The effects of metaphorical interface on germane cognitive load in Web-based instruction
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a metaphorical interface on germane cognitive load in Web-based instruction. Based on cognitive load theory, germane cognitive load is a cognitive investment for schema construction and automation. A new instrument developed in a previous study was used to measure students’ mental activities of schema construction and automation supported by structural cues in a metaphorical interface environment. Eighty participants were randomly assigned to one of two types of instructional units with the same instructional content and different interface types (i.e., non-metaphorical interface and metaphorical interface). The results indicated that germane cognitive load positively affected learning performance while there was no relationship between germane cognitive load and students’ prior knowledge. A metaphorical interface enhanced learners’ germane cognitive load and learning performance, and both germane cognitive load and prior knowledge similarly contributed to learning performance. The findings provide implications for the advancement of cognitive load theory and the practice of instructional development.
KeywordsMetaphorical interface Germane cognitive load User interface
- Anderson, R. A. (2006). Exploring the art and technology of web design. Clifton Park, NY: Thomson Delmar Learning.Google Scholar
- Barr, P., Biddle, R., & Noble, J. (2002). A taxonomy of user interface metaphors, In Proceedings of SIGCHI-NZ symposium on computer–human interaction (CHINZ 2002). Hamilton. Retrieved from http://www.mcs.vuw.ac.nz/~chikken/research/papers/chinz2002/barr_chinz2002.pdf.
- Beers, P. J., Boshuizen, H. P. A., Kirschner, P. A., Gijselaers, W., & Westendorp, J. (2008). Cognitive load measurements and stimulated recall interviews for studying the effects of information and communications technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(3), 309–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Beriswill, J. E. (1998). Analysis-based message design: Rethinking screen design guidelines. In Proceedings of the 20th national convention of the association for educational communications and technology, pp. 29–37.Google Scholar
- Berkley, J., & Cates, W. M. (1996). Building coping skills on a firm foundation: Using a metaphorical interface to deliver stress management instruction. In Proceedings of selected research and development presentations at the 1996 national convention of the association for educational communications and technology, 15, pp. 71–79.Google Scholar
- Cates, W. M. (1994). Designing hypermedia is hell: Metaphor’s role in instructional design. In Proceedings of selected research and development presentations at the 1994 national convention of the association for educational communications and technology, 16, pp. 95–108.Google Scholar
- Cates, W. M. (1996). Towards a taxonomy of metaphorical graphical user interfaces: Demands and implementations. In Proceedings of selected research and development presentations at the 18th national communications and technology, pp. 101–110.Google Scholar
- Cates, W. M., & Berkley, J. (2000) What price metaphor? Calculating metaphorical interfaces’ return-on-investment. In Proceedings of selected research and development presentations at the 2000 national convention of the association for educational communications and technology, 22, pp. 59–70.Google Scholar
- Cheon, J., & Grant, M. M. (2009). Are pretty interfaces worth the time? The effects of user interface types on web-based instruction. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 20(1), 5–33.Google Scholar
- Cheon, J., & Grant, M. M. (in press). Examining the relationships of different cognitive load types related to user interface in web-based instruction. Journal of Interactive Learning Research. Google Scholar
- Davidson, M. J., Dove, L., & Weltz, J. (1999). Mental models and usability. Retrieved from http://www.lauradove.info/reports/mental%20models.htm.
- Driscoll, M. P. (2005). The psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.Google Scholar
- Firat, M., & Kakakci, I. (2010). Use of visual metaphors for navigation in educational hypermedia: Effects on the navigational performance. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 19(1), 5–22.Google Scholar
- Gadanidis, G., Sedig, K., & Liang, H. N. (2004). Designing online mathematical investigation. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 23(3), 275–298.Google Scholar
- Haag, B. B., & Snetsigner, W. (1993). Aesthetics and screen design: An integration of principles. In Proceedings of the 25th annual conference of the international visual literacy association, pp. 92–97. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/26/9e/f4.pdf.
- Henderson, L., Putt, I., & Coombs, G. (2002). Mental models of teaching and learning with the WWW. Auckland: Paper presented at ASCILITE conference.Google Scholar
- Herrington, J. A. (1997). Authentic learning in interactive multimedia environments. Edith Cowan University. Unpublished doctoral thesis.Google Scholar
- Herrington, J., Oliver, R., Herrington, T., & Sparrow, H. (2000). Towards a new tradition of online instruction: Using situated learning to design web-based units. Coffs Harbour, QLD: Paper presented at ASCILITE conference.Google Scholar
- Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphor we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Lang, J. (2003). Role of metaphor in multimedia curriculum design for preservice teacher professional learning. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australian teacher education association, Melbourne. Retrieved from http://www.atea.edu.au/Conf2003Papers.htm.
- Lee, S., & Boling, E. (1999). Screen design guidelines for motivation in interactive multimedia instruction: A survey and framework for designers. Educational Technology, 39, 19–26.Google Scholar
- Lohr, L. L., & Ku, H. Y. (2003). Development of a web-based template for active learning. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 213–226.Google Scholar
- Mayer, R. E. (2005). The cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Metros, S. E., & Hedberg, J. G. (2002). More than just a pretty (inter) face: The role of the graphical user interface in engaging elearners. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(2), 191–205.Google Scholar
- Microsoft Corporation. (1995). The windows interface guidelines—A guide for designing software. Retrieved from http://www.ics.uci.edu/~kobsa/courses/ICS104/course-notes/Microsoft_WindowsGuidelines.pdf.
- Nielson, J. (2000). Designing web usability: The practice of simplicity. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders Publishing.Google Scholar
- Norman, D. (1998). The design of everyday things. New York, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
- Ohl, T. M., & Cates, W. M. (1997). Applying metaphorical interface design principles to the World Wide Web. Educational Technology, 37(6), 25–38.Google Scholar
- Paas, F., & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (1993). The efficiency of instructional conditions: An approach to combine mental effort and performance measures. Human Factors, 35, 737–743.Google Scholar
- Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Darabi, A. A. (2005). A motivational perspective on the relation between mental effort and performance: Optimizing learner involvement in instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Parizotto-Ribeiro, R., & Hammond, N. (2005). Does aesthetics affect the users’ perceptions of VLEs? Paper presented at the 12th international conference on artificial intelligence in education, Amsterdam. Retrieved from http://www.informatics.sussex.ac.uk/users/gr20/aied05/finalVersion/RParizotto.pdf.
- Pearrow, M. (2007). Web usability handbook (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Charles River Media.Google Scholar
- Plass, J. L. (1998). Design and evaluation of the user interface of foreign language multimedia software: A cognitive approach. Language Learning & Technology, 2(1), 40–53.Google Scholar
- Shneiderman, B., & Plaisant, C. (2005). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
- Swan, K. (2004). Relationships between interactions and learning in online environments. Retrieved from http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/books/interactions.pdf.
- Szabo, M., & Kanuka, H. (1998). Effects of violating screen design principles of balance, unity and focus on recall learning, study time and completion rates. Journal of Multimedia and Hypermedia, 8(1), 23–42.Google Scholar
- Vogt, C. (2001). The design elements in developing effective learning and instructional web-sites. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 5(4), 40–47.Google Scholar
- Williams, R., Tollett, J., & Rohr, D. (2002). Robin Williams web design workshop. Berkeley, CA: Peachpit Press.Google Scholar