From Diversifying Economic Quality: A Wiki for Instructors and Departments
|Line 1:||Line 1:|
== Evidence ==
== Evidence ==
Revision as of 13:49, 20 June 2011
"9 Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning" (Mayer & Moreno, 2003)
Bartsch & Cobern, 2003. This study, titled "Effectiveness of PowerPoint Presentations in Lectures," examined the differences in preference, perceived learning and test performance between class units taught using transparencies, a basic powerpoint presentation and an advanced powerpoint presentation including images and sounds. Students were surveyed directly after each lecture and at the end of the course and performance was measured using class averages on assessments administered for each unit. The study found no significant difference in preference between the three modes of presentation for end-of-class ratings, but a preference for powerpoints in the end-of-semester ratings. Students believed they learned more from both types of powerpoint presentations than from transparencies. It was found that students performed about 10% worse on the units taught using the advanced powerpoint presentation that included images and sounds. Upon this finding, researchers decided to examine the effect of relevant and irrelevant powerpoint images on test performance and enjoyment. Participants were shown 30 slides that included a fact and an image that was either relevant or irrelevant to the fact. Afterwards, participants were given a test on the slides' information. It was found irrelevant images had a significant negative effect on both performance and enjoyment. On the other hand, relevant images had neither a negative nor positive effect on performance and enjoyment of the material. Click here to see the study.
Jamet & Le Bohec, 2006. This study, titled "The Effect of Redundant Text in Multimedia Instruction," examined the interactions of redundant text and spoken information in cognitive psychology students learning different theories of memory. A lecture was presented to the students. This lecture was accompanied by a powepoint-style presentation that included a diagram of the memory theory being taught and no text (no redundancy), text (redundancy: text mirroring the entire lecture presented all at once), or sequential text (text mirroring the text was presented sequentially, after being spoken). Students were then assess on information retention, transfer (applying the information learned to more abstract situations) and diagram completion. Students in the non-redundant group significantly outperformed students in the redundant conditions, both full text and sequential text. No significant differences were observed between the full text and sequential text conditions, suggesting that redundancy itself plays the negative role, regardless of the order in which redundant information is presented. Click here to see the study.