Cognitive load as a factor in the structuring of technical material.

Self Cite

694

420

This article reports findings on the use of a partly auditory and partly visual mode of presentation for geometry worked examples. The logic was based on the split-attention effect and the effect of presentation modality on working memory. The split-attention effect occurs when students must split their attention between multiple sources of information, which results in a heavy cognitive load. Presentation-modality effects suggest that working memory has partially independent processors for handling visual and auditory material. Effective working memory may be increased by presenting material in a mixed rather than a unitary mode. If so, the negative consequences of split attention in geometry might be ameliorated by presenting geometry statements in auditory, rather than visual, form. The results of 6 experiments supported this hypothesis.In recent years, working memory limitations have been identified as a major factor that needs to be considered when instruction is designed. Researchers have used cognitive load theory (e.g., Sweller, 1988Sweller, , 1989Sweller, , 1993Sweller, , 1994 to suggest that many commonly used instructional procedures are inadequate because they require learners to engage in unnecessary cognitive activities that impose a heavy working memory load. Alternatives that reduce extraneous cognitive load have been devised. This research has been generated by the following assumptions concerning our basic cognitive architecture: (a) People have a very limited working memory that is able to hold and process only a few items of information at a time; (b) People have a huge long-term memory that is effectively unlimited in size; (c) Schema acquisition is a primary learning mechanism. Schemata are defined as cognitive constructs that permit people to categorize information in the manner in which it will be used (see Low & Over, 1990Low, Over, Doolan, & Michell, 1994;Sweller & Low, 1992 functions of storing information in long-term memory and of reducing working memory load by permitting people to treat multiple elements of information as a single element; (d) Automation of cognitive processes, including automatic use of schemata, is a learning mechanism that also reduces working memory load by effectively bypassing working memory. Automated information can be processed without conscious effort.A limited working memory is central to this architecture and central to cognitive load theory. Recent work has expanded researchers' knowledge of working memory characteristics and in turn, this work has the potential to expand the instructional techniques generated by cognitive load theory. In this article, we discuss the split-attention effect that previous research has suggested is a cognitive load phenomenon. The split-attention effect occurs when learners are required to divide their attention among and mentally integrate multiple sources of information. Mentally integrating multiple sources of information results in less effective acquisition of information than if learners are presented the same mater...

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: ) a Abo = A Cbo (Sss Theoremmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes.

Mousavi¹,

Low²,

Sweller³

1995

Self Cite

694

420

“…The contiguity principle has also been described under the name of split-attention effect in the cognitive load literature (Chandler & Sweller, 1992;Sweller et al, 1990;Tarmizi & Sweller, 1988). On the basis of research on worked-out examples, Sweller and his colleagues defined the splitattention effect as the impairment in learning that arises from the need to mentally integrate disparate sources of information before instructional material can be rendered intelligible (Chandler & Sweller, 1992;Cooper & Sweller, 1987;Sweller & Cooper, 1985;Ward & Sweller, 1990).…”

Section: Contiguity Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity.

Moreno

Mayer

1999

1,008

613

Students viewed a computer animation depicting the process of lightning. In Experiment 1, they concurrently viewed on-screen text presented near the animation or far from the animation, or concurrently listened to a narration. In Experiment 2, they concurrently viewed on-screen text or listened to a narration, viewed on-screen text following or preceding the animation, or listened to a narration following or preceding the animation. Learning was measured by retention, transfer, and matching tests. Experiment 1 revealed a spatial-contiguity effect in which students learned better when visual and verbal materials were physically close. Both experiments revealed a modality effect in which students learned better when verbal input was presented auditorily as speech rather than visually as text. The results support 2 cognitive principles of multimedia learning.Roxana Moreno created the multimedia materials used in Experiments 1 and 2.

“…In settings in which learners spend significant amounts of time solving problems, effects on problem-solving efficiency can be thought to improve learning efficiency as well, because learners can then do more problems per unit of time. However, to properly claim a facilitated learning effect, the combination of improved learning outcomes and improved learning efficiency has to be verified within a single learning study, as several previous studies have done while studying other effects (Cerpa, Chandler, & Sweller, 1996;Chandler & Sweller, 1991;Kalyuga, Chandler, & Sweller, 1998;MartinMichiellot & Mendelsohn, 2000;Sweller & Chandler, 1994;Sweller et al, 1990). It is possible that learners with spatially distributed rather than stacked displays learn more in a fixed amount of time, learn the same amount in less time, or learn more in less time.…”

Section: Toward An Explanation For a Distributed Versus Stacked Displmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The advantage of spatially integrated displays for learning has been demonstrated in many studies (Chandler & Sweller, 1991Mayer, 1989;Mayer & Gallini, 1990;Sweller, Chandler, Tierney, & Cooper, 1990;Tarmizi & Sweller, 1988;Ward & Sweller, 1990). For example, studies in several different domains (e.g., geometry, algebra, kinematics) found that worked examples were effective only when the text and accompanying diagrams were presented in an integrated format (Tarmizi & Sweller, 1988;Ward & Sweller, 1990).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatially distributed instructions improve learning outcomes and efficiency.

Jang

Schunn

Nokes

2011

Learning requires applying limited working memory and attentional resources to intrinsic, germane, and extraneous aspects of the learning task. To reduce the especially undesirable extraneous load aspects of learning environments, cognitive load theorists suggest that spatially integrated learning materials should be used instead of spatially separated materials, thereby reducing the split-attention effect (Sweller & Chandler, 1994). Recent work, however, has suggested a new distinction between two common formats of spatially separated displays: spatially distributed versus spatially stacked (Jang & Schunn, 2010). Moreover, a distinction between instructions and learning task materials has rarely been made. Across two studies with 106 college students (56 in Study 1 and 50 in Study 2), we compared spatially distributed (multiple sources of information are placed side by side) versus spatially stacked (only one at the top is visible) instructions, without changing the learning task materials, on both task performance and learning. With materials more typical of practice, Study 1 showed that the distributed-display instructions led learners to more efficient learning; learners finished the task faster and scored higher in the overall learning test. With materials more tightly controlled for spatial format per se, Study 2 replicated the effect and found that the benefit of the distributed instructions appeared to be associated with changes in cognitive load. Implications for educational practice are discussed.