Abstract
Computer-based multimedia learning environments make it possible to present interactive animated pictures, which can be manipulated for active exploratory learning and which allow the dynamic behavior of complex subject matter to be displayed. Due to the large range of possibilities for exploratory interaction, such learning environments seem well suited for co-operative learning in which different learners analyse the presented subject matter from different perspectives. This paper first describes a theoretical framework for learning from texts and pictures together with an analysis of possible effects of animation and interactivity on knowledge acquisition. It then presents two empirical studies in which knowledge acquisition from interactive animated pictures was compared with knowledge acquisition from static pictures under the conditions of individual learning (Study I) and of cooperative learning (Study II). In Study I, learning with interactive animated pictures resulted in a superior encoding of detail information, but did not facilitate performance of mental simulation tasks. In Study II, learning with interactive animated pictures resulted both in inferior encoding of detail information and poorer results in mental simulations. These findings and the analysis of discourse protocols of subjects’ co-operation suggest that exploratory learning with interactive animated pictures is associated with extraneous cognitive load and that this load can be further increased by the co-ordination demands of co-operative learning. Although animated pictures may provide external support for mental simulations, they do not appear to be generally beneficial for learning, because they can prevent individuals from performing relevant cognitive processes.
Résumé
Les environnements informatiques d’apprentissage donnent la possibilité de présenter des images interactives animées qui peuvent être manipulées pour un apprentissage actif par exploration et qui permettent de visualiser le fonctionnement dynamique-d’un contenu d’enseignement complexe. Du fait du grand nombre de possibilités d’interactions d’explorations, de tels environnements d’apprentissage semblent bien adaptés pour un apprentissage coopératif dans lequel différents apprenants analysent la matière présentée de différents points de vue. L’acquisition de connaissance à partir d’images interactives animées a été comparée à l’acquisition de connaissance à partir d’images statiques dans des conditions d’apprentissage individuel (première étude) et d’apprentissage coopératif (deuxième étude). Dans la première étude, l’apprentissage avec des images interactives animées a conduit à un encodage supérieur du détail d’information, mais n’a pas facilité les performances dans des tâches de simulation mentale. Dans la seconde étude, l’apprentissage avec des images interactives animées a conduit simultanément à un encodage inférieur du détail d’information et à des résultants médiocres des simulations mentales. Ces résultats et les analyses des protocoles du discours des sujets coopérants suggèrent que l’apprentissage par exploration avec des images interactives animées induit une charge cognitive sur les détails, et que cette charge peut être encoure accrue par les contraintes de coordination liées à l’apprentissage en coopération. Bien que les images animées puissent fournir un support externe aux simulations mentales, elles n’apparaissent pas comme étant en général bénéfiques pour l’apprentissage du fait qu’elles peuvent gêner les individus dans la mise en oeuvre de processus cognitifs pertinents.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baddeley, A. (1992). Working memory.Science, 255, 556–559.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instrution.Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293–332.
Clark, J.M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education.Educational Psychology Review, 3 149–210.
Cohen, E.G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups.Review of Educational Research, 64, 1–35.
Collins, A., & Brown, J.S. (1988). The computer as a tool for learning through reflection. In H. Mandl & A. Lesgold (Eds.),Learning issues for intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 1–18). New York: Springer.
De Kleer, J., & Brown, J.S. (1984). A qualitative physics based on confluences.Artificial Intelligence, 24, 7–83.
Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O’Malley, C. (1995). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In P. Reimann & H. Spada (Eds.),Learning in humans and machines. Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp. 189–211). Oxford: Elsevier.
Duffy, T.M., & Jonassen, D.H. (Eds.) (1992).Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K.D., & Gentner, D. (1989/90). The structure-mapping enginge: algorithm and examples.Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1–63.
Forbus, K.D., Nielsen, P., & Faltings, B. (1991). Qualitative spatial reasoning — The clock project.Artificial Intelligence, 51, 417–471.
Graesser, A.C., Millis, K.K., & Zwaan, R.A. (1997). Discourse comprehension.Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 163–189.
Greeno, J.G. (1991). Mathematical cognition: Accomplishments and challenges in research. In R.R. Hoffman & D.S. Palermo (Eds.),Cognition and the symbolic processes: Applied and ecological perspectives (pp. 255–279). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Greeno, J.G., Smith, D.R., & Moore, J.L. (1993). Transfer of situated learning. In D.K. Dettermann & R.J. Sternberg (Eds.),Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction (pp. 99–167). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Hegarty, M. (1992). Mental animation: Inferring motion from static displays of mechanical systems.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 1084–1102.
Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1983). Mental Models.Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Johnson-Laird, P.N., & Byrne, R.M.J. (1991).Deducation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kaput, J.J. (1992). Technology and Mathematics Education. In D.A. Grouws (Eds.),Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teachning and Learning (pp. 515–556). New York, NY: MacMillan.
Kosslyn, S.M. (1994).Image and brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kozma, R.B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Refraiming the debate.Educational Technology Research and Development, 42, 1–19.
Kozma, R., Chin, E., Russell, J., & Marx, N. (1997).The use of linked multiple representations to understand and solve problems in chemistry. Final report, Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Levie, H.W., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30, 195–232.
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, pp. 51–86). New York: Springer.
Lowe, R.K. (1996). Background knowledge and the construction of a situational representation from a diagram.European Journal of Psychology of Education, 11, 377–397.
Mayer, R.E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions?Educational Psychologist, 32, 1–19.
Mayer, R.E., & Gallini, J.K. (1990). When is an illustration worth ten thousand words?Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 715–726.
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, 389–401.
Mayer, R.E., Steinhoff, K., Bower, G., & Mars, R. (1995). A generative theory of textbook design: Using annotated illustrations to foster meaningful learning of science text.Educational Technology Research and Development, 43, 31–44.
Neisser, U. (1976).Cognition and reality. San Francisco: Freeman.
Paivio, A. (1978). A dual coding approach to perception and cognition. In H.L. Pick & E. Saltzman (Eds.),Modes of perceiving and processing information (pp. 39–52). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Palmer, S. E. (1978). Fundamental aspects of cognitive representation. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.),Cognition and categorization (pp. 259–303). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Peirce, C. S. (1906). Prolegmena to an apology for pragmaticism.The Monist, 492–546.
Peterson, D. (1996).Forms of Representation. Exeter: Intellect.
Pinker, S. (1990). A theory of graph comprehension. In R. Freedle (Ed.),Artificial intelligence and the future of testing (pp. 73–126). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Renkl, A., & Mandl, H. (1995). Kooperatives Lernen: Die Frage nach dem Notwendigen und dem Ersetzbaren.Unterrichtswissenschaft, 23, 292–300.
Resnick, L. (1987). Learning in school and out.Educational Researcher, 16, 13–20.
Salomon, G. (1994).Interaction of media, cognition, and learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schnotz, W. (1993). On the relation between dual coding and mental models in graphics comprehension.Learning and Instruction, 3, 247–249.
Schnotz, W. (1994).Aufbau von Wissensstrukturen. Weinheim: Beltz.
Schwartz, D.L. (1995). Reasoning about the referent of a picture versus reasoning about the picture as the referent.: An effect of visual realism.Memory and Cognition, 23, 709–722.
Shuell, T.J. (1988). The role of the student in the learning from instruction.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 13, 276–295.
Sims, V.K., & Hegarty, M. (1997). Mental animation in the visuospatial sketchpad: Evidence from dual-tasks studies.Memory & Cognition, 25, 321–332.
Spiro, R.J., Feltovich, R.L., Jacobson, M.J., & Poulsen, R.L. (1991). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism and hypertext: random access instruction for advanced knowledge aquisition in ill-structured domains.Educational Technology, 31, 24–33.
Strittmatter, P. (1994). Wissenserwerb mit Bildern bei Film und Fernsehen. In Weidenmann, B. (Eds.),Wissenserwerb mit Bildern (pp. 177–194). Bern: Huber.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning.Cognitive Science, 12, 257–285.
Sweller, J., & Chandler (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn.Cognition and Instruction, 12, 185–223.
Ullman, S. (1984). Visual routines.Cognition, 18, 97–159.
van Dijk, T.A., & Kintsch, W. (1983).Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
Weaver III, C.A., Mannes, S., & Fletcher, C.R. (Eds.) (1995).Discourse comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wertheimer, M. (1938).Laws of organization in perceptual forms in a source book for Gestalt Psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Winn, W.D. (1994). Contributions of perceptual and cognitive processes to the comprehension of graphics. In W. Schnotz & R. Kulhavy (Eds.),Comprehension of graphics (pp. 3–27). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Wygotski, L.S. (1964).Denken und Sprechen. Stuttgart: Fischer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schnotz, W., Böckheler, J. & Grzondziel, H. Individual and co-operative learning with interactive animated pictures. Eur J Psychol Educ 14, 245–265 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172968
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172968