Abstract
The educational effectiveness of conventionally designed animations that portray complex, unfamiliar subject matter in a behaviorally realistic fashion too often falls well short of expectations. Previous research indicates that the veridical dynamic properties of these comprehensive animations make a major contribution to their lack of effectiveness. Due to these dynamics, there is a substantial mismatch between the processing demands these animations impose on learners and the characteristics of the human information processing system. As a result, the quality of the mental models that learners are able to construct is compromised. Interventions intended to improve learners’ processing of such animations have met with only limited success. This chapter argues that substantial gains in the educational effectiveness of animations will require a fundamental change in the assumptions underlying how they are designed. An alternative design approach based on the Animation Processing Model (APM) is outlined that aims to facilitate the learner’s composition of an internal representation by adopting a different perspective on the characteristics of the animation as an external representation. This Composition Approach presents learners with information in an incremental, cumulative manner that is better matched with their processing capacities. The practical application of this approach is illustrated and implications for future research are canvassed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Ayres, P., Marcus, N., Chan, C., & Qian, N. (2009). Learning hand manipulative tasks: When instructional animations are superior to equivalent static representations. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 348–353.
Ayres, P., & Pass, F. (2007). Making instructional animations more effective: A cognitive load approach. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 695–700.
Bétrancourt, M., & Réalini, N. (2005, June). Faut il vraiment laisser le déroulement d’une animation sous le contrôle de l’apprenant? Paper presented at the 11th Journées d’Etude sur le Traitement Cognitif des Systèmes d’Information Complexes (JETCSIC), Nice.
Boucheix, J.-M. (2008). Young learners’ control of technical animations. In R. K. Lowe & W. Schnotz (Eds.), Learning with animation: Research implications for design (pp. 208–234). New York: Cambridge University Press.
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.
Boucheix, J.-M., Lowe, R. K., & Bugaiska, A. (2015). Age differences in learning from instructional animations. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 29, 524–535.
Boucheix, J.-M., Lowe, R. K., Putri, D. K., & Groff, J. (2013). Cueing animations: Dynamic signaling aids information extraction and comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 25, 71–84.
Boucheix, J.-M., Lowe, R. K., & Soirat, A. (2006, August). Online processing of a complex technical animation: Eye tracking investigation during verbal description. Paper presented at the comprehension of text and graphics conference, University of Nottingham.
De Koning, B. B., & Jarodzka, H. (2017). Attention guidance strategies for supporting learning from dynamic visualizations. In R. Lowe & R. Ploetzner (Eds.), Learning from dynamic visualization – Innovations in research and application. Berlin: Springer (this volume).
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.
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.
Fischer, S., Lowe, R. K., & Schwan, S. (2008). Effects of presentation speed of a dynamic visualization on the understanding of a mechanical system. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 1126–1141.
Hegarty, M., & Kriz, S. (2008). Effects of knowledge and spatial ability on learning from animation. In R. K. Lowe & W. Schnotz (Eds.), Learning with animation: Research implications for design (pp. 304–356). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jenkinson, J. (2017). The role of craft-based knowledge in the design of dynamic visualizations. In R. Lowe & R. Ploetzner (Eds.), Learning from dynamic visualization – Innovations in research and application. Berlin: Springer (this volume).
Kriz, S., & Hegarty, M. (2007). Top-down and bottom-up influences on learning from animations. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 65, 911–930.
Lowe, R. K. (1999). Extracting information from an animation during complex visual learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 225–244.
Lowe, R. K. (2008). Learning from animation: Where to look, when to look. In R. K. Lowe & W. Schnotz (Eds.), Learning with animation: Research implications for design (pp. 49–68). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lowe, R. K., & Boucheix, J.-M. (2008a). Learning from animated diagrams: How are mental models built? In G. Stapleton, J. Howse, & J. Lee (Eds.), Diagrammatic representation and inference (pp. 266–281). Berlin: Springer.
Lowe, R. K., & Boucheix, J.-M. (2008b). Supporting relational processing in complex animated diagrams. In G. Stapleton, J. Howse, & J. Lee (Eds.), Diagrammatic representation and inference (pp. 391–394). Berlin: Springer.
Lowe, R. K., & Boucheix, J.-M. (2011). Cueing complex animation: Does direction of attention foster learning processes? Learning and Instruction, 21, 650–663.
Lowe, R. K., & Boucheix, J.-M. (2012a). Dynamic diagrams: A composition alternative. In P. Cox, B. Plimmer, & P. Rogers (Eds.), Diagrammatic representation and inference (pp. 233–240). Berlin: Springer.
Lowe, R. K., & Boucheix, J.-M. (2012b). Addressing challenges of biological animations. In E. de Vries & K. Scheiter (Eds.), Proceedings of the meeting of the EARLI special interest group on comprehension of text and graphics (pp. 217–129). Grenoble: University of Grenoble.
Lowe, R. K., & Boucheix, J.-M. (2013, August). Principled animation design: A key to improving learning. Paper presented at the 15th Biennial EARLI conference for Research on Learning and Instruction, Munich.
Lowe, R. K., & Boucheix, J.-M. (2016). Principled animation design improves comprehension of complex dynamics. Learning and Instruction, 45, 72–84.
Lowe, R., Boucheix, J. M., & Fillisch, B. (2017). Demonstration tasks for assessment. In R. Lowe & R. Ploetzner (Eds.), Learning from dynamic visualization – Innovations in research and application. Berlin: Springer (this volume).
Lowe, R., & Mason, L. (2017). Self-generated drawing: A help or hindrance to learning from animation? In R. Lowe & R. Ploetzner (Eds.), Learning from dynamic visualization – Innovations in research and application. Berlin: Springer (this volume).
Lowe, R. K., & Schnotz, W. (2014). Animation principles in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 513–546). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mason, L., Lowe, R. K., & Tornatora, M. C. (2013). Self-generated drawings for supporting comprehension of a complex animation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38, 211–224.
Mayer, R. E., & Anderson, R. B. (1991). Animations need narrations: An experimental test of a dual coding hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 484–490.
Mayer, R. E., & Anderson, R. B. (1992). The instructive animation: Helping students build connections between words and pictures in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 444–452.
Mayer, R. E., & Chandler, P. (2001). When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages? Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 390–397.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2002). Animation as an aid to multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 87–99.
Paik, E. S., & Schraw, G. (2013). Learning with animation and illusions of understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 449–457.
Ploetzner, R., & Breyer, B. (2017). Strategies for learning from animation with and without narration. In R. Lowe & R. Ploetzner (Eds.), Learning from dynamic visualization – Innovations in research and application. Berlin: Springer (this volume).
Ploetzner, R., & Lowe, R. K. (2012). A systematic characterization of expository animations. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 781–794.
Ploetzner, R., & Lowe, R. K. (2014). Simultaneously presented animations facilitate the learning of higher-order relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 12–22.
Ploetzner, R., & Lowe, R. (2017). Looking across instead of back and forth – How the simultaneous presentation of multiple animation episodes facilitates learning. In R. Lowe & R. Ploetzner (Eds.), Learning from dynamic visualization – Innovations in research and application. Berlin: Springer (this volume).
Sanchez, C. A., & Wiley, J. (2017). Dynamic visuospatial ability and learning from dynamic visualizations. In R. Lowe & R. Ploetzner (Eds.), Learning from dynamic visualization – Innovations in research and application. Berlin: Springer (this volume).
Schnotz, W., & Lowe, R. K. (2008). A unified view of learning from animated and static graphics. In R. K. Lowe & W. Schnotz (Eds.), Learning with animation: Research implications for design (pp. 304–356). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schwan, S., & Riempp, R. (2004). The cognitive benefits of interactive videos: Learning to tie nautical knots. Learning and Instruction, 14, 293–305.
Spanjers, I. A. E., Van Gog, T., & Van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2010). A theoretical analysis of how segmentation of dynamic visualizations optimizes students’ learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 411–423.
Spanjers, I. A. E., Wouters, P., van Gog, T., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2011). An expertise reversal effect of segmentation in learning from animated worked out examples. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 46–52.
Tversky, B., Heiser, J., Mackenzie, R., Lozano, S., & Morrison, J. (2008). Enriching animations. In R. K. Lowe & W. Schnotz (Eds.), Learning with animation: Research implications for design (pp. 263–285). New York: Cambridge University Press.
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: Cambridge University Press.
Van Patten, J., Chao, C. I., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1986). A review of strategies for sequencing and synthesizing instruction. Review of Educational Research, 56, 437–471.
Wagner, I., & Schnotz, W. (2017). Learning from static and dynamic visualizations: What kind of questions should we ask? In R. Lowe & R. Ploetzner (Eds.), Learning from dynamic visualization – Innovations in research and application. Berlin: Springer (this volume).
Wong, A., Leahy, W., Marcus, N., & Sweller, J. (2012). Cognitive load theory, the transient information effect and e-learning. Learning and Instruction, 22, 449–457.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lowe, R., Boucheix, JM. (2017). A Composition Approach to Design of Educational Animations. In: Lowe, R., Ploetzner, R. (eds) Learning from Dynamic Visualization. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56204-9_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56204-9_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-56202-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-56204-9
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)