Steffen Lepa

1
A Coherence Effect in Multimedia Learning The
Case for Minimizing Irrelevant Sounds in the
Design of Multimedia Instructional Messages

• (Roxana Moreno Richard E. Meyer, 2000)

2
A Coherence Effect in Multimedia Learning The
Case for Minimizing Irrelevant Sounds in the
Design of Multimedia Instructional Messages

• Einführung Operationalisierung
• Experiment 1 - meteorology
• Design
• Ergebnisse
• Experiment 2 car mechanics
• Design
• Ergebnisse
• Deutung Generalisierbarkeit
• Diskussion

3
I. Einführung Operationalisierung

• Usage of music sound in multimedia learning
• Dual-processing model of multimedia learning
• Modality specific processing channels
• Limited processing capacity in each channel
• Cognitive processing selection of relevant
  material for further processing (e.g.
  integrating, consolidating, memorizing)
• Focus of the experiment
• limited processing capacity
• Arousal versus Coherence Theory

4
I. Einführung Operationalisierung

• Arousal Theory
• Arousal through music or sound might motivate
  learner and help to enhance attention towards
  learning material resulting in better lerning
• More material is processed, improved retention
  and transfer
• Coherence Theory
• Auditory adjuncts like music or sound may
  overload the auditory channel and therefore
  weaken processing capacity resulting in an
  interference of learning
• Less processing of material, poorer performance
  in retention and transfer

5
I. Einführung Operationalisierung

• Learning operationalized
• Multimedia Animation presented once, all tests
  directly afterwards
• Paper-and-pencil Retention Test Write down how
  works!
• Cued-Retention Test Listen to this sounds,
  maybe you might now add something to your
  explanation
• Paper-and-pencil Transfer Test If you know how
  works, how might work?
• Paper-and-pencil Matching Test Mark in this
  picture where the can be found
• Double-blind study
• Participants were not aware of being treated
  differently
• Scorers didnt know about which treatment a
  specific participant got

6
II. Experiment I - Versuchsdesign

• Animation from a CBT-Course concerning
  Meteorology
• 4 Groups (randomized and X2-Tested(gender/age),pre
  -knowers excluded)
• N Naration (n19)
• NS Naration plus environmental sounds (n18)
• NM Naration plus music (n19)
• NMS Naration plus environmental sounds and music
  (n19)
• Procedure
• Pre-instruction followed by Tests for
  (self-perceived) preknowledge acoustic
  preference
• Test Instruction
• Animation
• Retention test
• Cued-Retention test
• Transfer test
• Matching test

7
II. Experiment I - Ergebnisse
8
II. Experiment I - Ergebnisse

• Retention Test
• Significant (plt0.0001) better scores without
  music
• No significant differences concerning sounds
• Significant interaction Music/Sound (plt0.05)
• Post-Hoc Newman-Keul-Test N NS best, NSM worst
• Cued-Retention Test
• Neither any significant differences nor
  interactions
• Transfer Test
• Significant (plt0.0001) better scores without
  music
• No significant differences concerning sounds
• Significant interaction Music/Sound (plt0.05)
• Post-Hoc Newman-Keul-Test N NS best, NSM worst
• Matching Test
• Neither any significant differences nor
  interactions

9
III. Experiment II - Versuchsdesign

• Animation from a CBT-Course concerning car
  mechanics
• 4 Groups (randomized and X2-Tested
  (gender/age),pre-knowers excluded)
• N Naration (n20)
• NS Naration plus environmental sounds (n17)
• NM Naration plus music (n18)
• NMS Naration plus environmental sounds and music
  (n20)
• Procedure
• Pre-instruction followed by Tests for
  (self-perceived) preknowledge acoustic
  preference
• Test Instruction
• Animation
• Retention test
• Cued-Retention test (not directly mentioned but
  scored afterwards)
• Transfer test
• Matching test

10
III. Experiment II - Ergebnisse
11
III. Experiment II - Ergebnisse

• - Retention Test
• Significant (plt0.05) better scores without music
• Significant (plt0.05) better scores without sounds
• No significant interaction Music/Sound
• Post-Hoc Newman-Keul-Test N best, NSM worst
• Cued-Retention Test
• Not mentioned any longer
• Transfer Test
• Significant (plt0.05) better scores without music
• Significant (plt0.05) better scores without sounds
• Significant interaction Music/Sound (plt0.01)
• Post-Hoc Newman-Keul-Test N best
• Matching Test
• Neither any significant differences nor
  interactions

12
IV. Deutung Generalisierbarkeit

• Eindeutige Ergebnisse
• Bei der schriftlichen Wiedergabe und
  Transferfragen bezüglich einer kurz vorher
  einmalig gesehenen Animation (aus Meteorology/Car
  mechanics CBT) schneiden Partizipanten
  signifikant besser ab, die weder Musik noch
  Sounds zur Unterstützung der Animation erhielten
• Auslegung nach Moreno Mayer
• Sound Cues helfen nicht beim Erinnern, wirken
  sich, wenn sie arbiträr sind, sogar negativ aus!
• Matching Test war nicht adäquat, vermutlich
  Ceiling-Effekt
• Kohärenz-Theorie wird durch Untersuchungsergebniss
  e bestätigt und Arousal-Theorie widerlegt.
  Designer von MM-CBTs sollten auf den Einsatz
  inköhärenter auditiver Elemente tunlichst
  verzichten.

13
V. Diskussion

• Kritik
• Formell
• Zahlreiche Fehler/Vertauschungen bei den
  Datenwerten!!!
• Lückenhafte Beschreibung/Auswertung (cued
  retention, pre-Test, matching test)
• Tendentiöse Auswertung (matching Test
  Erklärungsversuche)
• Inhaltsvalidität
• Operationalisierung von Lernen zweifelhaft
  wer lernt so?
• Fragestellungsbezogen
• Widerspricht/ignoriert bestehende (teils)
  verifizierte kognitionspsychologische Modelle
  (z. B. Deklaratives(what)/prozedurales(How)
  Wissen / Encoding Specificity / Memory
  Consolidation)
• Generalsierbarkeit zweifelhaft (Werden CBTs nur
  1x rezipiert? Ist Vorwissen dabei
  ausgeschlossen?) ? evtl. schlechte externe
  Validität
• Am Thema vorbei? (falsche Darstellung der
  Arousal-Theory)

14
V. Diskussion

• Attention and Arousal (M. Eysenck, 1982)
• Furthermore, most (if not all) arousers appear
  to affect attentional mechanisms in similar ways
  more specifically, high arousal produced in
  several ways leads to greater attentional
  selectivity and increased distractibility.