Introduction
A fundamental hypothesis underlying re-search on multimedia learning is that mul-timedia instructional messages that are de-signed in light of how the human mind works are more likely to lead to mean-ingful learning than those that are not. The cognitive theory of multimedia learn-ing (CTML) is based on three cognitive science principles of learning; the human information processing system includes dual channels for visual/pictorial and audi-tory/verbal processing (i.e., dual-channels assumption); each channel has limited ca-pacity for processing (i.e., limited capac-ity assumption); and active learning entails carrying out a coordinated set of cognitive processes during learning (i.e., active pro-cessing assumption). The cognitive theory of multimedia learning specifies five cogni-tive processes in multimedia learning: se-lecting relevant words from the presented text or narration, selecting relevant im-ago from the presented illustrations, orga-nizing the selected words into a coherent verbal representation, organizing selected images into a coherent pictorial representation, and integrating the pictorial and verbal represen-"tations and prior knowledge. Multimedia instructional messages should be designed to prime these processes.
Task
The Case for Multimedia Learning
What is the rationale for a theory of multi-media learning? People learn more deeply from words and pictures than from words alone. This assertion — which can be called the multimedia principle — underlies much of the interest in multimedia learning. For thousands of years, words have been the ma-jor format for instruction — including spo-ken words, and within the last few hundred years, printed words. Today, thanks to fur-ther technological advances, pictorial forms of instruction are becoming widely available, including dazzling computer-based graphics. However, simply adding pictures to words does not guarantee an improvement in learn-ing — that is, all multimedia presentations are not equally effective. In this chapter I ex-plore a theory aimed at understanding how 31
32 THE CAMBRIDGE HANDBOOK OF MULTIMEDIA LEARNING
to use words and pictures to improve hu-man learning.
A fundamental hypothesis underlying re-search on multimedia learning is that mul-timedia instructional messages that are de-signed in light of how the human mind works are more likely to lead to meaning-ful learning than those that are not. For the past 15 years my colleagues and I at the University of California, Santa Barbara have been engaged in a sustained effort to con-struct an evidenced-based theory of mul-timedia learning that can guide the design of effective multimedia instructional mes-sages (Mayer 2001, 2002, 2oo3a; Mayer &
Moreno, 2003).
What is a multimedia instructional message? A multimedia instructional mes-sage is a communication containing words and pictures intended to foster learning. The communication can be delivered using any medium, including paper (i.e., book-based communications) or computers (i.e., computer-based communications). Words can include printed words (such as you are now reading) or spoken words (such as in a narration); pictures can include static graphics — such as illustrations or photos — or dynamic graphics — such as animation or video clips. This definition is broad enough to include textbook chapters, online lessons containing animation and narration, and interactive simulation games. For example, Figure 3.1 presents frames from a narrated animation on lightning formation, which we have studied in numerous experiments (Mayer, 2001).
Learning can be measured by tests of re-tention (i.e., remembering the presented in-formation) and transfer (i.e., being able to use the information to solve new problems). Our focus is on transfer because we are mainly interested in how words and pictures can be used to promote understanding. In short, transfer tests can help tell us how well people understand what they have learned. We are particularly interested in the cog-' nitive processes by which people construct ;meaningful learning outcomes from words and pictures.
What is the role of a theory of learning in ' multimedia design? Much of the work pre-sented in this handbook is based on the rpremise that the design of multimedia in-structional messages should be compatible with how people learn. In short, the de-sign of multimedia instructional messages should be sensitive to what we know about how people process information. The cog-nitive theory of multimedia learning rep-resents an attempt to help accomplish this goal by describing how people learn from words and pictures, based on consistent em-pirical research evidence c.e (e.g., Mayer, 2001, 2002, 2oo3a; Mayer & Moreno, 2003) and on consensus principles in cognitive science (e.g., Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999; Lambert & McCombs, 1998; Mayer, zoo3b).
In building the cognitive theory of mul-timedia learning my colleagues and I were guided by four criteria: theoretical plausibil-ity — the theory is consistent with cognitive science principles of learning; testability—the theory yields predictions that can be tested in scientific research; empirical plausibility — the theory is consistent with empirical re-search evidence on multimedia learning; and aplicability — the theory is relevant to edu-cational needs for improving the design of multimedia instructional messages. In this chapter, I describe the cognitive theory of multimedia learning, which is intended to meet these criteria. In particular, I sum-marize three underlying assumptions of the theory derived from cognitive science; de-scribe ree memory stores, cognitive processes, and five o of representation in the theory; and then provide examples and a conclusion.
Process
ASSUMPTION OF THE THEORY
Dual-Channel Assumption
The dual-channel assumption is that hu-mans possess separate information process-1 ing channels for visually represented ma- terial and auditorily represented material. The dual-channel assumption is incorpo-rated into the cognitive theory of multi-media learning by proposing that the hu-man information-processing system contains an auditory/verbal channel and a visual/ pictorial channel.
Limited Capacity Assumption
The second assumption is that humans are limited in the amount of information that can be processed in each channel at one time. When an illustration or animation is pre-sented, the learner is able to hold only a few images in working memory at any one time, reflecting portions of the presented material rather than an exact copy of the presented material.
HOW ARE LIMITED COGNITIVE RESOURCES ALLOCATED?
The constraints on our processing capac-ity force us to make decisions about which pieces of incoming information to pay at-tention to, the degree to which we should build connections among the selected pieces of information, and the degree to which we should build connections between se-lected pieces of information and our existing knowledge.metacognitive strategies are tech-niques for allocating, monitoring coordinat-ing, and adjusting these limited cognitive re-sources. These strategies are at the heart of what Baddeley (1986, 1999) calls the central executive — the system that controls the al-location of cognitive resources — and play a central role in modern theories of intel-ligence (Sternberg, 1990).
Active Processing Assumption
The third assumption is that humans ac- )
tively engage in cognitive processing in or- der to construct a coherent mental repre- l sentation of their experiences. These active cognitive processes include paying attention, (organizing incoming information, and in-tegrating incoming information with other knowledge. In short, humans are active pro-cessors who seek to make sense of multime-dia presentations. This view of humans as active processors conflicts with a common view of humans as passive processors who seek to add as much information as possible to memory that is, as tape recorders who file copies of their experiences in memory to be retrieved later.
Evaluation
The theory is very applicable since it plays a vital role in the process of learning sinc it impress learners and motivate them, Audio, txt graphs and video encourage the attendancy of the chilndern
It also faciitate easy understanding of the concept
Conclusion
Historical Overview
The cognitive theory of multimedia learning has evolved within the body of research pa-pers produced by my colleagues and me at the University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB) over the past 15 years. Although the name has changed over the years, the underlying elements of the theory — that is, dual channels, limited capacity, and ac-tive processing — have remained constant. orne names used early in the research pro-ram — such as "model of meaningful learn- g" (Mayer, 1989) and "cognitive conditions for effective illustrations" (Mayer & Gallini, 1990) — emphasized the active processing el-ement. Other names used later — such as
COGNITIVE THEORY OF MULTIMEDIA LEARNING 45
dual-coding model" (Mayer & Anderson, 1991, 1992) and "dual-processing model of multimedia learning" (Mayer & Moreno, 1998; Mayer, Moreno, Boire, & Vagge, 1999) — emphasized the dual-channels ele-ment. Yet other names — such as "generative theory" (Mayer, Steinhoff, Bower, & Mars, 1995) and "generative theory of multimedia learning" (Mayer, 1997; Plass, Chun, Mayer, & Leutner, 1998) — emphasized all three el-ements. The current name, "cognitive the-ory of multimedia learning," was used in Mayer, Bove, Bryman, Mars, and Tapangco (1996), Moreno and Mayer (2000), and Mayer, Heiser, and Lonn (2001), and was se-lected for use in major reviews (Mayer, 2001, 2002, 2003a; Mayer & Moreno, 2003
MUCHAS GRACIAS AMIGO......!!!!! PAINTER