Abstract
In this study, the effect of multimedia learning environment designed with two different attention types (focused — split) was investigated on recall performances of learners with different short term memory spans (high — medium — low). The participants were 60 undergraduate students who were presented with either focused attention or split attention multimedia learning materials. First, participants’ short term memory spans were determined by Visual — Aural Digit Span Test-Revised (VADS-B) test. Second, they were separated to three groups as high, medium and low. In 3 × 2 nested ANOVA design, one of the groups studied the multimedia designed in split attention type whereas the other had focused attention type design. As they finished the study task, they were given a recall task, which produced their recall performances. Data were analyzed by Nested ANOVA, t-Test and ANCOVA tests. The findings indicated that multimedia instructional designs were effective on recall performances. Learners showed higher recall performances in the multimedia learning environment in focused attention design. However, no significant difference was observed in learners’ recall performances when their STM spans were taken into account. Significant differences were observed between time spent in studying multimedia.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Altınışık S, Orhan F (2002) Sosyal Bilgiler Dersinde Çoklu Ortamın Öğrencilerin Akademik Başarıları ve Derse Karşı Tutumları Üzerindeki Etkisi. Hacettepe Univ J Educ 23:41–49
Ayres P, Pass F (2007) Making instructional animations more effective: a cognitive load approach. Applied Cognitive Psychology. Spec Issue Cogn Load Approach Learn Eff Instr Animat 21(6):695–700
Ayres P, Sweller J (2005) The Split-Attention Principle in multimedia. In: ed. Mayer RE (ed) The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning
Betrancourt M (2005) The animation and interactivity principles in multimedia learning. In: Mayer (ed) The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, pp. 287–296. New York: Cambridge.
Cierniak G, Scheiter K, Gerjets P (2009) Explaining the split-attention effect: is the reduction of extraneous cognitive load accompanied by an increase in germane cognitive load? Comput Hum Behav 25:315–324
Dutke S, Rinck M (2006) Multimedia learning: working memory and the learning of word and picture diagrams. Learn Instr 16:526–537
Fletcher JD, Tobias S (2005) The multimedia principle. In: Mayer RE (ed) The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 117–134
Kalyuga S, Chandler P, Sweller J (1999) Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Appl Cogn Psychol 13:351–371
Karakaş S, Yalın A (1995) Görsel İşitsel Sayı Dizileri Testi B Formunun 13–54 yaş grupları üzerindeki standardizasyon çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi 10(34):20–31
Kemp JE, Morrison GR, Ross SM (1998) Design effective instruction. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey
Malinowski P, Fuchs S, Müller MM (2007) Sustained division of spatial attention to multiple locations within one hemifield. Neurosci Lett 414:65–70
Mayer RE (2001) Multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press, New York
Mayer RE (2005) Principles for managing essential processing in multimedia learning: Segmenting, pretraining, and modality principles. In: Mayer RE (ed), Psychology, 91, 358-368.
Mayer RE, Moreno R (1998) A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. J Educ Psychol 90:312–320
Mayer RE, Moreno R (2002) Aids to computer-based multimedia learning. Learn Instr 12:107–119
Montgomery DC (2005) Design and analysis of experiments, 6th edn. Wiley, New York
Muller DA, Bewes J, Sharma MD, Reimannt P (2008) Saying the wrong thing: improving learning with multimedia by including misconceptions. J Comput Assist Learn 24:144–155
Norhayati AM, Siew PH (2004) Malaysian perspective: designing interactive multimedia learning for moral values education. Educ Technol Soc 7(4):143–152
Schnotz W (2005) An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In: Mayer RE (ed) The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press, New York
Širanović Z (2007) Guidelines for designing multimedia learning materials. University of Zagreb, Varaždin
Solso RL, Maclin MK, Maclin OH (2007) Cognitive psychology. Pearson Allyn and Bacon, USA
Sorden SD (2005) A cognitive approach to instructional design for multimedia learning. Inf Sci J 8.
Summerviller J (1999) Role of awareness of cognitive style in hypermedia. Int J Educ Technol, 1, (1)
Sweller J (1994) Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learn Instr 4:295–312
Sweller J (2004) Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instr Sci 32:9–31
Weinstein C, Goetz ET, Alexander PA (1988) Learning and study strategies: Issues in assessment, instruction, and evaluation. Academic, San Diego
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mutlu Bayraktar, D., Altun, A. The effect of multimedia design types on learners’ recall performances with varying short term memory spans. Multimed Tools Appl 71, 1201–1213 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-012-1257-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-012-1257-z