Abstract
Multimedia learning scenarios in which a picture is the main focus often use combinations of verbal and visual cueing. Based on models of picture processing and multimedia learning, the present study examined the effect of verbal and visual cueing on two basic aspects of pictorial learning: retention and localization of pictorial elements. Videos of three paintings were presented with verbal cueing (naming of pictorial elements), either alone or in combination with visual frames (explicit cues) or zoom-ins (implicit cues), in a 2 × 3 × 3 mixed design (n = 86) with the factors verbal cueing (uncued vs. cued elements, within-subjects) × visual cueing (no vs. explicit vs. implicit, between-subjects) × film (Mantegna vs. Rubens vs. Marsh, within-subjects). The three films were used to check whether our results are generalizable across different pictorial contents. The retention of pictorial elements was measured by open questions, and the localization of the pictorial elements was measured by asking the participants to place picture snippets at the correct location on an area representing the dimensions of the respective painting. The combination of verbal and visual cueing increased the difference between the cued and the less well retained uncued elements and compensated a disadvantage of verbal cueing for localization performance. This was compensated by both types of visual cueing. Regarding retention and localization, explicit and implicit cueing were equally effective. The study provides a differentiated insight into the interplay of verbal and visual cueing regarding cognitive processing in multimedia learning scenarios in which pictures are the main learning focus.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amadieu, F., Mariné, C., & Laimay, C. (2011). The attention-guiding effect and cognitive load in the comprehension of animations. Computers in Human Behavior,27, 36–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.05.009.
Ballstaedt, S.-P. (1997). Wissensvermittlung. Die Gestaltung von Lernmaterial. Weinheim: Beltz Psychologie Verlags Union.
Bauer, D., & Schwan, S. (2018). Expertise influences meaning-making with renaissance portraits: Evidence from gaze and thinking-aloud. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts,12, 193–204. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000085.
Bordwell, D., & Thompson, K. (2012). Film art: An introduction. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Boucheix, J.-M., & Lowe, R. K. (2010). An eye tracking comparison of external pointing cues and internal continuous cues in learning with complex animations. Learning and Instruction,20, 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.015.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction,8, 293–332. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0804_2.
De Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2007). Attention cueing as a means to enhance learning from an animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology,21, 731–746. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1346.
De Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2010). Learning by generating vs. receiving instructional explanations: Two approaches to enhance attention cueing in animations. Computers & Education,55, 681–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.027.
Erhel, S., & Jamet, E. (2011). How can positive effects of pop-up windows on multimedia learning be explained? Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia,20(2), 135–156.
Glaser, M., Lengyel, D., Toulouse, C., & Schwan, S. (2017). Designing computer-based learning contents: influence of digital zoom on attention. Educational Technology Research and Development,65, 1135–1151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9495-9.
Glaser, M., & Schwan, S. (2015). Explaining pictures: How verbal cues influence processing of pictorial learning material. Journal of Educational Psychology,107, 1006–1018. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000044.
Huettig, F., & Altmann, G. T. (2005). Word meaning and the control of eye fixation: Semantic competitor effects and the visual world paradigm. Cognition,96(1), B23–B32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.10.003.
Huff, M., & Schwan, S. (2008). Verbalizing events: Overshadowing or facilitation? Memory & Cognition,36, 392–402. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.2.392.
Jamet, E. (2014). An eye-tracking study of cueing effects in multimedia learning. Computers in Human Behavior,32, 47–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.11.013.
Jamet, E., & Fernandez, J. (2016). Enhancing interactive tutorial effectiveness through visual cueing. Education Technology Research and Development,64, 631–641. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9437-6.
Jarodzka, H., van Gog, T., Dorr, M., Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2013). Learning to see: Guiding students’ attention via a model’s eye movements fosters learning. Learning and Instruction,25, 62–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.11.004.
Kipper, P. (1986). Television camera movement as a source of perceptual information. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media,30(3), 295–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838158609386625.
Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgements. British Journal of Psychology,95, 489–508. https://doi.org/10.1348/0007126042369811.
Mautone, P. D., & Mayer, R. E. (2001). Signaling as a cognitive guide in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology,93(2), 377–389. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.2.377.
Mayer, R. E. (2014). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E., & Fiorella, L. (2014). Principles for reducing extraneous processing in multimedia learning: Coherence, signaling, redundancy, spatial contiguity, and temporal contiguity principles. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 263–278). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McNeish, D. (2017). Thanks coefficient alpha, we’ll take it from here. Psychological Methods,23, 412–433. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000144.
Revelle, W. (2016, May). Using R and the psych package to find ω. Retrieved from https://personality-project.org/r/psych/HowTo/omega.pdf
Revelle, W., & Zinbarg, R. E. (2009). Coefficients alpha, beta, omega, and the glb: Comments on Sijtsma. Psychometrika,74, 145–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-008-9102-z.
Richter, J., Scheiter, K., & Eitel, A. (2016). Signaling text-picture relations in multimedia learning: A comprehensive meta-analysis. Educational Research Review,17, 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.12.003.
RM ARTS (Producer). (2015). Renaissance to postmodernism – 1000 masterworks [DVD box]. Retrieved from Arthaus Musik GmbH.
Salomon, G. (1994). Interaction of media, cognition, and learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schnotz, W. (2014). Intergrated model of text and picture comprehension. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 263–278). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schwan, S., & Papenmeier, F. (2017). Learning from animations: From 2D to 3D? In R. Lowe & R. Ploetzner (Eds.), Learning from dynamic visualizations (pp. 31–50). Berlin: Springer.
Smith, T. J. (2012). The attentional theory of cinematic continuity. Projections,6(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.3167/proj.2012.060102.
Smith, T. J., & Henderson, J. M. (2008). Edit Blindness: The relationship between attention and global change blindness in dynamic scenes. Journal of Eye Movement Research,2(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.16910/jemr.2.2.6.
Solso, R. L. (1994). Cognition and the visual arts. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Melbourne: ACER Press.
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York: Springer.
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. J., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review,10, 251–296. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022193728205.
van Gog, T. (2014). The signaling (or cueing) principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 263–278). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Ayres, P. (2005). Research on cognitive load theory and its design implications for e-learning. Educational Technology Research and Development,53(3), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504793.
Xie, H., Mayer, R. E., Wang, F., & Zhou, Z. (2018). Coordinating visual and auditory cueing in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology.,111, 235. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000285.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval:
Permission by the local ethics committee.
Informed consent
Informed consent signed by participants.
Research involving human rights
Research involving human participants.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Glaser, M., Schwan, S. Combining verbal and visual cueing: Fostering learning pictorial content by coordinating verbal explanations with different types of visual cueing. Instr Sci 48, 159–182 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09506-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09506-5