4.2 Instructional Design and Multimedia
Having said all this, then, designing products and content that are effective, engaging, and of quality is an experience that presents some complexity. In this sense, from a review of the relevant literature it appears possible to state that designers, teachers, and educators in order to bring appropriate content to life must address three main critical issues: extraneous content, extraneous details, and complexity (Ibrahim, 2012).
Extraneous content:
Instructional multimedia products that contain extraneous elements at the level of meaning can create a condition of cognitive load for the learner. According to Ibrahim (2012) «empirical studies have found that learners performed better on a problem solving transfer test after reviewing a concise lesson, rather than an expanded lesson» (p. 84). In addition, receiving too much information (verbally and visually) can distract the learner from focusing on the main idea. Instead, adding headings, emphasizing central facts, and using symbols can, on the contrary, help the learner focus on the information they need.
Extraneous details:
Instructional media products that are too detailed (i.e., contain too much detail) or are too long can cause cognitive load for the learner, depending on each individual’s prior knowledge. The more knowledge a learner has already gained in the area of a specific topic, the less mental effort he or she will have to put into understanding the new content. This then manifests itself in the possibility for the learner to have more cognitive capacity available to select and organize new information.
Complexity:
In addition, to avoid generating a cognitive load condition, a lecture must be divided into a number of different sections. Thus, if the visual element on the screen and the reference text are too far apart, a split-attention effect may be generated.
So if these are the three challenges that a multimedia designer must keep in mind when developing and producing appropriate content, a question arises: how can targeted and well-organized content then be developed?
Again following Mayer’s research and studies, it is possible to identify what are the elements within an instructional multimedia design process that can lead to what we have called meaningful learning. For example, Mayer’s studies have shown how storytelling and the visual-graphic component are extremely effective both for entry level courses and for introducing complex topics.
In addition, students are able to generate more meaningful learning when the text is presented verbally rather than being written on the screen. Moreover, multimedia designers should place graphics and text next to each other and remove those that are purely decorative elements that do not contribute to the main objectives of the lesson.
Redundancy.
The first design principle we introduce is called the redundancy principle. Precisely, those who design multimedia content should avoid introducing redundant information. Text that is spoken should not appear word for word on the screen. Presenting the printed words and a narrative (reading) can affect the quality of learning because of a substantial amount of cognitive load. Therefore, if text is present on the screen it must be harmoniously embedded within the learning experience. In fact, under certain circumstances, a limited amount of text can introduce appropriate, rather than extraneous, cognitive load. Also in a study conducted by Mayer specifically regarding the issue of redundancy, it was found that the addition of a short redundant text (two or three words) along with narrated graphics resulted in improvements on retention of the narration but not on transfer (Mayer & Johnson, 2008).
Thus, redundant information can cause cognitive overload because the learner’s working memory is busy processing information that is not needed. Therefore, multimedia designers should not include information in their content that is not needed (printed text, spoken words and visual graphics).
Signaling.
The second multimedia principle we introduce is called the signaling principle and is a technique that can be used to reduce extraneous material. The term extraneous material in an instructional multimedia piece can refer to excess text, excess images, diagrams, etc. Therefore, it is important to be able to point out what is the central and most relevant information; for this, multimedia designers can use headings, summaries, identify keywords and content, use symbols such as arrows, and refer to central content to capture learners’ attention. Specifically, the font of the text can also be changed by turning the text bold, changing the typeface, or the color itself. At the same time, the text can also contain animations (fade in, fly in, rotation, and flashing). Without the use of these kinds of specific cues, color learners may experience what we have termed cognitive load since the learner must be able to match the information received through the audio channel and retain it in memory until, at the visual level, he or she can find the visual reference. Therefore, it is necessary for multimedia designers to use signs and symbols to avoid the phenomenon of cognitive overload.
Segmentation.
The third principle is that of segmentation, which focuses on dividing instructional multimedia pieces into smaller (smaller) elements that are distributed within the lesson. Let’s try an example: within a multimedia lesson on Photoshop that involves learning about a range of content such as the tools, filters, effects, and layers, which instead of being presented all at once, can be divided into smaller segments or chunks. The principle of segmentation allows learners to learn one theme before even proceeding to explore the next theme. In this way, the learner can have control over the amount of content to be handled each time. The principle of segmentation, according to a range of research, can be effective for beginner learners, when the learning material is conceptually complex, and the presentation pace is rapid. Also in an experiment conducted by Mayer, learners’ performance was compared on two specific occasions: the first, which involved the enjoyment by a group of learners of a continuous animation showing how an electric motor works, the second, which involved the enjoyment of the same content but fragmented into sections.
Animation vs static image
The fourth design principle we consider relates to the issue of animation vs. static images. In this regard, it is possible to cite the work of some authors such as Höffler & Leutner who developed a series of empirical research in order to determine whether instructional animations were more effective and efficient than static images. The results that resulted from their work showed that there is indeed an advantage to using animations in place of non-moving images, especially when the animation connects directly to the topic and/or lesson being taught. In order to achieve what we have termed meaningful learning, students must be able to create a mental representation of the content being presented on a specific slide.
Control.
Research conducted by Mayer has shown that when learners have control over the amount of content they can enjoy, learning is more meaningful and effective. In this regard, Mayer and Chandler, two other researchers, conducted a series of experiments within which learners were in control of their instructional multimedia pieces. Among them, some of the experiments were very simple and consisted of simply giving students the opportunity to have control over the content from a button they could pause. In an experiment conducted by Sage, Bonacorsi, Izzo, & Quirk (2015) only a quarter of the participants involved used the click-to-pause feature and most of the participants said they were still happy that the button was there. Instead, another experiment compared the two different modes, both what we call the learner-control version and what we call the system-controlled version. The results obtained showed that the learner-control version had better transfer performance while the system-controlled version gave the ability to control the materials, avoiding the cognitive overload condition. In this sense, having a summary of content in the multimedia instructional design allows students to quickly understand where specific topics are placed while avoiding the effort that would be required in scanning through the whole multimedia piece. Not only that, dividing the lesson into smaller segments allows students to control their attention to the aspects of the lesson they prefer.
Interactivity.
Interactivity describes interactions between students and students and between teachers and students and between students and content. According to Evans & Gibbons (2007). Specifically, interaction includes three specific actions:
- initiation,
- response,
- feedback.
Initiation: the ability to present the learner with a button or specification that allows them to manage content (stop, send forward, send back).
Response: the learner presses the button or control features.
Feedback: the next slide is presented as the result of the student’s action (e.g., having pressed the button).
Evans and Gibbons conducted two experiments with the goal of understanding whether the use of interactivity can facilitate the learning process.
One experiment was interactive and the other was non-interactive. The results showed how students who enjoyed the interactive material had better results in the problem-solving test and took less time in completing the memory and problem-solving tests.
In a further experiment, conducted by Chen & Catrambone (2014) it had been found that students were more motivated and involved in the learning process because of the interactivity tool.
In light of this, interactivity can also help students generate meaningful learning.
Engagement and feedback.
Instructional multimedia content must not only be designed in light of the elements already mentioned, thus, signaling, must avoid redundancy, must be divided into smaller sections, must contain interactive elements, but most importantly, must interact with the student allowing them to be involved with the lesson that is to be presented. Engagement and feedback must be meaningful, help the student apply what he/she has learned, and, most importantly, must be realistic (Oud, 2009).
When we talk about engagement we are talking about the possibility of introducing multiple choice questions, buttons to click on, objects that can be moved and moved to interact with the material, and links that can lead to slides, other pages, and websites. Thus, if the multimedia designer creates, along with the designed lesson, a series of multiple choice questions, these questions themselves must include feedback. If, then, the student matches the questions correctly, it must be necessary to explain why that turned out to be the correct answer. Otherwise, then, if the student answered incorrectly, the correct answer must be presented (and this must be done even if the student answered the correct way).
Screencasts.
In Jon Udell’s (2004) definition, screencast is defined as a way of presenting «digitally recorded playback of a computer screen output that contains spoken narration» (Brown, Luterbach, & Sugar, 2009).
Screencast, therefore, may fall into the category of animations-since animations are defined as moving images that are provided with spoken narration. An example of a screencast may be a recording of a lecturer or instructor introducing a specific topic by giving a powerpoint presentation; the product also has the audio recording of the instructor presenting. From the researchers’ perspective, there are a number of benefits to using instructional multimedia pieces such as screencasts. In fact, according to Hartsell and Yuen (2006), video-based products succeed in engaging students and learners in a learning process that, through the voice of the instructor, enables them to learn complex concepts and difficult procedures. In the same vein, according to an experiment conducted by other researchers, Ali, Zamzuri, Samsudin, Hassan, Sidek (2011), students learn best when the products we call screencasts contain narratives that must be short, simple–they must not contain complex animation and most importantly, students must already be aware of a range of content related to the subject of the lesson (prior knowledge). When an instructional or multimedia designer develops screencast multimedia content it is essential to consider other major elements: prior knowledge, redundancy, signaling, segmentation, and control as without these there is danger of overloading the limited cognitive capacity of the learner (Brown, Luterbach, & Sugar, 2009).
Now, again with a view to proposing design methods that can be efficient for producing multimedia design pieces, let us now see, in detail, four instructional design methods proposed by Reyer:
- presenting words and pictures rather than words alone,
- excluding extraneous words and pictures,
- placing corresponding words and pictures near each other on the page or screen,
- and expressing the words in a conversational style.
Before going into this question, however, it is necessary to ask whether these methods enunciated above apply to all media. In doing so, it is also possible to ask about a further question, namely, can the process of multimedia learning be more influenced by the instructional methods (e.g., well-designed versus less well-designed), by the media (e.g., book-based versus computer-based), or does the effect of the instructional method depend on the media (e.g., well-designed presentations work in one medium but not the other)?
Mayer (2003) again points out that there is an effective consensus among researchers in the field as to how to design instructional messages across various media. Some examples of these instructional principles might be:
- include integrating pictures with words, excluding irrelevant material, and presenting words in a conversational style.
At the same time, there is also consensus among experts that examining the effects of the intended media per se-so, for example, the computer and books-may not be a productive research and inquiry strategy. Some scholars such as Jonassen, Campbell, and Davidson (1994, p. 31) assert precisely that research questions should be absolutely dropped on both the student and the media, shifting the focus away from the latter.
In this sense, the models Meyer (ib.) presents here focus on the possibility of creating multimedia messages – through media- that can facilitate learning and what design principles might apply to one tool as well as another. In addition, the author focuses on the role of both verbal and visual modes of presentation that can be enabled by computer-based and book-based media.
The four instructional methods that, therefore, we will now have a chance to organize, which can work within different media environments: the multimedia effect, the coherence effect, the spatial contiguity effect, and the personalization effect.
1) Multimedia effect with text-and-illustrations and narration-and-animation:
The most basic effect of the presentation method relates to the ability to add pictures to words to enable students to understand an explanation.
Meyer introduces the topic from two cases to be taken together, which take shape in two learning environments: a) with printed text and illustrations on a page and b) with spoken text and animation on a screen.
Again according to Meyer, for example, considering a textual content within a written book related to the operation of brakes, within which, then, the explanation is presented through either only the written words (words-only group) or through the set of written words together with illustrations (and in this case we speak of (words-and-pictures group). In this sense, within a series of three studies related to the functioning of brakes Mayer, 1989, Experiments 1 and 2; Mayer & Gallini, 1990, Experiment 1), the set of words and pictures (words-and-pictures group) resulted in a significantly high success rate on problem-solving transfer tests, especially compared to words-only groups.
Similarly, consider a computer lesson always related to the same topic, how brakes work, a lesson that can present narration describing the steps in how brakes work (words-only group) or narration along with concurrent animation (words-and-pictures group). When the media takes the form of written text and animation, an important multimedia effect is presented. In short, it is possible to detect a number of important pieces of evidence that show how the multimedia effect can develop between two different media environments-printed text and illustrations on a page as well as spoken text and animation on a screen. Related to what we have already examined, it seems relevant to point out that the words used to explain how the brakes worked were identical across the different media, while the presentations collected on the books contained additional information related to other elements that the digital presentation did not.
Overall, in finding a multimedia effect in both learning environments-book-based and computer-based environments, we may encounter one of the first examples of the same method being used across different media. These results should be considered relevant in light of the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning summarized. In both book-based and computer-based environments, multimedia messages were more likely to cause learners to use both channels whereas words-only messages were more likely to cause learners to use only one channel. Thus, multimedia messages were more likely than words-only messages to prime all the cognitive processes for active learning.
2) Coherence effect with text-and-illustrations and narration-and-animation:
The issue of consistency – at the level of method – is further central. Indeed, another important effect of the presentation method relates to understanding what happens when interesting but irrelevant materials (which we can call seductive details) are added to the materials to be enjoyed. The coherence effect relates to the assumption that students and learners learn much more deeply when there is no material within an instructional design piece that is extraneous to the topic.
In illustrating this type of aspect, Meyer presents two types of experiences (two different media environments): one related to printed text and illustrations in a book-based environment and with spoken text and animation in a computer-based environment.
Again referring to the examples shown by Meyer, let us consider a situation within which students are involved in a lesson related to how lightning storms develop. Then, within the scenario described, students learn how an atmospheric phenomenon of the type works by reading a passage that contains printed words describing the steps that lead to the formation of lightning with illustrations (equipped with a description) depicting all the steps. Then, within the experiment, some students (embellished presentation group) were presented instructional design materials equipped with additional sentences and pictures, which contained interesting but irrelevant information, such as the story description of an athlete struck by lightning on a soccer field.
Other students (concise presentation group), however, were not given any other materials (seductive details). Thus, again following the work of Mayer and coworkers (Harp & Mayer, 1997, Experiment 1; Harp & Mayer, 1998, Experiments 1, 2, 3, and 4) the group that had not enjoyed the content with added seductive materials had generated a more creative set of responses than the other group, which had received the material characterized by the additional information.
It is clear, therefore, that there is a strong coherence effect for this book-based multimedia environment. Similarly, the same experiments were developed in a parallel case, i.e., in a scenario for which two groups of students-who always enjoy content related to thunder formation-were examined and administered content on the topic that contains the steps leading to lightning formation through an animation describing the steps, accompanied by a contextual narration.
Thus, in this case, the experiment was constructed as follows: some students (embellished presentation group) were presented with the materials accompanied by a few sentences/video clips related to interesting but irrelevant information, similar to the other ”extra” content (seductive details) that was also used in the other learning environment, book-based environment. The other group (concise presentation group), on the other hand, was presented with the materials in question devoid of additional narratives and/or video clips. Thus, in the three texts involving lightning formation (Mayer, Heiser, & Lonn, 2001), the group that received the materials devoid of seductive materials performed better, compared to the other group (embellished presentation group). Thus, as in the book-based learning environment, the experiments conducted within the computer-based environment also produced a coherence effect.
Thus, overall, it is possible to discern relevant evidence of how the coherence effect works within two of two different media environments. Thus, the very fact of adding materials that turn out to be extraneous invalidates students’ and students’ understanding and learning both when the multimedia explanation is presented in the form of written words and illustrations and when the multimedia explanation is presented in the form of spoken words (spoken words and narration). Adding extraneous words or pictures to a multimedia message can interfere with any of the cognitive processes involved in the learning process, by encouraging learners to pay attention to words or images that are not relevant, by disrupting how learners organize words or pictures into a causal chain, and by priming inappropriate schemas to be used to assimilate the incoming words and pictures. In some cases, of course, the goal of instruction may be to consider many alternative perspectives, in which case coherence should not be a guiding instructional design principle.
3) Contiguity effect with text-and-illustrations and text-and-animation
Another presentation method we consider again following Mayer’s work and theorizing is the element related to how corresponding text and illustrations are presented on a page or computer screen. Thus, what we have already referred to as being spatial contiguity effect relates to the assumption that students learn more deeply from products of a multimedia nature when within those products the words and images are placed near, rather than far away (either on the page or on the screen).
Also with a view to presenting empirical experiences, Meyer and collaborators analyzed the spatial contiguity effect in two different media environments: thus, both with printed text and illustrations in a book-based environment and with printed text and animations in a computer-based environment. In the first case, one group of students (integrated presentation group) always benefited from the passage on lightning formation organized into illustrations depicting the steps in the formation of the atmospheric phenomenon through the presentation of illustrations and corresponding captions that described the steps in words. The other students, involved in the other group (separated presentation group) enjoyed the content that proposed corresponding images and text but on different pages. Thus, in three studies conducted from what was described, students in the first group performed significantly better than students included in the other group, to whom the images and text were presented and not placed at the right distance. While what has been illustrated includes the analysis of the effects of the theme of spatial contiguity in a book-based learning environment, as far as the computer-based environment is concerned, the students involved were offered to watch an animation that contained depicting the steps in lightning formation along with concurrent on-screen text that described the steps in words.
Then, for some students (integrated presentation group) the text was placed next to the event being described. For students included in the other group, the on-screen text was placed at the bottom of the screen, away from the animation. Also according to Mayer and colleagues, in a study they conducted using a lighting explanation (Moreno & Mayer, 1999, Experiment 1), students involved in the integrated presentation group performed better than students involved in the separated presentation group. As with the book-based environment, there was a spatial contiguity effect in the computer based environment. These results, summarized here briefly, show how indeed spatial contiguity effects are consistent with the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Thus, it is possible to say that when corresponding words and pictures are placed close to each other, students are put in a better position to hold corresponding words and pictures in working memory at the same time.
When corresponding words and pictures are presented near each other, learners are more likely to be able to hold corresponding words and pictures in working memory at the same time.
This situation enables the process of integrating visual and verbal models, a key step in active learning. Of course, it must be noted that external representations (such as text and illustrations) do not translate automatically into internal representations (such as verbal and visual models). That translation process depends on internal cognitive processing—including selecting and organizing—that are subject to working memory limitations. Ainsworth, Bibby, and Wood (1998) have shown that under some circumstances, instruction with multiple representations can be less effective than less demanding instruction.
4) Personalization effect with animation-and-narration and animation-and-text
Finally, we turn to consider what is called the personalization effect, and the example presented by Meyers and colleagues considers a typical situation within which text is transformed from formal to informal.
In this sense, however, the personalization effect was analyzed within two
computer-based environments-animation with narration versus animation with on-screen text. In both cases, students involved in the study observed an animation, in the first case the corresponding words were presented as spoken text and in the other environment the corresponding words were presented as printed text placed at the bottom of the screen. In the first case, students watched an animation that depicted the stages of lighting formation. For some, the verbal production took on a formal style (conventional presentation group) and resembled ,much to the third-person monologue style used in many textbooks and lectures. For others, however, the narrative took on an exquisitely formal tone, thanks to the use of the second person and the introduction of some sentences presented in a more conversational and informal tone. Clearly, the content was the same.
However, both versions contained the same explanation based on the same steps in lightning formation. In one study involving animation and narration (Moreno & Mayer, 2000, Experiment 1), the personalized group generated 36% more creative solutions than the conventional group on the problem-solving transfer test, yielding an effect size of 0.96. When the media include animation and narration, there is evidence for a personalization effect.
What happens to the personalization effect when the words are presented as printed text rather than spoken text?
In the animation-and-text environment, students viewed an animation depicting the steps in lightning formation along with concurrent onscreen text presented at the bottom of the screen as one or two sentences at a time. For some students (conventional presentation group), the wording was identical to the formal style used in the animation-and-narration environment. For other students (personalized presentation group), the wording was identical to the conversational style used in the animation-and-narration environment. In one study (Moreno & Mayer, 2000, Experiment 2), the personalized group generated 116% more creative solutions than the conventional group on the problem-solving transfer test. The corresponding effect size was 1.60. Clearly, when the media include animation and onscreen text, there is evidence for a personalization effect. Overall, a personalization effect was obtained across two different media—when the explanation was presented as animation and narration and when the explanation was presented as animation and on-screen text. The results are preliminary because only one study was involved for each of the media environments, but the consistent pattern produces our fourth and final example of the same method effects with different media. The personalization effect is consistent with an expanded version of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning shown in Fig. 2. Personalized messages may prime the conversation schema in learners—that is, learners may be more willing to accept that they are in a human-to-human conversation including all the conventions of trying hard to understand what the other person is saying. In trying harder to understand the message, learners with personalized messages are more likely to engage in the cognitive processes particularly organizing and integrating.
