Prerequisite knowledge and time of testing in learning with animations and static pictures: Evidence for the expertise reversal effect

Abstract An animation can have an informational advantage over a static picture by depicting dynamic features. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the provision of prerequisite knowledge can help learners infer dynamic features from a static picture. It was assumed that this supposedly more active processing with a static picture would result in longer lasting knowledge representations. A 2 × 2 × 2 between-subjects design with visualization format (static picture vs. animation), prerequisite knowledge (provided vs. not provided), and time of testing (immediate vs. one week later) was used (N = 260). The results of a transfer test showed that learners with low prerequisite knowledge benefited from the animation, but this was not the case for learners with high prerequisite knowledge. Time of testing had no influence. In line with the expertise reversal effect, prerequisite knowledge not only fostered learning with the static picture but also hindered learning with the animation.

[1]  F. Paas,et al.  A motivational perspective on the relation between mental effort and performance: Optimizing learner involvement in instruction , 2005 .

[2]  F. Paas.  Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. , 1992 .

[3]  Manu Kapur,et al.  Is having more prerequisite knowledge better for learning from productive failure? , 2017 .

[4]  Katharina Scheiter,et al.  Can differences in learning strategies explain the benefits of learning from static and dynamic visualizations? , 2011, Comput. Educ..

[5]  Mireille Bétrancourt.  Chapter 18. The Animation and Interactivity Principles in Multimedia Learning , 2004 .

[6]  Manu Kapur.  Examining Productive Failure, Productive Success, Unproductive Failure, and Unproductive Success in Learning , 2016 .

[7]  Katharina Scheiter,et al.  Self‐regulated learning from illustrated text: Eye movement modelling to support use and regulation of cognitive processes during learning from multimedia , 2018, The British journal of educational psychology.

[8]  Cheryl I. Johnson,et al.  A Testing Effect with Multimedia Learning , 2009 .

[9]  Tina Seufert,et al.  Understanding instructional design effects by differentiated measurement of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load , 2020, Instructional Science.

[10]  Katharina Scheiter,et al.  Explaining the split-attention effect: Is the reduction of extraneous cognitive load accompanied by an increase in germane cognitive load? , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[11]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Relative effectiveness of animated and static diagrams: An effect of learner prior knowledge , 2008, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[12]  Mireille Betrancourt,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning: The Animation and Interactivity Principles in Multimedia Learning , 2005 .

[13]  Fred Paas,et al.  Learning symbols from permanent and transient visual presentations: Don't overplay the hand , 2018, Comput. Educ..

[14]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Principles for managing essential processing in multimedia learning: Segmenting, pre-training, and modality principles. , 2005 .

[15]  K. Scheiter,et al.  Signaling Text–Picture Relations in Multimedia Learning: The Influence of Prior Knowledge , 2018 .

[16]  W. Schnotz.  Reanalyzing the expertise reversal effect , 2010 .

[17]  Ralf Rummer,et al.  Integrating written text and graphics as a desirable difficulty in long-term multimedia learning , 2016, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[18]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Incorporating Learner Experience into the Design of Multimedia Instruction. , 2000 .

[19]  Stefan Münzer,et al.  The moderating role of additional information when learning with animations compared to static pictures , 2019, Instructional Science.

[20]  Fred Paas,et al.  Making instructional animations more effective: a cognitive load approach , 2007 .

[21]  Katharina Scheiter,et al.  The influence of text modality on learning with static and dynamic visualizations , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[22]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning , 2001, Visible Learning Guide to Student Achievement.

[23]  Richard Lowe,et al.  Animation principles in multimedia learning , 2014 .

[24]  T. Höffler.  Spatial Ability: Its Influence on Learning with Visualizations—a Meta-Analytic Review , 2010 .

[25]  Fred Paas,et al.  Gender Imbalance in Instructional Dynamic Versus Static Visualizations: a Meta-analysis , 2019, Educational Psychology Review.

[26]  Alexander Eitel,et al.  The multimedia effect and its stability over time , 2015 .

[27]  Peter Gerjets,et al.  Extending multimedia research: How do prerequisite knowledge and reading comprehension affect learning from text and pictures , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[28]  Richard K. Lowe,et al.  A unified view of learning from animated and static graphics , 2008 .

[29]  Jeffrey D. Karpicke,et al.  Test-Enhanced Learning , 2006, Psychological science.

[30]  Günter Daniel Rey,et al.  The expertise reversal effect: cognitive load and motivational explanations. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[31]  H. Pashler,et al.  Editors’ Introduction to the Special Section on Replicability in Psychological Science , 2012, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[32]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  External cognition: how do graphical representations work? , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[33]  T. Gog,et al.  Development of an instrument for measuring different types of cognitive load , 2013, Behavior Research Methods.

[34]  Rolf Ploetzner,et al.  A review of learning demands in instructional animations: The educational effectiveness of animations unfolds if the features of change need to be learned , 2020, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[35]  K. Scheiter,et al.  Studying the expertise reversal of the multimedia signaling effect at a process level: evidence from eye tracking , 2019, Instructional Science.

[36]  K. Scheiter,et al.  The Scientific Value of Cognitive Load Theory: A Research Agenda Based on the Structuralist View of Theories , 2009 .

[37]  D. Leutner,et al.  Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis , 2007 .

[38]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Animation: can it facilitate? , 2002, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[39]  Benedict C. O. F. Fehringer,et al.  Text Information and Spatial Abilities in Learning With Different Visualizations Formats , 2017 .

[40]  Sandra Berney,et al.  Does animation enhance learning? A meta-analysis , 2016, Comput. Educ..

[41]  Slava Kalyuga.  The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning: The Expertise Reversal Principle in Multimedia Learning , 2014 .

[42]  T. Jong.  Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: some food for thought , 2010 .

[43]  Fred Paas,et al.  Learning from observing hands in static and animated versions of non-manipulative tasks , 2014 .

[44]  Tim Kühl,et al.  Animations and static pictures: The influence of prompting and time of testing , 2018, Learning and Instruction.

[45]  Slava Kalyuga.  Expertise Reversal Effect and Its Implications for Learner-Tailored Instruction , 2007 .

[46]  Danielle S. McNamara,et al.  Learning from texts: Effects of prior knowledge and text coherence , 1996 .

[47]  Richard Lowe,et al.  Interrogation of a dynamic visualization during learning , 2004 .

[48]  E. Bjork,et al.  Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. , 2011 .

[49]  Esther Ziegler,et al.  Delayed benefits of learning elementary algebraic transformations through contrasted comparisons , 2014 .

[50]  J. Sweller.  Implications of Cognitive Load Theory for Multimedia Learning , 2005, The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning.