Dataset Information

Learners misperceive the benefits of redundant text in multimedia learning.

ABSTRACT: Research on metacognition has consistently demonstrated that learners fail to endorse instructional designs that produce benefits to memory, and often prefer designs that actually impair comprehension. Unlike previous studies in which learners were only exposed to a single multimedia design, the current study used a within-subjects approach to examine whether exposure to both redundant text and non-redundant text multimedia presentations improved learners' metacognitive judgments about presentation styles that promote better understanding. A redundant text multimedia presentation containing narration paired with verbatim on-screen text (Redundant) was contrasted with two non-redundant text multimedia presentations: (1) narration paired with images and minimal text (Complementary) or (2) narration paired with minimal text (Sparse). Learners watched presentation pairs of either Redundant + Complementary, or Redundant + Sparse. Results demonstrate that Complementary and Sparse presentations produced highest overall performance on the final comprehension assessment, but the Redundant presentation produced highest perceived understanding and engagement ratings. These findings suggest that learners misperceive the benefits of redundant text, even after direct exposure to a non-redundant, effective presentation.

SUBMITTER: Fenesi B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4088922 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Regarding the redundancy effect in multimedia learning environments, more consistency is needed in the theoretical assumptions and investigation of this effect. Current research lacks a comprehensive account of different redundant scenarios in which materials facilitate or inhibit learning and provides little conceptual guidance on how learning processes are affected by different types of redundancy. Theoretical assumptions refer to redundancy as a contentual overlap of information provided by the learning material; in this case, processing duplicated information strains the learners' limited cognitive capacities. Other assumptions refer to the role of processing limitations in working memory channels, including separate processing for visual and verbal information. In this case, an ineffective combination of sources leads to an overload of the limited working memory capacity. This paper reviews empirical research on the redundancy effect (63 studies) and classifies two types of redundancy: (1) content redundancy, and (2) working memory channel redundancy. From an instructional psychology perspective, the analyses reveal four different implementations of redundant scenarios: (1) adding narration to visualizations, (2) adding written text to visualizations, (3) adding written text to narration, and (4) adding written text to narrated visualizations. Regarding the effects of the two redundancy types within these scenarios, analyses indicate positive effects of content redundancy (affected by learners' prior knowledge), negative effects of working memory channel redundancy (regarding visualizations and written text), and positive effects of working memory channel redundancy (regarding narration and written text). Moreover, results point to factors that might moderate the effect of redundancy and illustrate interactions with existing multimedia effects. Overall, this review provides an overview of the state of empirical research and reveals that the consideration of both redundancy types provides further explanations in this field of research.

Dataset Information

Learners misperceive the benefits of redundant text in multimedia learning.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets