The Multimedia Principle

From Eduwiki

Javier A. Sanchez

The Multimedia Principle

Introduction

The principle of Multimedia Learning, as stated by Mayer, is “that people learn better from words and pictures than from words alone, or, more specifically, that people learn more or more deeply when appropriate pictures are added to text.” This principle is backed by empirical research and applications with the use of the cognitive theory, but of course with clear examples of gaps in the principle and research that supports it. An example of a fault in the principle is that the multimedia principle does not necessarily help out all students as when pictures and graphics are added to instruction; it is often incredibly beneficial to students without prior knowledge of a specific subject, but distracting to students with knowledge of the specific subject being taught. Augmenting text has also played a key role in the evolving term of multimedia, therefore changing its principle definition to only applying still images. Augmentations such as materials, graphics, still and animated pictures, video, voice, music, and sound effects increase multimedia popularity and is successful in instructional learning via computer-based presentations, programming, and other similar electronic applications. Therefore, the basic use of images is no longer the only tool available for educational designers. Cognitive theories are also discussed in this chapter such as the use of voice, music, and sound effects to enhance text presentations, although tactile capabilities are not covered as hefty as the other learning processes due to lack of empirical evidence by researches, a clear gap in theory development. Another dissection into this chapter discusses the effects of instructional media with regular commercialized media; which is a great tool for teaching, unless it is engaging cognitive processes that control learning and covering the same subject which is being taught. Therefore, it is unlikely that non-instructional media, like TV, radio, or film, would receive higher successful learning rates because they might not cover the same standards a teacher must cover. The overall question laid out with multimedia learning is as follows: does augmenting text with graphics, or vice versa, improve instructional effectiveness?

Theoretical Foundations

Researchers and scholars in this field have added their own observations and theories that lay foundation to the multimedia principle. As Bishop George Berkeley states, “Nothing exists or has meaning unless it is perceived by some mind” and pointed out that words are abstract and generic while images are concrete and very specific. This reinforces that learning without prior knowledge of a certain subject or physical (digital) representation could underline a non-existing world to students without a foundation for that specific subject taught. Another hypothesis, coding redundancy, “suggests that imagery acts as an additional memory code that helps recall concrete nouns,” as in a student who reads the word apple and simultaneously views an image of an apple appears, increases his/her recall and recognition. Dual-coding theory is more “general and based on a large body of research concerning cognitive processing of observational (concrete) and theoretical (abstract) items, using images to describe greater detailed themes, not the simple one-worded nouns.” An example of this would be of a teacher who talks about an idea should show it as well, i.e. talking about pi in math would be coded with the image of π and perhaps a graph of a circle to explain how it is applied to our physical world. Paivio, a researcher in the field, concluded that because of their concreteness, images are superior to words in promoting recall. Keynote to these conceptions was articulated by Ulrich Neisser, as he stated, “the central assertion is that seeing, hearing, and remembering are all acts of construction, which may make more or less use of stimulus information depending on circumstances.” In other words, if you say it, try and show it, it constructs a better understanding of the topic.

Empirical Foundation

1. Instructional Effectiveness Mayer summarized nine studies were student participants received instruction with words alone or words augmented by pictures. Mayer measured retention and transfer; scores showed that 6 of 9 studies showed better recall of multimedia with an increase of 23% with that of plain text instruction. Contiguity principle suggests that verbal and pictorial information should be coordinated. Is to say that words and pictures should be presented together in time and space rather than successively, for example, introducing a planet in our solar system with the concurrent image of that planet. Coherence Principle concerns the inclusion or exclusion of extraneous material, such as irrelevant words and pictures, in multimedia instruction, for example, do not put a picture/animation of an acoustic guitar when instructing on electric basses.

2. Animation and Video In a Mayer and Anderson study, which tested two groups on measures of transfer, the performance of the narration with animation groups was significantly superior to other non-animation groups. There is a superiority of video/animation over still pictures which have been found by researchers, Hanly, Herron, and Cole, although the effect of video/animation lecture over pictorial one might require more theoretical development to be conclusive with its appropriate evidence. Researcher Al-Seghayer’s students suggested that the video clips did help them understand more precisely the meaning of the target vocabulary he had the study group review and be tested on. Interesting find, even though other researches debate animation could be a distraction to the lesson.

3. Student Characteristics In this reading Mayer and Gallini found that a well-designed presentation using both text and illustrations, compared to a poorly designed presentation using only text, resulted in better transfer performance for students with low prior knowledge of the domain. There was much less difference between two presentations for students with high prior knowledge. These results support Tobias’s hypothesis and are reinforced by number of other studies that indicate there is an “expertise reversal effect” with those of higher knowledge, such as experts, actually interfering with their learning when a presentation is too “flashy;” experts might not care for the look of the presentation, more-so the actual information needed from the presentation.

Implications for Instructional Design

Evidence is clear that augmenting text with illustrations to spruce up the text does not necessarily improve learning unless the illustrative material serves relevant instructional purposes. For example as in educational text where Mayer found that 30% of the space used for illustrations was irrelevant to the goal of the lesson. Interestingly, Mayer does emphasize the “value of allowing students to interactively and systematically manipulate animations, supporting memory coding while providing feedback for the learner.” On a production scale based on numbers Mayer assembled, he found that information about higher end graphics and staff hours equal to 37.5 weeks as opposed to 12.5 weeks for lowest end graphics on a M1 tank as an example. Although expensive and time consuming, results show that higher-detailed training procedures cause a substantial practical payoff. Regardless of production value, “to maximize the effectiveness of human cognition with its separate, additive channels, material intended for different channels should be in close temporal and spatial proximity, rather than separated.” Keep showing multimedia examples that are relevant and timely to the topic being taught.

Implications for Cognitive Theory

Mayer reinforces that the evidence of transfer in multimedia learning settings suggests that the learning is relatively “deep” leading to effective transfer reporting. Wisher et al found that forgetting varied not only with the type of learning, for example procedural or declarative knowledge, but also with such factors as the presence of feedback, availability of performance aids, and extent of over learning. The student must absorb some portion of working memory. 1. Working Memory Working memory, described as preliminary work attempting to assess cognitive load by measuring brain and eye activity and some researchers described some neuro-imaging techniques to get at cognitive load more directly. Such techniques were conducted by Air Force Armstrong Laboratory Test Center in San Antonio Texas, developing a scale measuring between 6 and 15 of working memory capacity. With this in mind it seemed to test not only working memory as general learning ability but aid those on general intelligence. This is of importance for students with smaller working memory capacity, or general learning ability, than their higher capacity peers.

2. Motivation and Metacognition The impact of interest and motivational goal orientation remain active areas of research in instructional psychology. Research is also beginning to explore the effect of motivation on metacognition, knowing about knowing or self-awareness about a student’s own cognitive learning paths. As stated before, these constructs need to be “included in models of multimedia learning and cognitive load to make them more relevant to learning in real-life contexts, whether in school or over the internet.”

3. Aptitude-Treatment Interaction ATI Research is concerned with the interactions of any student characteristic, not just cognitive ones, with instructional treatments. ATI research results should lead to a series of replicated interactions between student characteristics and instructional treatments that would enable instructional designers to create presentations ideally suited to learner with different characteristics. This would be incredibly time consuming for instructors to design different treatments for each type of learner. ATI was popular in the 1960’s and 1970’s but fell into disfavor when interactions were difficult to verify and replicate.

Works Cited

Mayer E., Richard. The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2009.