Cognitive Theory

  • Linda M. PhillipsEmail author
  • Stephen P. Norris
  • John S. Macnab
Part of the Models and Modeling in Science Education book series (MMSE, volume 5)


This chapter examines basic mechanisms of visualization. An important question is whether visual images and language are coded and processed simultaneously or separately. If it is determined that linguistic and visual modes are coded and processed separately then the possible level of interaction between the modes becomes an issue.


Visual Imagery Dual Code Visual Mode Dual Code Theory Effective Visualization 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Vekiri, I. (2002). What is the value of graphical displays in learning? Educational Psychology Review, 14(3), 261–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3(3), 149–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Sadoski, M., & Paivio, A. (2001). Imagery and text: A dual coding theory of and writing.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. Paivio, A. (1974). Language and knowledge of the world. Educational Researcher, 3(9), 5–12.Google Scholar
  6. Hertzog, C., & Dunlosky, J. (2006). Using visual imagery as a mnemonic for verbal associative learning: Developmental and individual differences. In T. Vecchi & G. Bottini (Eds.), Imagery and spatial cognition: Methods, models and cognitive assessment(pp. 259–280). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  7. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1998). Imagery, visualization, and thinking. In J. Hochberg (Ed.), Perception and cognition at century’s end (pp. 441–467). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  8. Pylyshyn, Z. W. (2003). Seeing and visualizing: It’s not what you think. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kulhavy, R. W., Stock, W. A., Peterson, S. E., Pridemore, D. R., & Klein, J. D. (1992). Using maps to retrieve text: A test of conjoint retention. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 17(1), 56–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rieber, L. P. (1990a). Animation in computer-based instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38(1), 77–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rieber, L. P. (1990b). Using computer animated graphics in science instruction with children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 135–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mayer, R. E., & Simms, V. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 389–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Tversky, B. (2001). Spatial schemas in depictions. In M. Gattis (Ed.), Spatial schemas and thought (pp. 79–111). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linda M. Phillips
    • 1
    Email author
  • Stephen P. Norris
    • 2
  • John S. Macnab
    • 3
  1. 1.Canadian Centre for Research on LiteracyUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  2. 2.Centre for Research in Youth, Science Teaching and LearningUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  3. 3.EdmontonCanada

Personalised recommendations