Cognitive activities in complex science text and diagrams

Ainsworth’s (2006) DeFT framework posits that different representations may lead learners to use different strategies. We wanted to investigate whether students use different strategies, and more broadly, different cognitive activities in diagrams vs. in running text. In order to do so, we collected think-aloud protocol and other measures from 91 beginning biology majors reading an 8-page passage from their own textbook which included seven complex diagrams. We coded the protocols for a wide range of cognitive activities, including strategy use, inference, background knowledge, vocabulary, and word reading. Comparisons of verbalizations while reading running text vs. reading diagrams showed that high-level cognitive activities—inferences and high-level strategy use—were used a higher proportion of the time when comprehending diagrams compared to when reading text. However, in running text vs. diagrams participants used a wider range of different individual cognitive activities (e.g., more different types of inferences). Our results suggest that instructors might consider teaching students how to draw inferences in both text and diagrams. They also show an interesting paradox that warrants further research—students often skipped over or superficially skimmed diagrams, but when they did read the diagrams they engaged in more high-level cognitive activity.

[1]  M. Wittrock Generative Processes of Comprehension , 1989 .

[2]  Kim A. Kastens,et al.  Eliciting Self-Explanations Improves Children's Performance on a Field-Based Map Skills Task , 2007 .

[3]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Arrows in Comprehending and Producing Mechanical Diagrams , 2006, Cogn. Sci..

[4]  Richard Lowe,et al.  Animation and learning: selective processing of information in dynamic graphics , 2003 .

[5]  Mary Hegarty,et al.  The Roles of Mental Animations and External Animations in Understanding Mechanical Systems , 2003 .

[6]  M. Chi,et al.  Eliciting Self‐Explanations Improves Understanding , 1994 .

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

[8]  Wolff‐Michael Roth,et al.  Prevalence, function, and structure of Photographs in high school biology textbooks , 2003 .

[9]  Marlene Scardamalia,et al.  Education for the Knowledge Age: Design-Centered Models of Teaching and Instruction , 2006 .

[10]  Carolyn R. Fehrenbach Gifted/Average Readers , 1991 .

[11]  Samuel D. Miller,et al.  A Longitudinal Analysis of Elementary School Students' Achievement Goals in Literacy Activities. , 2001, Contemporary educational psychology.

[12]  D. Langenberg Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction , 2000 .

[13]  J. Hyönä,et al.  Utilization of Illustrations during Learning of Science Textbook Passages among Low- and High-Ability Children. , 1999, Contemporary educational psychology.

[14]  M. Bannert,et al.  Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation , 2003 .

[15]  Mary Hegarty,et al.  When static media promote active learning: annotated illustrations versus narrated animations in multimedia instruction. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[16]  A. Renkl,et al.  Instructional Aids to Support a Conceptual Understanding of Multiple Representations. , 2009 .

[17]  P. Chandler,et al.  Learning and understanding science instructional material. , 2003 .

[18]  Matthew W. Lewis,et al.  Self-Explonations: How Students Study and Use Examples in Learning to Solve Problems , 1989, Cogn. Sci..

[19]  C. Crain-Thoreson,et al.  Windows on comprehension: Reading comprehension processes as revealed by two think-aloud procedures. , 1997 .

[20]  Paul J. Feltovich,et al.  Categorization and Representation of Physics Problems by Experts and Novices , 1981, Cogn. Sci..

[21]  Wouter R. van Joolingen,et al.  Students' reasoning during modeling in an inquiry learning environment , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[22]  M. Pressley,et al.  Cognitive Strategies Instruction: From Basic Research to Classroom Instruction , 2009 .

[23]  Patricia A. Alexander,et al.  Modeling Domain Learning: Profiles From the Field of Special Education , 2004 .

[24]  R. Mayer,et al.  For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. , 1994 .

[25]  P. Pintrich,et al.  Handbook of self-regulation , 2000 .

[26]  Roger Azevedo,et al.  Self-report of reading comprehension strategies: What are we measuring? , 2007 .

[27]  N. Hari Narayanan,et al.  On designing comprehensible interactive hypermedia manuals , 1998, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[28]  Daniel Bodemer,et al.  External and mental referencing of multiple representations , 2006, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[29]  A. Renkl,et al.  How multiple external representations are used and how they can be made more useful , 2009 .

[30]  Rolf Ploetzner,et al.  What contributes to the split-attention effect? The role of text segmentation, picture labelling, and spatial proximity , 2010 .

[31]  Eduardo Vidal-Abarca,et al.  The Effects of Tasks on Integrating Information From Multiple Documents , 2008 .

[32]  Generating inferences from written and spoken language: a comparison of children with visual impairment and children with sight , 2006 .

[33]  A. Kamhi,et al.  The Use of Think-Aloud Protocols to Compare Inferencing Abilities in Average and Below-Average Readers , 2002, Journal of learning disabilities.

[34]  Shaaron Ainsworth,et al.  The effects of self‐explaining when learning with text or diagrams , 2003 .

[35]  Rolf Ploetzner,et al.  Supporting learning with interactive multimedia through active integration of representations , 2005 .

[36]  Marit S. Samuelstuen,et al.  Examining the validity of self-reports on scales measuring students' strategic processing. , 2007, The British journal of educational psychology.

[37]  Michelene T. H. Chi,et al.  Self-Explanations: How Students Study and Use Examples in Learning To Solve Problems. Technical Report No. 9. , 1987 .

[38]  Shaaron Ainsworth,et al.  The impact of text coherence on learning by self-explanation , 2007 .

[39]  Kirsten R. Butcher Learning from Text with Diagrams: Promoting Mental Model Development and Inference Generation. , 2006 .

[40]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  An effective metacognitive strategy: learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based Cognitive Tutor , 2002, Cogn. Sci..

[41]  W. C. Robertson,et al.  Detection of Cognitive Structure with Protocol Data: Predicting Performance on Physics Transfer Problems , 1990, Cogn. Sci..

[42]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Question asking and eye tracking during cognitive disequilibrium: Comprehending illustrated texts on devices when the devices break down , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[43]  A. Graesser An introduction to strategic reading comprehension. , 2007 .

[44]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition , 1998 .

[45]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning: Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning , 2005 .

[46]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[47]  Danielle S. McNamara Reading comprehension strategies : theories, interventions, and technologies , 2007 .

[48]  Cornelia S. Große,et al.  Effects of multiple solution methods in mathematics learning , 2006 .

[49]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning: The Promise of Multimedia Learning , 2001 .

[50]  M. Barnes,et al.  Comprehension skill, inference-making ability, and their relation to knowledge , 2001, Memory & cognition.

[51]  R. Sawyer The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences: Introduction , 2014 .

[52]  Susan B. Neuman Assessing Children's Inferencing Strategies. , 1989 .

[53]  Mary Hegarty,et al.  Top-down and bottom-up influences on learning from animations , 2007, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[54]  Cor Aarnoutse,et al.  Third-grader's think-aloud protocols : types of reading activities in reading an expository text , 2006 .

[55]  Jill Scevak,et al.  Learning from Texts and Visual Aids: a Developmental Perspective , 1997 .

[56]  Marcia C. Linn,et al.  The Knowledge Integration Perspective on Learning and Instruction , 2005 .

[57]  Danielle S. McNamara,et al.  Prior knowledge, reading skill, and text cohesion in the comprehension of science texts , 2009 .

[58]  M. Just,et al.  Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. , 1993 .

[59]  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 .

[60]  Thomas D. Griffin,et al.  Individual differences, rereading, and self-explanation: Concurrent processing and cue validity as constraints on metacomprehension accuracy , 2008, Memory & cognition.

[61]  E. Fox The Role of Reader Characteristics in Processing and Learning From Informational Text , 2009 .

[62]  R. Azevedo,et al.  Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students' learning with hypermedia? , 2004 .

[63]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  The influence of language proficiency and comprehension skill on situation‐model construction , 1996 .

[64]  Mary Hegarty,et al.  Effects of knowledge and display design on comprehension of complex graphics , 2010 .

[65]  J. Wiley,et al.  An examination of the seductive details effect in terms of working memory capacity , 2006, Memory & cognition.

[66]  M. Chi Quantifying Qualitative Analyses of Verbal Data: A Practical Guide , 1997 .

[67]  Gregory Schraw,et al.  An analysis of spontaneous study strategies. , 1990 .

[68]  C. Weinstein,et al.  Self-Regulation Interventions with a Focus on Learning Strategies , 2000 .

[69]  D. Lewalter Cognitive Strategies for Learning from Static and Dynamic Visuals , 2003 .

[70]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design: Recent Developments , 2003 .

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

[72]  Florian Schmidt-Weigand,et al.  A closer look at split visual attention in system- and self-paced instruction in multimedia learning , 2010 .

[73]  Krista R. Muis Epistemic profiles and self-regulated learning: Examining relations in the context of mathematics problem solving , 2008 .

[74]  Rainer Bromme,et al.  Coherence Formation when Learning from Text and Pictures: What Kind of Support for Whom? , 2009 .

[75]  P. Pintrich The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. , 2000 .

[76]  S. Ainsworth DeFT: A Conceptual Framework for Considering Learning with Multiple Representations. , 2006 .

[77]  D. McNamara Reading both high-coherence and low-coherence texts: effects of text sequence and prior knowledge. , 2001, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.