Map features and the recall of discourse

Contextual Influences of Maps and Diagrams on Learning

“…Diagrams, on the other hand, have not been shown to be similarly effective in facilitating prose learning (Winn & Holiday, 1982). In the second case, our prediction of poorer prose recall by those with maps whose components were listed rather than spatially configured, was in line with the findings of several similar past studies (Schwartz & Kulhavy, 1981;Mastropieri & Peters, 1987;Abel & Kulhavy, 1989).…”

“…Of further surprise was the absence of notable differences in story recall between the Map and List conditions, particularly given the numerous studies that have reported greater prose learning when map features are spatially distributed versus merely listed (Abel & Kulhavy, 1986;Mastropieri & Peters, 1987;Schwartz & Kulhavy, 1981). A reasonable explanation for this finding is that criterion measures on the post-test were unrelated to the keywords that constituted the map features.…”

“…of display components (Kulhavy & Schwartz, 1980;Winn, 1988;Winn & Sutherland, 1989). A good example of research in this area can be seen in several map studies conducted by Kulhavy and his colleagues (Abel & Kulhavy, 1986;Kulhavy & Schwartz, 1980;Kulhavy, Schwartz, & Shaha, 1983;Schwartz & Kulhavy, 1981) that found subjects were signifIcantly better at recalling map features and related text material when the components were depicted mimetically (visually mimicking the real-world objects to which they refer) rather than through the use of labels.…”

Learning and remembering from thematic maps of familiar regions

“…Thus, the spatial distribution of regions provided by the cartogram, the proportional symbol map, and the data map did This outcome prevents estimation of the degree to which students' nonverbal memory code (Paivio, 1986) (Schwartz & Kulhavy, 1981) is likely to be greatest with unfamiliar regions, where new map structure can be used to remember new verbal information.…”

When tactics collide: Counter effects between an adjunct map and prequestions

“…A number of researchers (Abel & Kulhavy, 1986, 1989Griffin & Robinson, 2000;Kulhavy, Schwartz, & Shaha, 1983;Mastropieri & Peters, 1987;Schwartz & Kulhavy, 1981) have discounted this idea by showing that subjects viewing maps with features listed along the border (whether depicted by labels or mimetic icons) recall significantly less from accompanying texts than those viewing maps with features that are spatially dispersed. If maps do, in fact, aid text recall through selective cueing, there should have been no difference between groups since both displays contained identical linguistic and graphic elements.…”