Advertisement

Reading Instructions Facilitate Signaling Effect on Science Text for Young Readers: an Eye-Movement Study

  • Yu-Cin JianEmail author
Article

Abstract

Science texts often use visual representations (e.g. diagrams, graphs, photographs) to help readers learn science knowledge. Reading an illustrated text for learning is one type of multimedia learning. Empirical research has increasingly confirmed the signaling principle’s effectiveness in multimedia learning. Highlighting correspondences between text and pictures benefits learning outcomes. However, the signaling effect’s cognitive processes and its generalizability to young readers are unknown. This study clarified these aspects using eye-tracking technology and reading tests. Eighty-nine sixth-grade students read an illustrated science text in one of three conditions: reading material with signals, without signals (identical labels of Diagram 1 and Diagram 2 in text and illustration), and with signals combined with reading instructions. Findings revealed that the signaling principle alone cannot be generalized to young readers. Specifically, “Diagram 1” and “Diagram 2” in parentheses mixed with science text content had limited signaling effect for students and reading instructions are necessary. Eye movements reflected cognitive processes of science reading; students who received reading instructions employed greater cognitive effort and time in reading illustrations and tried to integrate textual and pictorial information using signals.

Keywords

Diagrams Eye tracking Reading instruction Science text Signaling principle 

Notes

Funding Information

This research is supported by the grants MOST103-2511-S-003-065-MY3 from the Ministry of Science and Technology in Taiwan.

References

  1. Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16, 183–198.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.03.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armstrong, R. A. (2014). When to use the Bonferroni correction. Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics, 34, 502–508.  https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.12131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bartholomé, T., & Bromme, R. (2009). Coherence formation when learning from text and pictures: What kind of support for whom? Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 282–293.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boucheix, J. M., & Guignard, H. (2005). What animated illustrations conditions can improve technical document comprehension in young students? Format, signaling and control of the presentation. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20, 369–388.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03173563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Butcher, K. R. (2014). The multimedia principle. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 174–205). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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.
  7. De Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2009). Towards a framework for attention cueing in instructional animations: Guidelines for research and design. Educational Psychology Review, 21, 113–140.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9098-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eitel, A. (2016). How repeated studying and testing affects multimedia learning: Evidence for adaptation to task demands. Learning and Instruction, 41, 70–84.Google Scholar
  9. Eitel, A., Scheiter, K., Schüler, A., Nyström, M., & Holmqvist, K. (2013). How a picture facilitates the process of learning from text: Evidence for scaffolding. Learning and Instruction, 28, 48–63.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.05.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hannus, M., & Hyönä, J. (1999). Utilization of illustrations during learning of science textbook passages among low- and high-ability children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 95–123.  https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1998.0987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hasselhorn, M., & Körkel, J. (1986). Metacognitive versus traditional reading instructions: The mediating role domain-specific knowledge on children’s text-processing. Human Learning, 5, 75–90.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.05.002.Google Scholar
  12. Hegarty, M., & Just, M. A. (1993). Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 717–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jeung, H. J., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). The role of visual indicators in dual sensory mode instruction. Educational Psychology, 17, 329–345.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341970170307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jian, Y. C. (2016). Fourth graders’ cognitive processes and learning strategies for reading illustrated biology texts: Eye movement measurements. Reading Research Quarterly, 51(1), 93–109.  https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.125.
  16. Jian, Y. C. (2017). Eye-movement patterns and reader characteristics of students with good and poor performance when reading scientific text with diagrams. Reading and Writing, 30, 1447–1472.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9732-6.
  17. Jian, Y. C. & Ko, H. W. (2017). Influences of text difficulty and reading ability on learning illustrated science texts for children: An eye movement study. Computers and Education, 113, 263–279.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.002.
  18. Jian, Y. C., & Wu, C. J. (2015). Using eye tracking to investigate semantic and spatial representations of scientific diagrams during text-diagram integration. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(1), 43–55.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9519-3.
  19. Jian, Y. C., Wu, C. J., & Su, J. H. (2014). Learners’ eye movements during construction of mechanical kinematic representations from static diagrams. Learning and Instruction, 32, 51–62.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.01.005.
  20. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1980). Mental models in cognitive science. Cognitive Science, 4, 71–115.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(81)80005-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ko, H. W. (2006). Reading comprehension screening test (in Chinese). Psychological Testing, 46, 1–11.Google Scholar
  25. Kombartzky, U., Ploetzner, R., Schlag, S., & Metz, B. (2010). Developing and evaluating a strategy for learning from animation. Learning and Instruction, 20, 424–433.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.05.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kriz, S., & Hegarty, M. (2007). Top-down and bottom-up influences on learning from animations. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65, 911–930.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2007.06.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Larson, C. O., Dansereau, D. F., Hythecker, V. I., O’Donnell, A., Young, M. D., Lambiotte, J. G., & Rocklin, T. R. (1986). Technical training: An application of a strategy for learning structural and functional information. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11, 217–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lin, Y. C., Lee, C. S., Huang, N. T., Chang, Y. T., & Tsai, S. F. (2008). Living science and technology textbook. Kang Hsuan Company Press.Google Scholar
  30. Mason, L., Pluchino, P., & Tornatora, M. C. (2013). Effects of picture labeling on science text processing and learning: Evidence from eye movements. Reading Research Quarterly, 48(2), 199–214.  https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mason, L., Tornatora, M. C., & Pluchino, P. (2015). Integrative processing of verbal and graphical information during re-reading predicts learning from illustrated text: An eye-movement study. Reading and Writing, 28(6), 851–872.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9552-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mautone, P. D., & Mayer, R. E. (2001). Signaling as a cognitive guide in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 377–389.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.2.377.
  33. Mayer, R. E. (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816819.036.
  34. Mayer, R. E. (2014). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 43–71). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Mayer, R. E., & Johnson, C. I. (2008). Revising the redundancy principle in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 380–386.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McTigue, E. M. (2009). Does multimedia learning theory extend to middle-school students? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 143–153.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.12.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Miller, B. W. (2015). Using reading times and eye-movements to measure cognitive engagement. Educational Psychologist, 50, 31–42.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1004068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Moore, P. J., & Scevak, J. J. (1997). Learning from texts and visual aids: A developmental perspective. Journal of Research in Reading, 20(3), 205–223.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.00033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ozcelik, E., Arslan-Ari, I., & Cagiltay, K. (2010). Why does signaling enhance multimedia learning? Evidence from eye movements. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 110–117.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.09.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ozcelik, E., Karakus, T., Kursun, E., & Cagiltay, K. (2009). An eye-tracking study of how color coding affects multimedia learning. Computers & Education, 53, 445–453.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.03.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372–422.Google Scholar
  43. Richter, J., Scheiter, K., & Eitel, A. (2016). Signaling text-picture relations in multimedia learning: A comprehensive meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 17, 19–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schnotz, W., Ludewig, U., Ulrich, M., Horz, H., McElvany, N., & Baumert, J. (2014). Strategy shifts during learning from texts and picture. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(4), 974–989.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037054.
  45. Scheiter, K., & Eitel, A. (2015). Signals foster multimedia learning by supporting integration of highlighted text and diagram elements. Learning and Instruction, 36, 11–26.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.11.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Scheiter, K., Schubert, C., Gerjets, P., & Stalbovs, K. (2015). Does a strategy training foster students’ ability to learn from multimedia? The Journal of Experimental Education, 83(2), 266–289.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2013.876603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schlag, S., & Plötzner, R. (2011). Supporting learning from illustrated texts: Conceptualizing and evaluating a learning strategy. Instructional Science, 39, 921–937.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-010-9160-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schnotz, W. (2005). An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 49–69). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Seufert, T. (2003). Supporting coherence formation in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 227–237.Google Scholar
  50. Tabbers, H. K., Martens, R. L., & Merriënboer, J. J. (2004). Multimedia instructions and cognitive load theory: Effects of modality and cueing. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 71–81.  https://doi.org/10.1348/000709904322848824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Van Gog, T. (2014). The signaling (or cueing) principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 263–278). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Educational Psychology and CounselingNational Taiwan Normal UniversityTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations