Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T13:55:09.421Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part V - Principles for Managing Essential Processing in Multimedia Learning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2021

Richard E. Mayer
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Barbara
Logan Fiorella
Affiliation:
University of Georgia
Get access

Summary

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Atkinson, R. K. (2002). Optimizing learning from examples using animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 416427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayres, P. (2006). Impact of reducing intrinsic cognitive load on learning in a mathematical domain. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(3), 287298.Google Scholar
Biard, N., Cojean, S., & Jamet, E. (2018). Effects of segmentation and pacing on procedural learning by video. Computers in Human Behavior, 89, 411417.Google Scholar
Boucheix, J., & Guignard, H. (2005). 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, 20, 369388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boucheix, J., & Schneider, E. (2009). Static and animated presentations in learning dynamic mechanical systems. Learning and Instruction, 19(2), 112127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2003). Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 5362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunken, R., Seufert, T., & Paas, F. (2010). Measuring cognitive load. In Plass, J. L., Moreno, R., & Brunken, R. (eds.), Cognitive Load Theory (pp. 181202). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chen, C-Y., & Yen, P-R. (2021). Learner control, segmenting, and modality effects in animated demonstrations used as before-class instructions in the flipped classroom. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(1), 4458.Google Scholar
Cheon, J., Crooks, S., & Chung, S. (2014). Does segmenting principle counteract modality principle in instructional animation? British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(1), 5664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, T., Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2005). The impact of sequencing and prior knowledge on learning mathematics through spreadsheet applications. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 1524.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. M. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent properties, picture features, and redundancy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 428434.Google Scholar
Crooks, S. M., Cheon, J., Inan, F., Ari, F., & Flores, R. (2012). Modality and cueing in multimedia learning: Examining cognitive and perceptual explanations for the modality effect. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 10631071.Google Scholar
de Oliveira Neto, J. D., Huang, W. D., & de Azevedo Melli, N. C. (2015). Online learning: Audio or text? Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(4), 555573.Google Scholar
DeLeeuw, K. E., & Mayer, R. E. (2008). A comparison of three measures of cognitive load: Evidence for separable measures of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 223234.Google Scholar
Eitel, A., Scheiter, K., & Schüler, A. (2013). How inspecting a picture affects processing of text in multimedia learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 4863.Google Scholar
Ellis, P. D. (2010). The Essential Guide to Effect Sizes. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2012). Paper-based aids for learning with a computer-based game. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 10741082.Google Scholar
Fiorella, L., Vogel-Walcutt, J. J., & Schatz, S. (2012). Applying the modality principle to real-time feedback and the acquisition of higher-order cognitive skills. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(2), 223238.Google Scholar
Gegner, J. A., MacKay, D. H. J., & Mayer, R. E. (2009). Computer-supported aids to making sense of scientific articles: Cognitive, motivational, and attitudinal effects. Educational Technology Research & Development, 57, 7997.Google Scholar
Gerjets, P., Scheiter, K., & Catrambone, R. (2006). Can learning from molar and modular worked examples be enhanced by providing instructional explanations and prompting self-explanations? Learning and Instruction, 16(2), 104121.Google Scholar
Ginns, P. (2005). Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning and Instruction, 15, 313332.Google Scholar
Harskamp, E. G., Mayer, R. E., & Suhre, C. (2007). Does the modality principle for multimedia learning apply to science classrooms? Learning and Instruction, 17, 465477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hasler, B. S., Kersten, B., & Sweller, J. (2007). Learner control, cognitive load, and instructional animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 713729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassanabadi, H., Robatjazi, E. S., & Savoji, A. P. (2011). Cognitive consequences of segmentation and modality methods in learning from instructional animations. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 14811487.Google Scholar
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Izmirli, S., & Kurt, A. A. (2016). Effects of modality and pace on achievement, mental effort, and positive affect in multimedia learning environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(3), 299325.Google Scholar
Jeung, H., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). The role of visual indicators in dual sensory mode instruction. Educational Psychology, 17, 329343.Google Scholar
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351371.Google Scholar
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2000). Incorporating learner experience into the design of multimedia instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 126136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kester, L., Kirschner, P. A., & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2004a). Timing of information presentation in learning statistics. Instructional Science, 32, 233252.Google Scholar
Kester, L., Kirschner, P. A., & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2004b). Information presentation and troubleshooting in electrical circuits. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 239256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kester, L., Kirschner, P. A., & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2006). Just-in-time information presentation: Improving learning a troubleshooting skill. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 167185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kester, L., Lehnen, C., van Gerven, P. W. M., & Kirschner, P. A. (2006). Just-in-time, schematic supporting information presentation during cognitive skill acquisition. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 93112.Google Scholar
Khacharem, A., Spanjers, I. A. E., Zoudji, B., Kalyuga, S., & Ripoll, H. (2013). Using segmentation to support the learning from animated soccer scenes: An effect of prior knowledge. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14, 154160.Google Scholar
Kühl, T., Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., & Edelmann, J. (2011). The influence of text modality on learning with static and dynamic visualizations. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 2935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leahy, W., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). When auditory presentations should and should not be a component of multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 401418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation and the transient information effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(6), 943951.Google Scholar
Lee, H., & Mayer, R. E. (2018). Fostering learning from instructional video in a second language. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32, 648654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, H., Plass, J. L., & Homer, B. D. (2006). Optimizing cognitive load for learning from computer-based science simulations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 902913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindow, S., Fuchs, H. M., Fürstenberg, A., Kleber, J., Schweppe, J., & Rummer, R. (2011). On the robustness of the modality effect: Attempting to replicate a basic finding. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 25(4), 231243.Google Scholar
Liu, Y., Jang, B. G., & Roy-Campbell, Z. (2018). Optimum input mode in the modality and redundancy principles for university ESL students’ multimedia learning. Computers & Education, 127, 190200.Google Scholar
Lusk, D. L., Evans, A. D., Jeffrey, T. R., Palmer, K. R., Wikstrom, C. S., & Doolittle, P. E. (2009). Multimedia learning and individual differences: Mediating the effects of working memory capacity with segmentation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 636651.Google Scholar
Mautone, P. D., & Mayer, R. E. (2007). Cognitive aids for guiding graph comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 640652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (1979a). Can advance organizers influence meaningful learning? Review of Educational Research, 49, 371383.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (1979b). Twenty years of research on advance organizers: Assimilation theory is still the best predictor of results. Instructional Science, 8, 133167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (1983). Can you repeat that? Qualitative effects of repetition and advance organizers on learning from science prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 4049.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2021). Multimedia Learning (3rd ed). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
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, 390397.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Dow, G., & 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, 806813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Howarth, J., Kaplan, M., & Hanna, S. (2018). Applying the segmenting principle to online geography lessons. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66, 563577.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Mathias, A., & Wetzell, K. (2002). Fostering understanding of multimedia messages through pre-training: Evidence for a two-stage theory of mental model construction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 147154.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Mautone, P., & Prothero, W. (2002). Pictorial aids for learning by doing in a multimedia geology simulation game. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 171185.Google Scholar
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, 312320.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 4352.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Wells, A., Parong, J., & Howarth, J. (2019). Learner control of the pacing of an online slideshow: Does segmenting help? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33, 930935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayrath, M. C., Nihalani, P. K., & Robinson, D. H. (2011). Varying tutorial modality and interface restriction to maximize transfer in a complex simulation environment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(2), 257268.Google Scholar
McCrudden, M. T., Magliano, J. P., & Schraw, G. (2011). The effect of diagrams on online reading processes and memory. Discourse Processes, 48, 6992.Google Scholar
Merkt, M., Ballman, A., Felfeli, J., & Schwan, S. (2018). Pauses in educational videos: Testing the transience explanation against the structuring explanation. Computers in Human Behavior, 89, 399410.Google Scholar
Moreno, R. (2007). Optimising learning from animations by minimising cognitive load: Cognitive and affective consequences of signaling and segmentation methods. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 765781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999) Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358368.Google Scholar
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Learning science in virtual reality multimedia environments: Role of methods and media. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 598610.Google Scholar
Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H., & Lester, J. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction, 19, 177213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 319334.Google Scholar
O’Neil, H. F., Mayer, R. E., Herl, H. E., Niemi, C., Olin, K., & Thurman, R. A. (2000). Instructional strategies for virtual aviation training environments. In O’Neil, H. F., & Andrews, D. H. (eds.), Aircrew Training and Assessment (pp. 105130). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ohst, A., Fondu, B., Glogger, I., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2014). Preparing learners with partly incorrect intuitive prior knowledge for learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 664.Google Scholar
Owens, P., & Sweller, J. (2008). Cognitive load theory and music instruction. Educational Psychology, 28(1), 2945.Google Scholar
Park, B., Flowerday, T., & Brünken, R. (2015). Cognitive and affective effects of seductive details in multimedia learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 267278.Google Scholar
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(1), 510.Google Scholar
Pilegard, C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Improving academic learning from computer-based narrative games. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44, 1220.Google Scholar
Pilegard, C., & Mayer, R. E. (2018). Game over for Tetris as a platform for cognitive skill training. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 54, 2941.Google Scholar
Pollock, E., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2002). Assimilating complex information. Learning and Instruction, 12, 6186.Google Scholar
Reinwein, J. (2012). Does the modality effect exist? and if so, which modality effect? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 41, 132.Google Scholar
Renkl, A., & Scheiter, K. (2017). Studying visual displays: How to instructionally support learning. Educational Psychology Review, 29(3), 599621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rey, G. D., Beege, M., Nebel, S., Wirzberger, M., Schmitt, T. H., & Schneider, S. (2019). A meta-analysis of the segmenting effect. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 389419.Google Scholar
Scheiter, K., Schüler, A., Gerjets, P., Huk, T., & Hesse, F. W. (2014). Extending multimedia research: How do prerequisite knowledge and reading comprehension affect learning from text and pictures. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 7384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt-Weigand, F., Kohnert, A., & Glowalla, U. (2010a). A closer look at split visual attention in system and self-paced instruction in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 100110.Google Scholar
Schmidt-Weigand, F., Kohnert, A., & Glowalla, U. (2010b). Explaining the modality and contiguity effects: New insights from investigating students’ viewing behaviour. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24, 226237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuler, A., Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2013). Is spoken text always better? Investigating the modality and redundancy effect with longer text presentation. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 15901601.Google Scholar
Schuler, A., Scheiter, K., Rummer, R., & Gerjets, P. (2012). Explaining the modality effect in multimedia learning: Is it due to a lack of temporal contiguity with written text and pictures? Learning and Instruction, 22, 92102.Google Scholar
Schwan, S., Dutz, S., & Dreger, F. (2018). Multimedia in the wild: Testing the validity of multimedia learning principles in an art exhibition. Learning and Instruction, 55, 148157.Google Scholar
Schweppe, J., & Rummer, R. (2016). Integrating written text and graphics as a desirable difficulty in long-term multimedia learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 131137.Google Scholar
Seufert, T. (2019). Training for coherence formation when learning from text and picture and the interplay with learners’ prior knowledge. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Singh, A., Marcus, N., & Ayres, P. (2012). The transient information effect: Investigating the impact of segmentation on spoken and written text. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 848853.Google Scholar
Skuballa, I. T., Fortunski, C., & Renkl, A. (2015). An eye movement pre-training fosters the comprehension of processes and functions in technical systems. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 598.Google Scholar
Spanjers, I. A. E., van Gog, T., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2010). A theoretical analysis of how segmentation of dynamic visualizations optimizes students’ learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 411423.Google Scholar
Spanjers, I. A. E., van Gog, T., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2012). Segmentation of worked examples: Effects on cognitive load and learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 352358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spanjers, I. A. E., van Gog, T., Wouters, P., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2012). Explaining the segmentation effect in learning from animations: The role of pausing and temporal cueing. Computers & Education, 59(2), 274280.Google Scholar
Spanjers, I. A. E., Wouters, P., van Gog, T., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2011). An expertise reversal effect of segmentation in learning from animated worked-out examples. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 4652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stiller, K. D., Freitag, A., Zinnbauer, P., & Freitag, C. (2009). How pacing of multimedia instructions can influence modality effects: A case of superiority of visual texts. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 184203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sung, E., & Mayer, R. E. (2013). Online multimedia learning with mobile devices and desktop computers: An experimental test of Clark’s methods-not-media hypothesis. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 639647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive Load Theory. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Tabbers, H. K., Martens, R. L., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2004). Multimedia instructions and cognitive load theory: Effects of modality and cueing. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 7181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). When two sensory modes are better than one. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 3, 257287.Google Scholar
Witteman, M. J., & Segers, E. (2010). The modality effect tested in children in a user-paced multimedia environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(2), 132142.Google Scholar
Wong, A., Leahy, W., Marcus, N., & Sweller, J. (2012). Cognitive load theory, the transient information effect and e-learning. Learning and Instruction, 22, 449457.Google Scholar
Wouters, P., Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2009). Observational learning from animated models: Effects of modality and reflection on transfer. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 18.Google Scholar

References

Baddeley, A. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255(5044), 556559.Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. (2012). Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baddeley, A., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. In Bower, G. H. (ed.), Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 4789). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bauhoff, V., Huff, M., & Schwan, S. (2012). Distance matters: Spatial contiguity effects as trade-off between gaze switches and memory load. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(6), 863871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brünken, R., Steinbacher, S., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2002). Assessment of cognitive load in multimedia learning using dual-task methodology. Experimental Psychology, 49(2), 109119.Google Scholar
Castro-Alonso, J. C. (ed.) (2019). Visuospatial Processing for Education in Health and Natural Sciences. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
Castro-Alonso, J. C., Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2019). Instructional visualizations, cognitive load theory, and visuospatial processing. In Castro-Alonso, J. C. (ed.), Visuospatial Processing for Education in Health and Natural Sciences (pp. 111143). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
Castro-Alonso, J. C., Ayres, P., Wong, M., & Paas, F. (2018). Learning symbols from permanent and transient visual presentations: Don’t overplay the hand. Computers & Education, 116, 113.Google Scholar
Castro-Alonso, J. C., & Sweller, J. (2020). The modality effect of cognitive load theory. In Karwowski, W., Ahram, T., & Nazir, S. (eds.), Advances in Human Factors in Training, Education, and Learning Sciences: Proceedings of the AHFE 2019 International Conference on Human Factors in Training, Education, and Learning Sciences (pp. 7584). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1992). The split-attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62(2), 233246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, J., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3(3), 149210.Google Scholar
Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87185.Google Scholar
Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. M. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent properties, picture features, and redundancy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 428434.Google Scholar
Crooks, S. M., Cheon, J., Inan, F., Ari, F., & Flores, R. (2012). Modality and cueing in multimedia learning: Examining cognitive and perceptual explanations for the modality effect. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 10631071.Google Scholar
De Renzi, E., & Nichelli, P. (1975). Verbal and non-verbal short-term memory impairment following hemispheric damage. Cortex, 11(4), 341354.Google Scholar
Dinçer, S., & Doğanay, A. (2017). The effects of multiple-pedagogical agents on learners’ academic success, motivation, and cognitive load. Computers & Education, 111, 74100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geary, D. C. (2008). An evolutionarily informed education science. Educational Psychologist, 43(4), 179195.Google Scholar
Ginns, P. (2005). Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning and Instruction, 15(4), 313331.Google Scholar
Harskamp, E. G., Mayer, R. E., & Suhre, C. (2007). Does the modality principle for multimedia learning apply to science classrooms? Learning and Instruction, 17(5), 465477.Google Scholar
Horvath, J. C. (2014). The neuroscience of PowerPointTM. Mind, Brain, and Education, 8(3), 137143.Google Scholar
Inan, F. A., Crooks, S. M., Cheon, J., Ari, F., Flores, R., Kurucay, M., & Paniukov, D. (2015). The reverse modality effect: Examining student learning from interactive computer-based instruction. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 123130.Google Scholar
Jeung, H. J., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). The role of visual indicators in dual sensory mode instruction. Educational Psychology, 17(3), 329343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirsner, K., & Smith, M. C. (1974). Modality effects in word identification. Memory & Cognition, 2(4), 637640.Google Scholar
Kroll, N. E. A., Parks, T., Parkinson, S. R., Bieber, S. L., & Johnson, A. L. (1970). Short-term memory while shadowing: Recall of visually and of aurally presented letters. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 85(2), 220224.Google Scholar
Kühl, T., Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., & Edelmann, J. (2011). The influence of text modality on learning with static and dynamic visualizations. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 2935.Google Scholar
Leahy, W., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). When auditory presentations should and should not be a component of multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17(4), 401418.Google Scholar
Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation and the transient information effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(6), 943951.Google Scholar
Lee, H., & Mayer, R. E. (2018). Fostering learning from instructional video in a second language. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32(5), 648654.Google Scholar
Margrain, S. A. (1967). Short-term memory as a function of input modality. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 19(2), 109114.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Fiorella, L., & Stull, A. (2020). Five ways to increase the effectiveness of instructional video. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(3), 837852.Google Scholar
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(2), 312320.Google Scholar
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 8197.Google Scholar
Moreno, R. (2006). Does the modality principle hold for different media? A test of the method-affects-learning hypothesis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(3), 149158.Google Scholar
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 358368.Google Scholar
Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction, 19(2), 177213.Google Scholar
Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 319334.Google Scholar
Murdock, B. B. Jr. (1971). Four-channel effects in short-term memory. Psychonomic Science, 24(4), 197198.Google Scholar
Mutlu-Bayraktar, D., Cosgun, V., & Altan, T. (2019). Cognitive load in multimedia learning environments: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 141, 103618.Google Scholar
Oberauer, K., Lewandowsky, S., Awh, E., Brown, G. D. A., Conway, A., Cowan, N., … Ward, G. (2018). Benchmarks for models of short-term and working memory. Psychological Bulletin, 144(9), 885958.Google Scholar
Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. New York: Methuen.Google Scholar
Paivio, A. (1969). Mental imagery in associative learning and memory. Psychological Review, 76(3), 241263.Google Scholar
Paivio, A. (2014). Intelligence, dual coding theory, and the brain. Intelligence, 47, 141158.Google Scholar
Park, S. (2015). The effects of social cue principles on cognitive load, situational interest, motivation, and achievement in pedagogical agent multimedia learning. Educational Technology & Society, 18(4), 211229.Google Scholar
Penney, C. G. (1980). Order of report in bisensory verbal short-term memory. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 34(2), 190195.Google Scholar
Penney, C. G. (1989). Modality effects and the structure of short-term verbal memory. Memory & Cognition, 17(4), 398422.Google Scholar
Peterson, L. R., & Peterson, M. J. (1959). Short-term retention of individual verbal items. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58(3), 193198.Google Scholar
Reinwein, J. (2012). Does the modality effect exist? and if so, which modality effect? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 41(1), 132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rollins, H. A., & Thibadeau, R. (1973). The effects of auditory shadowing on recognition of information received visually. Memory & Cognition, 1(2), 164168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanders, A. F., & Schroots, J. J. F. (1969). Cognitive categories and memory span. III. Effects of similarity on recall. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 21(1), 2128.Google Scholar
Scheiter, K., Schüler, A., Gerjets, P., Huk, T., & Hesse, F. W. (2014). Extending multimedia research: How do prerequisite knowledge and reading comprehension affect learning from text and pictures. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 7384.Google Scholar
Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12(3), 185233.Google Scholar
Tabbers, H. K., Martens, R. L., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2004). Multimedia instructions and cognitive load theory: Effects of modality and cueing. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(1), 7181.Google Scholar
Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). When two sensory modes are better than one. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 3(4), 257287.Google Scholar
Wong, A., Leahy, W., Marcus, N., & Sweller, J. (2012). Cognitive load theory, the transient information effect and e-learning. Learning and Instruction, 22(6), 449457.Google Scholar

References

Boucheix, J., & Forestier, C. (2017). Reducing the transience effect of animations does not (always) lead to better performance in children learning a complex hand procedure. Computers in Human Behavior, 69, 358370.Google Scholar
Brünken, R., Plass, J., & Leutner, D. (2004). Assessment of cognitive load in multimedia learning with dual-task methodology: Auditory load and modality effects. Instructional Science, 32, 115132.Google Scholar
Castro-Alonso, J., Ayres, P., & Paas, F. (2014). Learning from observing hands in static and animated versions of non-manipulative tasks. Learning and Instruction, 34, 1121.Google Scholar
Castro-Alonso, J., Ayres, P., Wong, M., & Paas, F. (2018). Learning symbols from permanent and transient visual presentations: Don’t overplay the hand. Computers & Education, 116, 113.Google Scholar
Cheon, J., Crooks, S., Inan, F., Flores, R., & Ari, F. (2011). Exploring the instructional conditions for a reverse modality effect in multimedia instruction. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 20, 117133.Google Scholar
Cowan, N. (2000). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87185.Google Scholar
Crooks, S., Cheon, J., Inan, F., Ari, F., & Flores, R. (2012). Modality and cueing in multimedia learning: Examining cognitive and perceptual explanations for the modality effect. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 10631071.Google Scholar
Cunningham, T., Healy, A., Till, R., Fendrich, D., & Dimitry, C. (1993). Is there really very rapid forgetting from primary memory? The role of expectancy and item importance in short-term recall. Memory and Cognition, 21, 671688.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geary, D. (2008). An evolutionarily informed education science. Educational Psychologist, 43, 179195.Google Scholar
Guichon, N., & McLornan, S. (2008). The effects of multimodality on L2 learners: Implications for CALL resource design. System, 36(1), 8593.Google Scholar
Healy, A., & Cunningham, T. (1995). Very rapid forgetting: Reply to Muter. Memory and Cognition, 23, 387392.Google Scholar
Inan, F., Crooks, S., Cheon, J., Ari, F., Flores, R., Kurucay, M., & Paniukov, D. (2015). The reverse modality effect: Examining student learning from interactive computer-based instruction. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46, 123130.Google Scholar
Jiang, D., Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2018). The curious case of improving foreign language listening skills by reading rather than listening: An expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychology Review, 30, 11391165.Google Scholar
Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38, 2331.Google Scholar
Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation and the transient information effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 943951.Google Scholar
Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2016). Cognitive load theory and the effects of transient information on the modality effect. Instructional Science, 44, 107123.Google Scholar
Lin, Y., Liu, T., & Sweller, J. (2015). Improving the frame design of computer simulations for learning: Determining the primacy of the isolated elements or the transient information effects. Computers & Education, 88, 280291.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. (2001). Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mayer, R., 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, 256265.Google Scholar
Mayer, R., & Moreno, R. (2002). Aids to computer-based multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 12, 107119.Google Scholar
Miller, G. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 101(2), 343352.Google Scholar
Moussa-Inaty, J., Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2012). Improving listening skills in English as a foreign language by reading rather than listening: A cognitive load perspective. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 391402.Google Scholar
Muter, P. (1995). Very rapid forgetting: Reply to Cunningham, Healy, Till, Fendrich and Dimitry. Memory and Cognition, 23, 383386.Google Scholar
Ng, H., Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2013). Reducing transience during animation: A cognitive load perspective. Educational Psychology, 33, 755772.Google Scholar
Penney, C. (1989). Modality effects in delayed free recall and recognition: Visual is better than auditory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41, 455470.Google Scholar
Peterson, L., & Peterson, M. (1959). Short-term retention of individual verbal items. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58(3), 193198.Google Scholar
Ploetzner, R., & Lowe, R. (2014). Simultaneously presented animations facilitate the learning of higher-order relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 1222.Google Scholar
Pollock, E., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2002). Assimilating complex information. Learning and Instruction, 12, 6186.Google Scholar
Simon, H. (1974). How big is a chunk? Science, 183, 482488.Google Scholar
Singh, A., Marcus, N., & Ayres, P. (2012). The transient information effect: Investigating the impact of segmentation on spoken and written text. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 848853.Google Scholar
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive Load Theory. London: Springer.Google Scholar
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 261292.Google Scholar
Tabbers, H., & de Koeijer, B. (2010). Learner control in animated multimedia instructions. Instructional Science, 38, 441453.Google Scholar
Tabbers, H., Martens, R., & van Merriënboer, J. (2004). Multimedia instructions and cognitive load theory: Effects of modality and cueing. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 7181.Google Scholar
Tversky, B, Morrison, J., & Betrancourt, M. (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57, 247262.Google Scholar
van den Broek, G., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2014). Effects of text modality in multimedia presentations on written and oral performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30, 438449.Google Scholar
Witteman, M., & Segers, E. (2010). The modality effect tested in children in a user-paced multimedia environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 132142.Google Scholar
Wong, A., Leahy, W., Marcus, N., & Sweller, J. (2012). Cognitive load theory, the transient information effect and e-learning. Learning & Instruction, 22, 449457.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×