Online reading: a preliminary study of the impact of integrated and split-attention formats on L2 students’ cognitive load

Cognitive load theory has been utilized by second language acquisition (SLA) researchers to account for differences in learner performance with regards to different learning tasks. Certain instructional designs were shown to have an impact on cognitive load and working memory, and this impact was found to be accentuated in a multimedia environment where there is a variety of interacting elements and tools that can lead to cognitive overload and consequently reduced learning outcomes. This study investigated the influence of split-attention and integrated instructional formats on students’ cognitive load and how they might facilitate second language online reading and vocabulary learning. Twenty English as a Second Language (ESL) intermediate students studying at an Australian language institution were randomly assigned to four conditions: SAND (Split-Attention No Dictionary), SAOD (Split-Attention with Online Dictionary), IFND (Integrated Format No Dictionary), and IFOD (Integrated Format with Online Dictionary). Subjects were asked to complete an online reading comprehension task in which subjects tested under the SAND and SAOD conditions were exposed to a typical reading text followed by comprehension questions, whereas subjects in the IFND and IFOD conditions were exposed to a reading text where the comprehension questions were physically inserted within the reading text. Under the SAOD and IFOD conditions, subjects had access to an online dictionary. Results showed that the integrated reading format was found to facilitate students’ reading comprehension more than the split-attention format. Also, students who had access to the online dictionary in the SAOD and IFOD groups performed better on the vocabulary test, but spent more time on the reading task than the other two groups. Furthermore, participants in the split-attention format group looked up more words than their counterparts in the integrated format group. The results of the present study have certain implications for multimedia instructional designers and ESL teachers.

[1]  J. Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and Complex Learning: Recent Developments and Future Directions , 2005 .

[2]  John Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[3]  Richard Catrambone,et al.  Designing Instructional Examples to Reduce Intrinsic Cognitive Load: Molar versus Modular Presentation of Solution Procedures , 2004 .

[4]  Martin Graff,et al.  Assessing learning from hypertext: An individual differences perspective , 2003 .

[5]  Jaan Mikk,et al.  Sentence length for revealing the cognitive load reversal effect in text comprehension , 2008 .

[6]  Detlev Leutner,et al.  Cognitive load in reading a foreign language text with multimedia aids and the influence of verbal and spatial abilities , 2003, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[7]  P. Chandler,et al.  Assimilating complex information , 2002 .

[8]  D. Leutner,et al.  Assessment of Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning with Dual-Task Methodology: Auditory Load and Modality Effects , 2004 .

[9]  R. Moreno.  Decreasing Cognitive Load for Novice Students: Effects of Explanatory versus Corrective Feedback in Discovery-Based Multimedia , 2004 .

[10]  Jo-Anne LeFevre,et al.  Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[11]  Elke Peters,et al.  MANIPULATING L2 LEARNERS' ONLINE DICTIONARY USE AND ITS EFFECT ON L2 WORD RETENTION , 2007 .

[12]  Peter Gerjets,et al.  Information visualizations for knowledge acquisition: The impact of dimensionality and color coding , 2006, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[13]  Dorothy M. Chun.  L2 Reading on the Web: Strategies for Accessing Information in Hypermedia , 2001 .

[14]  Yasuyo Sawaki,et al.  Comparability of Conventional and Computerized Tests of Reading in a Second Language , 2001 .

[15]  Béatrice S. Hasler,et al.  Learner Control, Cognitive Load and Instructional Animation , 2007 .

[16]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design , 1998 .

[17]  R. Moreno,et al.  Cognitive load and learning effects of having students organize pictures and words in multimedia environments: The role of student interactivity and feedback , 2005 .

[18]  Katharina Scheiter,et al.  Goal Configurations and Processing Strategies as Moderators Between Instructional Design and Cognitive Load: Evidence From Hypertext-Based Instruction , 2003 .

[19]  Hitendra K. Pillay,et al.  Cognitive load and mental rotation: structuring orthographic projection for learning and problem solving , 1994 .

[20]  Dorothy M. Chun,et al.  What Makes Students Click: Working Memory and Look-Up Behavior , 2004 .

[21]  Paul van Schaik,et al.  The effect of link colour on information retrieval in educational intranet use , 2003, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[22]  Yeung,et al.  Cognitive Load and Learner Expertise: Split-Attention and Redundancy Effects in Reading with Explanatory Notes , 1998, Contemporary educational psychology.

[23]  Yavuz Akbulut,et al.  Effects of multimedia annotations on incidental vocabulary learning and reading comprehension of advanced learners of english as a foreign language , 2007 .

[24]  Anjel Tozcu,et al.  Successful Learning of Frequent Vocabulary through CALL also Benefits Reading Comprehension and Speed , 2004 .

[25]  W. Schnotz,et al.  A Reconsideration of Cognitive Load Theory , 2007 .

[26]  Mike Levy,et al.  Call Dimensions: Options and Issues in Computer Assisted Language Learning (ESL & Applied Linguistics Professional Series) , 2006 .

[27]  Harumi Ito,et al.  Logical connectives as catalysts for interactive L2 reading , 2003 .

[28]  Serap Unal,et al.  Does the amount of on-screen text influence student learning from a multimedia-based instructional unit? , 2008 .