1997), 1–19.
72. Mayer, R.E., Multimedia learning. Mayer, R.E., (eds.) The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 2nd ed., 2001, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
73. Mayer, R.E., Introduction to multimedia learning. Mayer, R.E., (eds.) The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 2005, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1–16.
74. Mayer, R.E., Chandler, P., When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages?. Journal of Educational Psychology 93:2 (2001), 390–397, 10.1037//0022-0663.93.2.390.
75. Mayer, R.E., Deleeuw, K.E., Ayres, P., Creating retroactive and proactive interference in multimedia learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology 21 (2007), 795–809, 10.1002/acp.
76. Mayer, R.E., Hegarty, M., Mayer, S., Campbell, J., When static media promote active learning: Annotated illustrations versus narrated animations in multimedia instruction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 11:4 (2005), 256–265, 10.1037/1076-898X.11.4.256.
77. Mayer, R.E., Moreno, R., A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1998, 10.1037/0022-0663.90.2.312.
78. Mayer, R.E., Moreno, R., Aids to computer-based multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction 12 (2002), 107–119, 10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00018-4.
79. McCloskey, M., Kohl, D., Naive physics: The curvilinear impetus principle and its role in interactions with moving objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 9:1 (1983), 146–156.
80. Moreno, R., Mayer, R.E., Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 1999 358–268.
81. Moreno, R., Mayer, R.E., Interactive multimodal learning environments. Educational Psychology Review 19:3 (2007), 309–326, 10.1007/s10648-007-9047-2.
82. Münzer, S., Seufert, T., Brünken, R., Learning from multimedia presentations: Facilitation function of animations and spatial abilities. Learning and Individual Differences 19:4 (2009), 481–485, 10.1016/j.lindif.2009.05.001.
83. Narayanan, N.H., Hegarty, M., On designing comprehensible interactive hypermedia manuals. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 48:2 (1998), 267–301, 10.1006/ijhc.1997.0169.
84. Narayanan, N.H., Hegarty, M., Multimedia design for communication of dynamic information. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 57 (2002), 279–315, 10.1006/ijhc.2002.1019.
85. Nerdel, C., Die Wirkung von Animation und Simulation auf das Verstaendnis von stoffwechselphysiologischen Prozessen. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), 2003, Christian-Albrechts Universität, Kiel, Germany.
86. Nesbit, J.C., Adesope, O.O., Learning from animated concept maps with concurrent audio narration. The Journal of Experimental Education 79:2 (2011), 209–230, 10.1080/00220970903292918.
87. Nicholls, C., Merkel, S., The effect of computer animation on students’ understanding of microbiology. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 28 (1996), 359–371.
88. Normand, S.-L.T., Tutorial in biostatistics meta-analysis: Formulating, evaluating, combining, and reporting. Statistics in Medicine 18 (1999), 321–359.
89. Paik, E.S., Schraw, G., Learning with animation and illusions of understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology 105:2 (2013), 278–289, 10.1037/a0030281.
90. Pane, J.F., Corbett, A.T., John, B.E., Assessing dynamics in computer-based instruction. Proceedings of CHI 96 conference on human factors in computing systems, 1996, 197–204 (Vancouver, BC, Canada).
91. Park, O.-C., Gittelman, S.S., Selective use of animation and feedback in computer-based instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development 40:4 (1992), 27–38.
92. Ploetzner, R., Lowe, R.K., A systematic characterisation of expository animations. Computers in Human Behavior 28:3 (2012), 781–794, 10.1016/j.chb.2011.12.001.
93. Rebetez, C., Sous quelles conditions l’ animation améliore-t-elle l’ apprentissage ?. (Unpublished master thesis), 2004, University of Geneva, Geneva.
94. Rebetez, C., Bétrancourt, M., Faut-il vraiment prôner l'interactivité dans les environnements multimédias d'apprentissage. EIAH, (eds.) Envrionnements infromatiques pour L'Apprentissage Humain, 2007, EIAH, Lausanne, Suisse, 323–328.
95. Rebetez, C., Sangin, M., Bétrancourt, M., Dillenbourg, P., Learning from animation enabled by collaboration. Instructional Science 38 (2010), 471–485.
96. Rieber, L.P., The effect of computer animated elaboration strategies and practice on factual and application learning in an elementary science lesson. Journal of Education Computing Research 5:4 (1989), 431–444.
97. Rieber, L.P., Animation, incidental learning and continuing motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology 83 (1991), 318–328.
98. Rieber, L.P., Boyce, M.J., Assad, C., The effect of computer animation on adult learning and retrieval tasks. Journal of Comupter-Based Instruction 17:2 (1990), 46–52.
99. Rigney, J.W., Lutz, K.A., Effect of graphic analogies of concepts in chemistry on learning and attitude. Journal of Educational Psychology 68:3 (1976), 305–311.
100. Rosenthal, R., The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin 86:3 (1979), 638–641, 10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638.
101. Ryoo, K., Linn, M.C., Can dynamic visualizations improve middle school students’ understanding of energy in photosynthesis?. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 49:2 (2012), 218–243, 10.1002/tea.21003.
102. Salomon, G., Interaction of media, cognition, and learning. 1994, Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
103. Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., Catrambone, R., Making the abstract concrete: Visualizing mathematical solution procedures. Computers in Human Behavior 22:1 (2006), 9–25, 10.1016/j.chb.2005.01.009.
104. Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., Huk, T., Imhof, B., Kammerer, Y., The effects of realism in learning with dynamic visualizations. Learning and Instruction 19:6 (2009), 481–494, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.08.001.
105. Schmidt-Weigand, F., Dynamic visualizations in multimedia learning: The influence of verbal explanations on visual attention, cognitive load and learning outcome. (Doctoral dissertation), 2005, Justus-Liebig Universität Giessen, Germany.
106. Schneider, E., Améliorer la Compréhension des Processus Dynamiques avec des Animations Interactives. (Doctoral dissertation), 2007, Université de Bourgogne, Dijon, France.
107. Schnotz, W., An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. Mayer, R.E., (eds.) The cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, 2005, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 49–69.
108. Schnotz, W., Böckheler, J., Grzondziel, H., Individual and co-operative learning with interactive animated pictures. European Journal of Psychology of Education 14:2 (1999), 242–265.
109. Schnotz, W., Lowe, R.K., External and internal representations in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction 13 (2003), 117–123.
110. Schnotz, W., Lowe, R.K., A unified view of learning from animated and static graphics. Lowe, R.K., Schnotz, W., (eds.) Learning with animation. Research implications for design, 2008, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 304–356.
111. Schnotz, W., Rasch, T., Enabling, facilitating and inhibiting effects of animations in multimedia learning: Why reduction of cognitive load can have negative results on learning. Educational Technology Research and Development 53:3 (2005), 47–58.
112. Schwan, S., Riempp, R., The cognitive benefits of interactive videos: Learning to tie nautical knots. Learning and Instruction 14:3 (2004), 293–305, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.005.
113. Spotts, J., Dwyer, F., The effect of computer-generated animation on student achievement of different types of educational objectives. Internationl Journal of Instructional Media 23:4 (1996), 365–375.
114. Sweller, J., Paas, F.G.W., van Merriënboer, J.J.G., Paas, F.G.W., Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review 10:3 (1998), 251–296, 10.1023/A:1022193728205.
115. Szabo, M., Poohkay, B., An experimental study of animation, mathematics achievement, and attitude toward computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 28:3 (1996), 2–9.
116. Tabbers, H.K., Where did the modality effect go ? A failure to replicate of one of Mayer's multimedia learning effects and why this still might make some sense. Educational Psychology, 2001, 2001–2004 (1998).
117. Tabbers, H.K., The modality of text in multimedia instructions. Refining the design guidelines. Doctoral dissertation, 2002, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen.
118. Thompson, S.V., Riding, R.J., The effect of animated diagrams on the understanding of mathematical demonstration in 11- to 14-year old pupils. British Journal of Educational Psychology 60 (1990), 93–98.
119. Tunuguntla, R., Rodriguez, O., Ruiz, J.G., Qadri, S.S., Mintzer, M.J., Van Zuilen, M.H., et al. Computer-based animations and static graphics as medical student aids in learning home safety assessment: A randomized controlled trial. Medical Teacher 30:8 (2008), 815–817, 10.1080/01421590802263508.
120. Tversky, B., Bauer-Morrison, J., Bétrancourt, M., Animation: Can it facilitate?. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 57:4 (2002), 247–262, 10.1006/ijhc.1017.
121. Wang, P.-Y., Vaughn, B.K., Liu, M., The impact of animation interactivity on novices’ learning of introductory statistics. Computers & Education 56:1 (2011), 300–311, 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.011.
122. Watson, G., Butterfield, J., Curran, R., Craig, C., Do dynamic work instructions provide an advantage over static instructions in a small scale assembly task?. Learning and Instruction 20:1 (2010), 84–93, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.05.001.
123. Wilson, D., David Wilson's statistic home page. Retrieved from, 2006 http://mason.gmu.edu/~dwilsonb/ma.html.
124. Wong, A., Marcus, N., Ayres, P., Smith, L., Cooper, G. a., Paas, F., et al. Instructional animations can be superior to statics when learning human motor skills. Computers in Human Behavior 25:2 (2009), 339–347, 10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.012.
125. Wright, P., Milroy, R., Lickorish, A., Static and animated graphics in learning from interactive texts. European Journal of Psychology of Education 14 (1999), 203–224.
126. Wu, C.-F., Chiang, M.-C., Effectiveness of applying 2D static depictions and 3D animations to orthographic views learning in graphical course. Computers & Education 63 (2013), 28–42, 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.012.
127. Yang, E., Andre, T., Greenbowe, T.J., Spatial ability and the impact of visualization. International Journal of Science Education 25:3 (2003), 329–350.