Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reconceptualizing Instructional Message Design: Toward the Development of a New Guiding Framework

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Design in Educational Technology

Abstract

According to Pettersson (2002, 2007), message design in the broadest sense comprises the analysis, planning, presentation, and understanding of the content, language, and form of messages that are created for the purpose of satisfying the aesthetic, economic, ergonomic, and subject matter information needs of the intended receivers. More specifically within the educational context, message design has been defined as the manipulation and planning of signs and symbols for the purpose of modifying the cognitive, affective, or psychomotor behavior of one or more persons (Fleming & Levie, 1978, 1993; National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), 2000, 2005; Seels & Richey, 1994). As a part of the overall instructional design process, instructional message design is the point at which generalized specifications about the nature of instruction are translated into the specific plans for the instructional materials to be used and how they should be designed in order to enhance learning from them (Grabowski, 1991; Reigeluth, 1983). And, like the field of instructional design generally, perspectives on instructional message design have changed as the theoretic orientations of psychologists and educators have changed over the years about how people learn.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K. W. Spence & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (2nd ed., pp. 89–195). New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1971). The control of short-term memory. Scientific American, 225, 82–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bednar, A., Cunningham, D., Duffy, T. M., & Perry, J. D. (1991). Theory into practice: How do we link? In G. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional technology: Past, present, and future (pp. 88–101). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlyne, D. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, L. H. (1995). Instructional message design: Evolution and future directions. In B. Seels (Ed.), Instructional design fundamentals: A reconsideration (pp. 87–98). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, M. J. (2000). The systematic use of sound in multimedia instruction to enhance learning. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(07), 2669.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, M. J. (2013). Instructional design: Past, present, and future relevance. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook for research in educational communications and technology (4th ed.). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, M. J., & Cates, W. M. (2001). Theoretical foundations for sound’s use in multimedia instruction to enhance learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(3), 5–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boling, E. (2010). The need for design cases: Disseminating design knowledge. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 1(1), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, G. M. (2004). Conversation theory. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 179–197). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, C. R. (1953). A theoretical orientation for instructional film research. AV Communication Review, 1(38), 52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, P. A. (1993). Paradigm shifts in designed instruction: From behaviorism to cognitivism to constructivism. Educational Technology, 33(5), 12–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dale, E. (1969). Audiovisual methods in teaching. New York: Dryden.

    Google Scholar 

  • De La Cruz, G., & Kearney, N. (2008). Online tutoring as conversation design. In R. Luppicini (Ed.), Handbook of conversation design for instructional applications (pp. 124–143). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1900). Psychology and social practice. Psychological Review, 7, 105–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 170–198). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck, M. (1982). Attention and arousal. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, B. A. (1975). Communication study in system perspective. In B. D. Ruben & J. Y. Kim (Eds.), General systems theory and human communication (pp. 191–206). Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, J. (2011). Introduction to communication studies (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, M. (1993). Introduction. In M. Fleming & W. H. Levie (Eds.), Instructional message design: Principles from the behavioral and cognitive sciences (2nd ed., pp. ix–xi). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, M., & Levie, W. H. (Eds.). (1978). Instructional message design: Principles from the behavioral sciences. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, M., & Levie, W. H. (Eds.). (1993). Instructional message design: Principles from the behavioral and cognitive sciences (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, E. D. (1985). The cognitive psychology of school learning. Boston: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerbner, G. (1956). Toward a general model of communication. AV Communication Review, 4, 171–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, A. S. (2009). The value of the operational principle in instructional design. Educational Technology, 49(1), 3–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, A. S., & Rogers, P. C. (2009a). The architecture of instructional theory. In C. M. Reigeluth & A. A. Carr-Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models (3rd ed., pp. 305–326). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, A. S., & Rogers, P. C. (2009b). Coming at design from a different angle: Functional design. In L. Moller & D. M. Harvey (Eds.), Learning and instructional technologies for the 21st century (pp. 15–25). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. (1954). A theory of pictorial perception. Audio-Visual Communications Review, 2, 2–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabowski, B. L. (1991). Message design: Issues and trends. In G. J. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional technology: Past, present and future (pp. 202–212). Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M. J. (1992). Emerging technologies, ISD, and learning environments: Critical perspectives. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(1), 49–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M. J., & Hooper, S. R. (1989). An integrated framework for CBI screen design and layout. Computers in Human Behavior, 5, 155–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M. J., & Hooper, S. R. (1993). Learning principles. In M. L. Fleming & W. H. Levie (Eds.), Instructional message design: Principles from the behavioral and cognitive sciences (2nd ed., pp. 191–231). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M. J., & Rieber, L. P. (1989a). Psychological foundations of instructional design for emerging computer-based instructional technologies: Part II. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(2), 102–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M. J., & Rieber, L. P. (1989b). Psychological foundations of instructional design for emerging computer-based instructional technologies: Part I. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(2), 91–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harp, S. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1997). The role of interest in learning from scientific text and illustrations on the distinction between emotional interest and cognitive interest. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 92–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harp, S. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1998). How seductive details do their damage: A theory of cognitive interest in science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 414–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooper, S. R., & Hannafin, M. J. (1988). Learning the ROPES of instructional design: Guidelines for emerging interactive technologies. Educational Technology, 28(7), 14–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, D. (1969). The individual and the larger context. In W. Gray, F. J. Duhl, & N. D. Rizzo (Eds.), General systems theory and psychiatry (pp. 390–415). Boston: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Januszewski, A., & Molenda, M. (Eds.). (2008). Educational technology: A definition with commentary. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (1990). Thinking technology: Toward a constructivist view of instructional design. Educational Technology, 30(9), 32–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39, 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kember, D., & Murphy, D. (1990). Alternative new directions for instructional design. Educational Technology, 30(8), 42–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (1975). The systems approach to communication. In B. D. Ruben & J. Y. Kim (Eds.), General systems theory and human communication (pp. 138–163). Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (2006). The semantic turn: A new foundation for design. Boca Raton, FL: CRC–Taylor Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, H. D. (1948). The structure and function of communication in society. In L. Bryson (Ed.), The communication of ideas, a series of addresses (pp. 61–89). New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lohr, L. (2008). Creating graphics for learning and performance: Lessons in visualliteracy (2nd ed.). New York: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (1999). The promise of educational psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall/Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning (1st ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13, 125–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (Ed.). (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2008). Applying the science of learning: Evidence-based principles for the design of multimedia instruction. The American Psychologist, 63, 760–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2013). Multimedia learning. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed.). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., Bove, W., Bryman, A., Mars, R., & Taangco, L. (1996). When less is more: Meaningful learning from visual and verbal summaries of science textbook lessons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 64–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 187–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2010). Techniques that reduce extraneous cognitive load and manage intrinsic cognitive load during multimedia learning. In J. L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive load theory (pp. 131–152). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Molenda, M., & Boling, E. (2007). Creating. In A. Januszewski & M. Molenda (Eds.), Educational technology: A definition with commentary (pp. 81–139). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). A coherence effect in multimedia learning: The case for minimizing irrelevant sounds in the design of multimedia instructional messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 117–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, C. W. (1946). Signs, language, and behavior. New York: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, G. R., Ross, A. M., Kalman, H., & Kemp, J. E. (2011). Designing effective instruction (6th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) (2000). Educational computing and technology leadership standards. Retrieved from http://www.ncate.org/

  • National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) (2005). Educational computing and technology leadership standards. Retrieved from http://www.ncate.org/

  • Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality: Principles and implications of cognitive psychology. San Francisco: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newcomb, T. M. (1953). An approach to the study of communicative acts. Psychological Review, 60, 393–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogden, C., & Richards, I. (1956). The meaning of meaning: A study of the influence of language upon thought and of the science of symbolism (8th ed.). New York: Harcourt, Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osgood, C. E. (1967). The measurement of meaning. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pask, G. (1975). The cybernetics of human learning and performance: A guide to theory and research. London: Hutchinson Educational.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C. S. (1931). Collected papers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pekrun, R. (2011). Emotions as drivers of learning and cognitive development. In R. A. Calvo & S. K. D’Mello (Eds.), New perspectives on affect and learning technologies (pp. 23–40). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pettersson, R. (2002). Information design: An introduction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettersson, R. (2007). Visual literacy in message design. Journal of Visual Literacy, 27(1), 61–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phye, G. D., & Andre, T. (1986). Cognitive classroom learning. Orlando: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potts, T. C. (1977). The place of structure in communication. In G. Vesey (Ed.), Communication and understanding (pp. 97–115). Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigeluth, C. M. (1983). Instructional design: What is it and why is it? In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 3–16). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saussure, F. (1913/1986). Course in general linguistics. Peru, IL: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schramm, W. (1955). Information theory and mass communication. In B. Berelson & M. Janowitz (Eds.), Reader in public opinion and communication (2nd ed., pp. 712–732). New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seels, B., & Richey, R. C. (1994). Instructional technology: The definition and domains of the field. Bloomington, IN: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL: The University of Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiffrin, R. M. (1988). Attention. In R. C. Atkinson, R. J. Herrnstein, G. Lindzey, & R. D. Luce (Eds.), Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology: Vol. 2. Learning and cognition (pp. 739–811). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Subramony, D. P. (2004). Instructional technologists’ inattention to issues of cultural diversity among learners. Educational Technology, 44(4), 19–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (2005). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 19–30). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Westley, B., & MacLean, M. (1957). A conceptual model for communication research. Journalism Quarterly, 34, 31–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, B. G. (2005a). Broadening our foundation for instructional design: Four pillars of practice. Educational Technology, 45(2), 10–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, B. G. (2005b). Foundations for instructional design: Reclaiming the conversation. In J. M. Spector, C. Ohrazda, A. Van Schaak, & D. Wiley (Eds.), Innovations in instructional design: Essays in honor of M. David Merrill (pp. 237–252). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winn, W. D. (1993). Instructional design and situated learning: Paradox or partnership? Educational Technology, 33(3), 16–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittrock, M. C. (1990). Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24(4), 345–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittrock, M. C. (2010). Learning as a generative process. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 40–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulation to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA, 18015, USA

    M. J. Bishop

Authors
  1. M. J. Bishop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. J. Bishop .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Design, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA

    Brad Hokanson

  2. Provo, Utah, USA

    Andrew Gibbons

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bishop, M.J. (2014). Reconceptualizing Instructional Message Design: Toward the Development of a New Guiding Framework. In: Hokanson, B., Gibbons, A. (eds) Design in Educational Technology. Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00927-8_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation