Lernen mit Bewegtbildern: Videos und Animationen

  • Martin MerktEmail author
  • Stephan Schwan
Living reference work entry
Part of the Springer Reference Psychologie book series (SRP)


Der vorliegende Beitrag beschäftigt sich nach einer kritischen Würdigung der grundsätzlichen Eignung von Bewegtbildern für den Wissenserwerb mit deren sinnvollem Einsatz in Lernsituationen. Ausgehend von kognitionspsychologischen und pädagogisch-psychologischen Forschungsergebnissen werden Strategien vorgestellt, wie Videos und Animationen durch Produktionstechniken (z. B. Kameraperspektive, Schnitte), Charakteristika der Darbietungssituation (z. B. Pausen) oder Methoden der Aufmerksamkeitslenkung (Cueing) für den Wissenserwerb optimiert werden können.


Video Animation Bewegtbilder Lernen Kognitionspsychologie Medien 


  1. Berney, S., & Bétrancourt, M. (2016). Does animation enhance learning? A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 101, 150–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bétrancourt, M., & Tversky, B. (2000). Effect of computer animation on users’ performance: A review. Le Travail Humain, 63, 311–329.Google Scholar
  3. Cheon, J., Chung, S., Crooks, S. M., Song, J., & Kim, J. (2014). An investigation of the effects of different types of activities during pauses in a segmented instructional animation. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17, 296–306.Google Scholar
  4. Eitel, A., & Scheiter, K. (2015). Picture or text first? Explaining sequence effects when learning with pictures and text. Educational Psychology Review, 27, 153–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Feierabend, S., & Klinger, W. (2003). Lehrer/-Innen und Medien 2003. Baden-Baden: Medienpädagogischer Forschungsverbund Südwest.Google Scholar
  6. Fiorella, L., van Gog, T., Hoogerheide, V., & Mayer, R. E. (2017). It’s all a matter of perspective: Viewing first-person video modeling examples promotes learning of an assembly task. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(5), 653–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Furnham, A., & Gunter, B. (1987). Effects of time of day and medium of presentation on immediate recall of violent and non-violent news. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 1, 255–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Garsoffky, B., Huff, M., & Schwan, S. (2007). Changing viewpoints during dynamic events. Perception, 36(3), 366–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Garsoffky, B., Schwan, S., & Huff, M. (2009). Canonical views of dynamic scenes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 17–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Glaser, M., & Schwan, S. (2015). Explaining pictures: How verbal cues influence processing of pictorial learning material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 1006–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Glaser, M., Lengyel, D., Toulouse, C., & Schwan, S. (2017). Designing computer-based learning contents: Influence of digital zoom on attention. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(5), 1135–1151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gunter, B., Furnham, A., & Leese, J. (1986). Memory for information from a party political broadcast as a function of the channel of communication. Social Behaviour, 1, 135–142.Google Scholar
  14. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hasler, B. S., Kersten, B., & Sweller, J. (2007). Learner control, cognitive load and instructional animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 713–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Höffler, T. N., & Leutner, D. (2007). Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 17, 722–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Institut für Demoskopie Allensbach. (2013). Digitale Medien im Unterricht – Möglichkeiten und Grenzen. Zugegriffen am 13.04.2017.
  18. Jarodzka, H., Balslev, T., Holmqvist, K., Nyström, M., Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., & Eika, B. (2012). Conveying clinical reasoning based on visual observation via eye-movement modelling examples. Instructional Science, 40, 813–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Khacharem, A., Spanjers, I. E., Zoudji, B., Kalyuga, S., & Ripoll, H. (2013). Using segmentation to support the learning from animated soccer scenes: An effect of prior knowledge. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14, 154–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Koning, B. B. de, 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Levie, W. H., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research. Educational Communication & Technology Journal, 30, 195–232.Google Scholar
  22. Lowe, R. K., & Boucheix, J.-M. (2008). Learning from animated diagrams: How are mental models built? In G. Stapleton, J. Howse & J. Lee (Hrsg.), Diagrammatic representation and inference (S. 266–281). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lusk, D. L., Evans, A. D., Jeffrey, T. R., Palmer, K. R., Wikstrom, C. S., & Doolittle, P. E. (2009). Multimedia learning and individual differences: Mediating the effects of working memory capacity with segmentation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40, 636–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mayer, R. E., & Pilegard, C. (2014). Principles for managing essential processing in multimedia learning: Segmenting, pre-training, and modality principles. In R. E. Mayer (Hrsg.), The Cambridge Handbook of multimedia learning (S. 316–344). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Meij, H. van der, & van der Meij, J. (2013) Eight guidelines for the design of instructional videos for software training. Technical Communication, 60, 205–228.Google Scholar
  26. Merkt, M., & Schwan, S. (2014). Training the use of interactive videos: Effects on mastering different tasks. Instructional Science, 42, 421–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Merkt, M., & Schwan, S. (2016). Lernen mit digitalen Videos: Der Einfluss einfacher interaktiver Kontrollmöglichkeiten. Psychologische Rundschau, 67, 94–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Merkt, M., & Sochatzy, F. (2015). Becoming aware of cinematic techniques in propaganda: Instructional support by cueing and training. Learning and Instruction, 39, 55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Merkt, M., Weigand, S., Heier, A., & Schwan, S. (2011). Learning with videos vs. learning with print: The role of interactive features. Learning and Instruction, 21, 687–704.Google Scholar
  30. Merkt, M., Werner, M., & Wagner, W. (2017). Historical thinking skills and mastery of multiple document tasks. Learning and Individual Differences, 54, 135–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Moreno, R. (2007). Optimising learning from animations by minimising cognitive load: Cognitive and affective consequences of signalling and segmentation methods. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 765–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Orgeron, D., Orgeron, M., & Streible, D. (2012). Learning with the lights off. Educational film in the United States. Oxford: Oxford Univeristy Press.Google Scholar
  33. Pettijohn, K. A., Thompson, A. N., Tamplin, A. K., Krawietz, S. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (2016). Event boundaries and memory improvement. Cognition, 148, 136–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ploetzner, R., & Lowe, R. (2012). A systematic characterization of expository animations. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 781–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rey, G. D. (2012). A review of research and a meta-analysis of the seductive detail effect. Educational Research Review, 7, 216–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Salomon, G. (1984). Television is „easy“ and print is „tough“: The differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attribution. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 647–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., Huk, T., Imhof, B., & Kammerer, Y. (2009). The effects of realism in learning with dynamic visualizations. Learning and Instruction, 19, 481–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schnotz, W., & Lowe, R. K. (Hrsg.). (2008). A unified view of learning from animated and static graphics. In Learning with animation (S. 304–356). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Schwan, S., & Garsoffky, B. (2004). The cognitive representation of filmic event summaries. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 3–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schwan, S., & Papenmeier, F. (2017). Learning from Animations: From 2D to 3D? In R. Plötzner & R. Lowe (Hrsg.), Learning from dynamic visualizations: Innovations in research and application (S. 31–49). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schwan, S., & Riempp, R. (2004). The cognitive benefits of interactive videos: Learning to tie nautical knots. Learning and Instruction, 14, 293–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Spanjers, I. E., van Gog, T., & van Merriënboer, J. G. (2010). A theoretical analysis of how segmentation of dynamic visualizations optimizes students’ learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 411–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Spanjers, I. E., Wouters, P., van Gog, T., & van Merriënboer, J. G. (2011). An expertise reversal effect of segmentation in learning from animated worked-out examples. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 46–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Spanjers, I. E., van Gog, T., Wouters, P., & van Merriënboer, J. G. (2012). Explaining the segmentation effect in learning from animations: The role of pausing and temporal cueing. Computers & Education, 59, 274–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tatler, B. W., & Melcher, D. (2007). Pictures in mind: Initial encoding of object properties varies with the realism of the scene stimulus. Perception, 36, 1715–1729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tversky, B., Morrison, J. B., & Bétrancourt, M. (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57, 247–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.NG Audiovisuelle Wissens- und InformationsmedienDeutsches Institut für Erwachsenenbildung (DIE)BonnDeutschland
  2. 2.AG Realitätsnahe DarstellungenLeibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien (IWM)TübingenDeutschland

Personalised recommendations