Abstract
We examined the kinds of information in a prose passage that is better remembered when depictive illustrations are embedded in the passage than when the passage contains no illustrations. Experiment 1 showed that (1) pictures depicting details effectively increased recall of those details and (2) pictures depicting relationships effectively increased recall of that relational information (relative to a no-picture control condition). In Experiment 2, comprehension skill was found to modulate the general effects obtained in Experiment 1. Detail pictures enhanced the recall of targeted details for all skill levels. Relational pictures enhanced recall of pictured relational information for highly skilled and moderately skilled comprehenders, but not for less skilled comprehenders. Because there were no recall differences across the different skill levels in the no-picture control condition, it is suggested that pictures may serve to enable processing in which readers would not necessarily engage under ordinary circumstances. Pictures, however, did not appear to compensate for limitations reflected in lower scores on a standardized test of reading comprehension.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Ackerman, B. P. (1986). The use of item-specific and relational episodic information in the recall of children and adults.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,42, 115–143.
Bransford, J. D., &Johnson, M. K. (1972). Contextual prerequisites for understanding.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,11, 717–726.
Brown, A. L., &Smiley, S. S. (1978). The development of strategies for studying texts.Child Development,49, 1076–1088.
Brown, J. I., Nelson, M. J., &Denny, E. C. (1973).The Nelson-Denny Reading Test, Form D. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
Cooney, J. B., &Swanson, H. L. (1987). Memory and learning disabilities: An overview. In H. L. Swanson (Ed.),Memory and learning disabilities: Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities (pp. 1–40). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Einstein, G. O., McDaniel.M. A., Bowers, C. A., &Stevens, D. T. (1984). Memory for prose: The influence of relational and proposition-specific processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,10, 133–143.
Einstein, G. O., McDaniel, M. A., Owen, P. D., &Cote, N. C. (1990). Encoding and recall of texts: The importance of material appropriate processing.Journal of Memory and Language,29, 566–581.
Feldman, M. J. (1985). Evaluating pre-primer basal readers using story grammar.American Educational Research Journal,22, 527–547.
Gernsbacher, M. A., Varner, K. R., &Faust, M. (1990). Investigating differences in general comprehension skill.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,16, 430–445.
Golinkoff, R. M. (1976). A comparison of reading comprehension processes in good and poor comprehenders.Reading Research Quarterly,11, 623–659.
Harber, J. R. (1980). Effects of illustrations on reading performance: Implications for further LD research.Learning Disability Quarterly,3, 60–70.
Haring, M. J., &Fry, M. A. (1979). Effect of pictures on children’s comprehension of written text.Educational Communication & Technology,27, 185–190.
Hartley, J., &Trueman, M. (1985). A research strategy for text designers: The role of headings.Instructional Science,14, 99–155.
Just, M. A., &Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory.Psychological Review,99, 122–149.
Kintsch, W. (1974).The representation of meaning in memory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Larkin, J. H., &Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words.Cognitive Science,11, 65–99.
Lee-Sammons, W. H., &Whitney, P. (1991). Reading perspectives and memory for text: An individual difference analysis.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 1074–1081.
Levin, J. R. (1973). Inducing comprehension in poor readers: A test of a recent model.Journal of Educational Psychology,65, 19–24.
Levin, J. R. (1981). On functions of pictures in prose. In F. J. Pirozzolo & M. C. Witrock (Eds.),Neuropsychological and cognitive processes in reading (pp. 203–228). New York: Academic Press.
Levin, J. R. (1983). Pictorial strategies for school learning: Practical illustrations. In M. Pressley & J. R. Levin (Eds.),Cognitive strategy research: Educational applications (pp. 213–237). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Levin, J. R., Anglin, G. J., &Carney, R. N. (1987). On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. In D. M. Willows & H. A. Houghton (Eds.),The psychology of illustration: Vol. 1. Basic research (pp. 51–85). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Mastropieri, M. A., &Scruggs, T. E. (1989). Constructing more meaningful relationships: Mnemonic instruction for special populations.Educational Psychology Review,1, 83–111.
Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E.,&Levin, J. R. (1986). Learning disabled students’ memory for expository prose: Mnemonic vs. nonmnemonic pictures.American Educational Research Journal,24, 505–519.
Mayer, R. E., &Gallini, J. K. (1990). When is an illustration worth ten thousand words?Journal of Educational Psychology,82, 715–726.
McDaniel, M. A., Einstein, G. O., Dunay, P. K., &Cobb, R. E. (1986). Encoding difficulty and memory: Toward a unifying theory.Journal of Memory & Language,25, 645–656.
Ortony, A. (1978). Remembering, understanding, and representation.Cognitive Science,2, 53–69.
Rose, T. L. (1986). Effects of illustrations on reading comprehension of learning disabled students.Journal of Learning Disabilities,19, 542–544.
Rosenthal, R., &Rosnow, R. (1985).Contrast analysis: Focused comparisons in the analysis of variance. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Salomon, G. (1972). Heuristic models for the generation of aptitude-treatment interaction hypotheses.Review of Educational Research,42, 327–343.
Salomon, G. (1974). Internalization of filmic schematic operations in interaction with learners’ aptitudes.Journal of Educational Psychology,66, 499–511.
Salomon, G. (1979). Media and symbol systems as related to cognition and learning.Journal of Educational Psychology,71, 131–148.
Schallert, O. L. (1980). The role of illustrations in reading comprehension. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.),Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 503–524). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schraw, G., & Wade, S. (1991, April).Selective learning strategies for relevant and important text information. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Waddill, P. J., McDaniel, M. A., &Einstein, G. O. (1988). Illustrations as adjuncts to prose: A text-appropriate processing approach.Journal of Educational Psychology,80, 457–464.
Weidenmann, B. (1989). When good pictures fail: An information processing approach to the effect of illustrations. In H. Mandl & J. R. Levin (Eds.),Knowledge acquisition from text and pictures (pp. 157–170). Amsterdam: Elsevier, North-Holland.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Waddill, P.J., McDaniel, M.A. Pictorial enhancement of text memory: Limitations imposed by picture type and comprehension skill. Memory & Cognition 20, 472–482 (1992). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199580
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199580