The More, the Better? Exploring the Effects of Modal and Codal Redundancy on Learning and Cognitive Load: An Experimental Study
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Why Should We Distinguish Different Types of Redundancy?
2.1. Modal Redundancy
2.2. Codal Redundancy
2.3. Purpose of the Study
3. Hypotheses
4. Method
4.1. Participants and Design
4.2. Learning Material (Rhombus Logic Tasks)
4.3. Tests and Scoring
4.3.1. Learning Outcomes
4.3.2. Perceived Task Difficulty and Mental Load
4.4. Procedure
5. Results
5.1. Experimental Factors (Modal and Codal Redundancy)
5.2. Learning
5.3. Perceived Task Difficulty
5.4. Mental Load
6. Discussion
6.1. Answering the Research Question
6.2. Limitations
7. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Mayer, R.E. Introduction to multimedia learning. In The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, 2nd ed.; Mayer, R.E., Ed.; Cambridge Press: Cambridge, UK, 2014; pp. 1–24. [Google Scholar]
- Mayer, R.E. Multimedia Learning, 2nd ed.; Cambridge Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Low, R.; Sweller, J. The modality principle in multimedia learning. In The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, 2nd ed.; Mayer, R.E., Ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2014; pp. 227–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sweller, J.; Ayres, P.; Kalyuga, S. Cognitive Load Theory; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Chandler, P.; Sweller, J. Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cogn. Instr. 1991, 8, 293–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trypke, M.; Stebner, F.; Wirth, J. Two types of redundancy in multimedia learning: A literature review. Front. Psychol. 2023, 14, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adegoke, B.A. Integrating Animations, Narratives and Textual Information for Improving Physics Learning. Electron. J. Res. Educ. Psychol. 2017, 8, 725–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jamet, E.; Bohec, O.L. The effect of redundant text in multimedia instruction. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2007, 32, 588–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chu, S.L. Investigating the Effectiveness of Redundant Text and Animation in Multimedia Learning Environments. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Kalyuga, S.; Chandler, P.; Sweller, J. Incorporating learner experience into the design of multimedia instruction. J. Educ. Psychol. 2000, 92, 126–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sweller, J.; van Merriënboer, J.J.G.; Paas, F. Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design: 20 Years Later. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2019, 31, 261–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albers, F.; Trypke, M.; Stebner, F.; Wirth, J.; Plass, J.L. Different types of redundancy and their effect on learning and cognitive load. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 2023, 339–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bohec, O.L.; Jamet, E. Levels of verbal redundancy, note-taking and multimedia learning. In Understanding Multimedia Documents; Rouet, J.F., Lowe, R., Schnotz, W., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2008; pp. 79–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mayer, R.E.; Fiorella, L. 12 Principles for reducing extraneous processing in multimedia learning: Coherence, signaling, redundancy, spatial contiguity, and temporal contiguity principles. In The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, 2nd ed.; Mayer, R.E., Ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2014; pp. 279–315. [Google Scholar]
- Harp, S.F.; Mayer, R.E. How seductive details do their damage: A theory of cognitive interest in science learning. J. Educ. Psychol. 1998, 90, 414–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bobis, J.; Sweller, J.; Cooper, M. Cognitive load effects in a primary school geometry task. Learn. Instr. 1993, 3, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalyuga, S.; Chandler, P.; Sweller, J. Levels of expertise and instructional design. Hum. Factors 1998, 40, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sweller, J.; Chandler, P. Why Some Material Is Difficult to Learn. Cogn. Instr. 1994, 12, 185–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dowell, J.; Shmueli, Y. Blending speech output and visual text in the multimodal interface. Hum. Factors 2008, 50, 782–788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gellevij, M.; van der Meij, H.; de Jong, T.; Pieters, J.M. Multimodal Versus Unimodal Instruction in a Complex Learning Context. J. Exp. Educ. 2002, 70, 215–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCrudden, M.T.; Hushman, C.J.; Marley, S.C. Exploring the boundary conditions of the redundancy principle. J. Exp. Educ. 2014, 82, 537–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Gog, T. The signaling (or cueing) principle in multimedia learning. In The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, 2nd ed.; Mayer, R.E., Ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2014; pp. 263–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mayer, R.E.; Johnson, C.I. Revising the redundancy principle in multimedia learning. J. Educ. Psychol. 2008, 100, 380–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moreno, R.; Mayer, R.E. Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. J. Educ. Psychol. 2002, 94, 156–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diao, Y.; Sweller, J. Redundancy in foreign language reading comprehension instruction: Concurrent written and spoken presentations. Learn. Instr. 2007, 17, 78–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faul, F.; Erdfelder, E.; Lang, A.-G.; Buchner, A. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav. Res. Methods 2007, 39, 175–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kalyuga, S.; Ayres, P.; Chandler, P.; Sweller, J. The expertise reversal effect. Educ. Psychol. 2003, 38, 23–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krell, M.; Hui, S.K.F. Evaluating an instrument to measure mental load and mental effort considering different sources of validity evidence. Cogent Educ. 2017, 4, 1280256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paas, F.; Tuovinen, J.E.; Tabbers, H.; van Gerven, P.W.M. Cognitive Load Measurement as a Means to Advance Cognitive Load Theory. Educ. Psychol. 2003, 38, 63–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bratfisch, O.; Borg, G.; Dornic, S. Perceived item-difficulty in three tests of intellectual performance capacity. Rep. Inst. Appl. Psychol. 1972, 29, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
- Hart, S.G.; Staveland, L.E. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In Human Mental Workload; Hancock, P.A., Meshkati, N., Eds.; North-Holland: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1988; pp. 139–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richardson, J.T. Eta Squared and Partial Eta Squared as Measures of Effect Size in Educational Research. Educ. Res. Rev. 2011, 6, 135–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glass, G.V.; Peckham, P.D.; Sanders, J.R. Consequences of Failure to Meet Assumptions Underlying the Fixed Effects Analyses of Variance and Covariance. Rev. Educ. Res. 1972, 42, 237–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mayer, R.E.; Moreno, R. A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. J. Educ. Psychol. 1998, 90, 312–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paivio, A. Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Schnotz, W. Integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning; Mayer, R.E., Ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2014; pp. 72–103. [Google Scholar]
- Adesope, O.O.; Nesbit, J.C. Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning environments: A meta-analysis. J. Educ. Psychol. 2012, 104, 250–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ari, F.; Raymond, F.; Fethi, A.I.; Cheon, J.; Crooks, S.M.; Paniukov, D.; Kurucay, M. The effects of verbally redundant information on student learning: An instance of reverse redundancy. Comput. Educ. 2014, 76, 199–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Koning, B.B.; van Hooijdonk, C.M.J.; Lagerwerf, L. Verbal redundancy in a procedural animation: On-screen labels improve retention but not behavioral performance. Comput. Educ. 2017, 107, 45–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Samur, Y. Redundancy effect on retention of vocabulary words using multimedia presentation. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2012, 43, E166–E170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, O.; Paas, F.; Sweller, J. A cognitive load theory approach to defining and measuring task complexity through element interactivity. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2023, 35, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klepsch, M.; Schmitz, F.; Seufert, T. Development and validation of two instruments measuring intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Front. Psychol. 2017, 8, 1997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Minkley, N.; Xu, K.M.; Krell, M. Analyzing relationships between causal and assessment factors of cognitive load: Associations between objective and subjective measures of cognitive load, stress, interest, and self-concept. Front. Educ. 2021, 6, 632907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayres, P.; Lee, J.Y.; Paas, F.; van Merriënboer, J.J.G. The validity of physiological measures to identify differences in intrinsic cognitive load. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 702538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Redundancy | Presentation | N = 158 | |
---|---|---|---|
Modal | Codal | ||
No | No | Images and narration (IN) | n = 43 (27.2%) |
No | Yes | Narration and written text (NT) | n = 35 (22.2%) |
Yes | No | Images and written text (IT) | n = 41 (25.9%) |
Yes | Yes | Images, narration, and written text (INT) | n = 39 (24.7%) |
Construction Score | Recall Score | Overall Learning Score * | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Groups | M | SD | M | SD | M | SD |
IN (n = 43) | 12.98 | 4.13 | 11.21 | 5.26 | 24.18 | 8.57 |
NT (n = 35) | 8.74 | 5.05 | 8.80 | 6.09 | 17.54 | 10.66 |
IT (n = 41) | 11.95 | 4.43 | 10.61 | 4.79 | 22.56 | 8.24 |
INT (n = 39) | 13.00 | 3.45 | 10.79 | 4.51 | 23.79 | 6.88 |
Difficulty Construction | Difficulty Recall | Overall Difficulty * | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Groups | M | SD | M | SD | M | SD |
IN (n = 43) | 5.62 | 1.68 | 5.66 | 1.81 | 5.64 | 1.65 |
NT (n = 35) | 7.24 | 1.25 | 6.82 | 1.62 | 7.03 | 1.39 |
IT (n = 41) | 5.59 | 1.68 | 5.70 | 1.61 | 5.65 | 1.54 |
INT (n = 39) | 6.36 | 1.34 | 6.30 | 1.30 | 6.33 | 1.22 |
Mental Load Construction | Mental Load Recall | Overall Mental Load * | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Groups | M | SD | M | SD | M | SD |
IN (n = 43) | 5.58 | 1.71 | 5.57 | 1.84 | 5.58 | 1.69 |
NT (n = 35) | 7.24 | 1.26 | 6.76 | 1.67 | 7.00 | 1.43 |
IT (n = 41) | 5.61 | 1.67 | 5.66 | 1.59 | 5.64 | 1.54 |
INT (n = 39) | 6.17 | 1.42 | 6.17 | 1.48 | 6.17 | 1.40 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Trypke, M.; Stebner, F.; Wirth, J. The More, the Better? Exploring the Effects of Modal and Codal Redundancy on Learning and Cognitive Load: An Experimental Study. Educ. Sci. 2024, 14, 872. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14080872
Trypke M, Stebner F, Wirth J. The More, the Better? Exploring the Effects of Modal and Codal Redundancy on Learning and Cognitive Load: An Experimental Study. Education Sciences. 2024; 14(8):872. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14080872
Chicago/Turabian StyleTrypke, Melanie, Ferdinand Stebner, and Joachim Wirth. 2024. "The More, the Better? Exploring the Effects of Modal and Codal Redundancy on Learning and Cognitive Load: An Experimental Study" Education Sciences 14, no. 8: 872. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14080872