Designing Instructional Text in a Conversational Style: A Meta-analysis
This article reviews research on the effects of conversational style on learning. Studies of conversational style have variously investigated “personalization” through changing instances of first-person address to second or third person, including sentences that directly address the learner; including more polite forms of address; and making the views and personality of the author more visible. Meta-analyses provided mixed support for a model of learning processes; statistically reliable average effects were found on self-reports of friendliness (d = 0.46) and effective cognitive processing (d = 0.62), but not learning assistance (d = 0.16) and interest (d = 0.15). Statistically reliable average effects on retention (d = 0.30) and transfer (d = 0.54) learning outcomes supported conversational-style redesigns across a range of potential moderators; the clearest apparent boundary condition for learning outcomes across the moderators under analysis was instructional time, with small, non-significant effects being found in studies longer than 35 min. Recommendations for future investigations are discussed.
KeywordsConversational style Personalization Instructional design Meta-analysis
- Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., et al. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
- Bargiela-Chiappini, F., & Kadar, D. (Eds.). (2010). Politeness across cultures. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
- Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: some universals in language use. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Clarebout, G., & Elen, J. (2007). In search of pedagogical agents’ modality and dialogue effects in open learning environments. e-Journal of Instructional Science and Technology (e-JIST), 10. Retrieved 3 September 2010 from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/e-jist/docs/vol10_no1/papers/full_papers/clarebout_elen.htm.
- Doolittle, P. (2010). The effects of segmentation and personalization on superficial and comprehensive strategy instruction in multimedia learning environments. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 19, 159–175.Google Scholar
- Dunsworth, Q. (2005). Fostering multimedia learning of science: the role of personalization and presentation mode. Doctoral dissertation. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. UMI no. AAT 3173234.Google Scholar
- Graesser, A. C., Hauft-Smith, K., Cohen, A. D., & Pyles, L. D. (1980a). Advanced outlines, familiarity, text genre, and retention of prose. The Journal of Experimental Education, 48, 209–220.Google Scholar
- Graesser, A. C., Hoffman, N. L., & Clark, L. F. (1980b). Structural components of reading time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 131–151.Google Scholar
- Graesser, A. C., Olde, B., & Klettke, B. (2002). How does the mind construct and represent stories? In M. C. Green, J. J. Strange, & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative impact: social and cognitive foundations (pp. 231–263). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Graesser, A. C., & Ottati, V. (1996). Why stories? Some evidence, questions, and challenges. In R. S. Wyer (Ed.), Knowledge and memory: the real story (pp. 121–132). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech arts (pp. 41–58). New York, NY: Academic.Google Scholar
- Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2000). Fixed effects vs. random effects meta-analysis methods: Implications for cumulative research knowledge. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 8, 275-292. doi:10.1111/1468-2389.00156.
- Kartal, G. (2007). How universal are e-learning design guidelines? Reconsidering the personalization principle. In D. Remenyi (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on E-Learning (pp. 269–275). Reading, UK: Academic Conferences.Google Scholar
- MacCallum, R.C., Zhang, S.,. Preacher, K.J., & Rucker, D.D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7, 19-40. doi:10.1037//1082-989X.7.1.19.
- McLaren, B. M., Lim, S., Gagnon, F., Yaron, D., & Koedinger, K. R. (2006). Studying the effects of personalized language and worked examples in the context of a web-based intelligent tutor. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Jhongli, Taiwan, June 26–30, 2006.Google Scholar
- McLaren, B.M., Lim, S., Yaron, D., & Koedinger, K.R. (2007). Can a polite intelligent tutoring system lead to improved learning outside of the lab? In R. Luckin, K.R. Koedinger, & J. Greer (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED-07), Artificial Intelligence in Education: Building Technology Rich Learning Contexts that Work (pp. 433–440). Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
- Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation: how people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Robertson, E. (2008). Effects of personalising anatomy instructions on learning. Honours thesis, The University of Sydney.Google Scholar
- Spiro, R. J. (1977). Remembering information from text: the “state of schema” approach. In R. C. Anderson, R. J. Spiro, & W. E. Montague (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 137–165). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Stiller, K. D., & Jedlicka, R. (2010). A kind of expertise reversal effect: personalization effect can depend on domain-specific prior knowledge. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26, 133–149.Google Scholar
- Wagner, L., Davis, S., & Handelsman, M. M. (1998). In search of the abominable consent form: the impact of readability and personalization. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 54, 115–120. doi:10.1002/%28SICI%291097-4679%28199801%2954:1%3C115::AID-JCLP13%3E3.0.CO;2-N.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wang, N., & Johnson, W. L. (2008). The politeness effect in an intelligent foreign language tutoring system. In B. P. Woolf, E. Aimeur, R. Nkambou, and Lajoie, S. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5091 (pp. 260–280). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Wilson, D.B. (2010). SPSS, Stata, and SAS macros for performing meta-analytic analyses. Retrieved September 19, 2012 from http://mason.gmu.edu/∼dwilsonb/ma.html.
- Yeung, A., Schmid, S., George, A. V., & King, M. M. (2009). Using the personalization hypothesis to design e-learning environments. In M. Gupta-Bhowon, S. Jhaumeer-Laulloo, H. L. K. Wah, & P. Ramasami (Eds.), Chemistry education in the ICT Age (pp. 287–300). Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9732-4_25.Google Scholar