Literature DB >> 19102616

Increased interestingness of extraneous details in a multimedia science presentation leads to decreased learning.

Richard E Mayer1, Emily Griffith, Ilana T N Jurkowitz, Daniel Rothman.   

Abstract

In Experiment 1, students received an illustrated booklet, PowerPoint presentation, or narrated animation that explained 6 steps in how a cold virus infects the human body. The material included 6 high-interest details mainly about the role of viruses in sex or death (high group) or 6 low-interest details consisting of facts and health tips about viruses (low group). The low group outperformed the high group across all 3 media on a subsequent test of problem-solving transfer (d = .80) but not retention (d = .05). In Experiment 2, students who studied a PowerPoint lesson explaining the steps in how digestion works performed better on a problem-solving transfer test if the lesson contained 7 low-interest details rather than 7 high-interest details (d = .86), but the groups did not differ on retention (d = .26). In both experiments, as the interestingness of details was increased, student understanding decreased (as measured by transfer). Results are consistent with a cognitive theory of multimedia learning, in which highly interesting details sap processing capacity away from deeper cognitive processing of the core material during learning. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19102616     DOI: 10.1037/a0013835

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Appl        ISSN: 1076-898X


  10 in total

1.  Metacognitive awareness of learning strategies in undergraduates.

Authors:  Jennifer McCabe
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-04

2.  Animation as Supplementary Learning Material About Carcinogenic Liver Fluke in Classes for Primary Schoolchildren.

Authors:  Preeyaporn Bukkhunthod; Thirayu Meererksom; Phornphitcha Pechdee; Sukanya Ponphimai; Juthamas Khiaowichit; Natthawut Kaewpitoon; Kanyarat Thueng-In; Monica Leng; Thitimakorn Namhong; Anunya Taweepakdeechot; Narada Yardcharoen; Wirangrong Srithongklang; Parichart Wakhuwathapong; Nattawut Keeratibharat; Soraya J Kaewpitoon
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 2.037

3.  Overcoming Addictions, a Web-Based Application, and SMART Recovery, an Online and In-Person Mutual Help Group for Problem Drinkers, Part 2: Six-Month Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial and Qualitative Feedback From Participants.

Authors:  William Campbell; Reid K Hester; Kathryn L Lenberg; Harold D Delaney
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2016-10-04       Impact factor: 5.428

4.  Embodied science and mixed reality: How gesture and motion capture affect physics education.

Authors:  Mina C Johnson-Glenberg; Colleen Megowan-Romanowicz
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2017-05-24

5.  Exploring EEG Effective Connectivity Network in Estimating Influence of Color on Emotion and Memory.

Authors:  Meei Tyng Chai; Hafeez Ullah Amin; Lila Iznita Izhar; Mohamad Naufal Mohamad Saad; Mohammad Abdul Rahman; Aamir Saeed Malik; Tong Boon Tang
Journal:  Front Neuroinform       Date:  2019-10-09       Impact factor: 4.081

6.  Seductive Details in the Flipped Classroom: The Impact of Interesting but Educationally Irrelevant Information on Student Learning and Motivation.

Authors:  Jeffrey Maloy; Laura Fries; Frank Laski; Gerardo Ramirez
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 3.325

7.  Beauty and the busy mind: Occupied working memory resources impair aesthetic experiences in everyday life.

Authors:  Rosalie Weigand; Thomas Jacobsen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-03-12       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Virtual patient design: exploring what works and why. A grounded theory study.

Authors:  James Bateman; Maggie Allen; Dipti Samani; Jane Kidd; David Davies
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 6.251

Review 9.  Transfer: A Review for Biology and the Life Sciences.

Authors:  Althea N Kaminske; Carolina E Kuepper-Tetzel; Cynthia L Nebel; Megan A Sumeracki; Sean P Ryan
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 3.325

10.  Representing Variability: The Case of Life Cycle Diagrams.

Authors:  David Menendez; Olympia N Mathiaparanam; David Liu; Vienne Seitz; Martha W Alibali; Karl S Rosengren
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 3.325

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.