The Journal of Korean Association of Computer Education (컴퓨터교육학회논문지)

The Korean Association of Computer Education (한국컴퓨터교육학회)
권호 표지

The impact of the transient information effect on multimedia learning efficiency

멀티미디어 학습에서 일시적 정보효과가 학습효율성에 미치는 영향

  • 시지현 (동아대학교 의과대학 의료인문학교실)
  • Received : 2015.12.14
  • Accepted : 2016.02.16
  • Published : 2016.03.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The transient information effect occurs when long and complex transient information disappear before the learner has time to adequately process it or link it with new information. This study aimed to explore the impact of the transient information effect on multimedia learning efficiency within the cognitive load perspective and how segmentation and pacing of instructional materials interact with the transient information effect. The results revealed that the visualonly instruction(a diagram with long and complex texts) was more efficient than the audiovisual instruction(a diagram with long and complex spoken texts). The overall results suggested that using long and complex spoken texts with a diagram can have a negative impact on learning unless the transient information effect are reduced through segmentation and learner-paced instructions.

일시적 정보효과는 멀티미디어 학습 환경에서 길고 복잡한 청각적 정보의 일시성으로 인해 학습에 가해지는 부정적인 효과를 말한다. 본 연구는 인지부하이론의 틀에서 멀티미디어 학습에서 일시적 정보효과가 학습에 미치는 영향을 살펴보고, 또한 일시적 정보효과를 극복하는 방법인 것으로 생각되는 분절화(long vs. short)와 학습자료 제시 조절방법(system-paced vs. learner-paced)이 일시적 정보효과에 어떤 영향을 미치는 지 살펴보고자 하였다. 연구결과에 의하면 멀티미디어 학습 환경에서 길고 복잡한 학습자료를 학습자에게 제시할 경우에는 시각적으로만 제시하는 것이 시청각적으로 제시하는 것보다 학습효율성이 보다 높은 것(높은 성취와 낮은 인지부하 투입)으로 드러났다. 또한 시청각적으로 자료를 제시해야 하는 경우는 청각적 학습 자료를 분절화해서 제시하거나, 학습자료 제시를 학습자가 조절하는 방법으로 멀티미디어 학습 환경을 설계하는 것이 학습 효율성을 높이는 방안인 것으로 드러났다.

Keywords

References

  1. Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation and the transient information effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(6), 943-951. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1787
  2. Lin, Y. C., Liu, T. C., & Sweller, J. (2015). Improving the frame design of computer simulations for learning: Determining the primacy of the isolated elements or the transient information effects. Computers & Education, 88, 280-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.06.001
  3. Singh, A. M., Marcus, N., & Ayres, P. (2012). The transient information effect: Investigating the impact of segmentation on spoken and written text. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(6), 848-853. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2885
  4. Wong, A., Leahy, W., Marcus, N., & Sweller, J. (2012). Cognitive load theory, the transient information effect and e-learning. Learning and Instruction, 22(6), 449-457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.05.004
  5. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory (Vol.1). New York: Springer.
  6. Low, R., & Sweller, J. (2005). The modality principle in multimedia learning. The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, 147-158.
  7. Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2004). Cognitive load theory: Instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021806.17516.d0
  8. Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123-138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5
  9. Hatsidimitris, G., & Kalyuga, S. (2013). Guided self-management of transient information in animations through pacing and sequencing strategies. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(1), 91-105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9276-z
  10. Plass, J. L., Moreno, R., & Brunken, R. (2010). Cognitive load theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
  12. Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12(3), 185-233. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1203_1
  13. Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147-177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0
  14. Baddeley, A. D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1736359
  15. Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 319 -334. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.87.2.319
  16. Kalyuga, S. (2012). Instructional benefits of spoken words: A review of cognitive load factors. Educational Research Review, 7(2), 145-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2011.12.002
  17. Ginns, P. (2005). Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning and Instruction, 15(4), 313-331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.07.001
  18. Tabbers, H. K., Martens, R. L., & v1an Merrienboer, J. (2004). Multimedia instructions and cognitive load theory: Effects of modality and cueing. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 71 -81. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709904322848824
  19. Van Gog, T., & Paas, F. (2008). Instructional efficiency: Revisiting the original construct in educational research. Educational Psychologist, 43(1), 16-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701756248
  20. Paas, F. G., & Van Merrienboer, J. J. (1994). Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem-solving skills: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(1), 122. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.86.1.122
  21. Schuler, A., Scheiter, K., Rummer, R., & Gerjets, P. (2012). Explaining the modality effect in multimedia learning: Is it due to a lack of temporal contiguity with written text and pictures? Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 92-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.08.001