When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages?

In 2 experiments, students received 2 presentations of a narrated animation that explained how lightning forms followed by retention and transfer tests. In Experiment 1, learners who were allowed to exercise control over the pace of the narrated animation before a second presentation of the same material at normal speed (part-whole presentation) performed better on transfer but not retention tests compared with learners who received the same 2 presentations in the reverse order (whole-part presentation). In Experiment 2, learners who were allowed to exercise control over the pace of the narrated animation across 2 presentations (part-part presentation) performed better on transfer but not retention tests compared with learners who received the same 2 presentations at normal speed without any learner control (whole-whole presentation). These results are consistent with cognitive load theory and a 2-stage theory of mental model construction.

[1]  M. Lepper.  Microcomputers in education: Motivational and social issues. , 1985 .

[2]  P. Chandler,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction , 1991 .

[3]  Fred G. W. C. Paas,et al.  The Efficiency of Instructional Conditions: An Approach to Combine Mental Effort and Performance Measures , 1992 .

[4]  P. Chandler,et al.  THE SPLIT‐ATTENTION EFFECT AS A FACTOR IN THE DESIGN OF INSTRUCTION , 1992 .

[5]  Thomas C. Reeves,et al.  Pseudoscience in Computer-Based Instruction: The Case of Learner Control Research. , 1993 .

[6]  F. Paas,et al.  Variability of Worked Examples and Transfer of Geometrical Problem-Solving Skills: A Cognitive-Load Approach , 1994 .

[7]  P. Chandler,et al.  Why Some Material Is Difficult to Learn , 1994 .

[8]  Herbert J. Walberg,et al.  Learner-Control Effects: A Review of Reviews and a Meta-Analysis , 1996 .

[9]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Handbook of Research for educational Communications and Technology , 1997 .

[10]  Sharon K Tindall-Ford,et al.  When two sensory modes are better than one , 1997 .

[11]  R. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? , 1997 .

[12]  Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer,et al.  Training Complex Cognitive Skills: A Four-Component Instructional Design Model for Technical Training , 1997 .

[13]  R. Mayer,et al.  A Split-Attention Effect in Multimedia Learning: Evidence for Dual Processing Systems in Working Memory , 1998 .

[14]  A. Dillon,et al.  Hypermedia as an Educational Technology: A Review of the Quantitative Research Literature on Learner Comprehension, Control, and Style , 1998 .

[15]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction , 1999 .

[16]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia aids to problem-solving transfer , 1999 .

[17]  R. Mayer,et al.  Cognitive Principles of Multimedia Learning: The Role of Modality and Contiguity , 1999 .

[18]  John Sweller,et al.  Instructional Design in Technical Areas , 1999 .

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

[20]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Learner Experience and Efficiency of Instructional Guidance , 2001 .

[21]  R. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning: The Promise of Multimedia Learning , 2001 .

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