Educational Technology Research and Development

, Volume 52, Issue 3, pp 23–34 | Cite as

The effects of visual and verbal coding mnemonics on learning Chinese characters in computer-based instruction

  • Mei-Liang Amy Kuo
  • Simon Hooper


The effects of different approaches to learning Chinese characters were investigated. Ninety-two high-school students were randomly assigned to one of five treatment groups: translation, verbal mnemonics, visual mnemonics, dual coding mnemonics, or self-generated mnemonics. All groups received instruction and completed posttests in a computer-based environment. The results indicate that participants who generated their own mnemonics demonstrated higher posttest performance than those in visual coding, verbal coding, and translation groups; subjects in the dual coding group scored higher than those in the translation group. Those who generated their own mnemonics spent more time on task than any other group, and those in the verbal coding group took more time than those in the translation group. Survey and qualitative data suggest that learners' interpretations of the Chinese characters were rooted in their cultural backgrounds and personal experiences.


Chinese Character Abstract Word Dual Code Concrete Word Code Group 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bednar, A.K., Cunningham, D., Duffy, T.M., & Perry, J.D. (1991). Theory into practice: How do we link? In Anglin, G.J. (Ed.),Instructional technology: Past, present, and future (pp. 88–101). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
  2. Bellezza, A.S. (1981). Mnemonic devices: Classification, characteristics, and criteria.Review of Educational Research, 51(2), 247–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Butler, C., & Blake, R. (1973, April).Cognitive scaffolding in the learning of foreign language vocabulary: An experimental study. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Las Vegas, NV.Google Scholar
  4. Carrier, C., Karbo, K., & Kindem, H. (1983). Use of selfgenerated and supplied visuals as mnemonics in gifted children's learning.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 57(1), 235–240.Google Scholar
  5. Chuang, C.J. (1975). The function of imagery in learning of Chinese language.Acta Psychologica Taiwanica, 1, 145–150.Google Scholar
  6. Clark, J., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education.Educational Psychology Review, 3(3), 149–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohen, J. (1988).Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  8. Grabowski, B.L. (1996). Generative learning: Past, present, and future. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.),Handbook of research in educational communications and technology (pp. 897–918). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Jonassen, D. (1991). Evaluating constructivistic learning.Educational Technology, 30(9), 28–33.Google Scholar
  10. Ke, C. (1996). An empirical study on the relationship between Chinese character recognition and production.Modern Language Journal, 80(3), 340–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kibler, J.L., & Blick, K.A. (1972). Evaluation of experimenter-supplied and subject-originated first-letter mnemonic in a free-recall task.Psychological Reports, 30, 307–313.Google Scholar
  12. Kobayashi, S. (1986). Theoretical issues concerning superiority of picture over words and sentences in memory.Perceptual and Motor Skill, 63, 783–792.Google Scholar
  13. Li, X. (1996). Hypercharacters: A pilot study in computerized learning of Chinese characters.CALICO Journal, 14(1), 77–94.Google Scholar
  14. Mantyla, T., & Nillson, L. (1983). Are my cues better then your cues?Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 24, 303–312.Google Scholar
  15. Mayer, R.E., & Anderson, R.B. (1991). Animations need narrations: An experimental test of dual-coding hypothesis.Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(4), 484–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mayer, R.E., & Anderson, R.B. (1992). The instructional animation: helping students build connections between words and pictures in multimedia learning.Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 444–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mayer, R.E., & Moreno, R. (2002). Aids to computer-based multimedia learning.Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 107–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mayer, R.E., & Sims, V.K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning.Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 389–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McGinnis, S. (1995, November).Does Johnny even want to read: Student attitudes and approaches in the learning of written Chinese. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
  20. Paivio, A. (1971).Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  21. Paivio, A. (1986).Mental representations: A dual-coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Paivio, A., & Lambert, W. (1981). Dual coding and bilingual memory.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20(5), 532–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Paradis, M. (1978). The stratification of bilingualism. In M. Paradis (Ed.),Aspects of bilingualism (pp. 165–176). Columbia, SC: Hornbean Press.Google Scholar
  24. Rieber, L.P. (1989). The effects of computer animated elaboration strategies and practice on factorial and application learning in an elementary science lesson.Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5(4), 431–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rieber, L.P. (1990). Animation and computer-based instruction.Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(1), 77–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rieber, L.P. (1991). Animation, incidental learning and continuing motivation.Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(3), 318–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rieber, L.P., & Kini, A.S. (1991). Theoretical foundations of instructional applications of computer-generated animated visuals.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 18(3), 83–88.Google Scholar
  28. Sadoski, M., Goetz, E., & Avila, E. (1995). Concreteness effects in text recall: Dual coding or context available?Reading Research Quarterly, 30(2), 278–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sadoski, M., Paivio, A., & Goetz, E. (1991). A critique of schema theory in reading and a dual coding alternative.Reading Research Quarterly, 26(4), 463–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Steffensen, M.S., Goetz, E.T., & Cheng, X. (1999) The images and emotions of bilingual Chinese readers: A dual coding analysis.Reading Psychology, 20(4), 301–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Swanson, H.L. (1988). The effects of self-generated visual mnemonics on adult learning disabled readers' word recall.Learning Disabilities Research, 4(1), 26–35.Google Scholar
  32. Taura, H. (1998). Bilingual dual coding in Japanese returnee students.Language, Culture and Curriculum, 11(1), 47–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Towers, R.L., & Anglin, G.J. (1994, February).The instructional effectiveness of computer-aniimated and static visuals. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Nashville, TN.Google Scholar
  34. Turnage, T., & McGinnies, E. (1973). A cross-cultural comparison of the effects of presentation mode and meaningfulness on short-term recall.American Journal of Psychology, 86(2), 369–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wall, H.M., & Routowicz, A. (1987). Use of self-generated cues in immediate and delayed recall.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 64, 1019–1022.Google Scholar
  36. Wang, A.Y., & Thomas, M.H. (1992). The effects of imagery-based mnemonics on the long-term retention of Chinese characters.Language Learning, 42(3), 359–376.Google Scholar
  37. Wang, A.., & Thomas, M.H. (1996). Mnemonic instruction and gifted child.Roeper Review, 19(2), 104–105.Google Scholar
  38. Wang, A.Y., Thomas, M.H., & Quellette, J.A. (1992). Keyword mnemonic retention of second-language vocabulary words.Journal of Educational Psychology, 4, 520–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wang, G.C. (1989). Research on teaching Chinese in forty-five universities: Analysis of survey results.Journal of Chinese Language Teaching Association, 24(3) 101–113.Google Scholar
  40. Wang, S. (1998). A study on the learning and teaching of Hanzi-Chinese characters.Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 14(1), 69–101.Google Scholar
  41. Williams, M.D. (1996). Learner-control and instructional technologies. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.),Handbook of research in educational communications and technology (pp. 957–983). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  42. Wittrock, M.C. (1990). Generative processes of comprehension.Educational Psychologist, 24(4), 345–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mei-Liang Amy Kuo
    • 1
  • Simon Hooper
    • 2
  1. 1.the School of Education at Capella UniversityUSA
  2. 2.College of Education and Human Development at the University of MinnesotaUSA

Personalised recommendations