Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T16:39:24.356Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

21 - Prior Knowledge Principle in Multimedia Learning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Slava Kalyuga
Affiliation:
University of New South Wales
Richard Mayer
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Barbara
Get access

Summary

Abstract

This chapter summarizes research and theory concerned with the effects of learner prior knowledge on multimedia learning principles. In many situations, design principles that help low-knowledge learners may not help or even hinder high-knowledge learners. The main theoretical issue associated with the prior knowledge principle concerns the integration in working memory of instructional information with information held in long-term memory. The major implication for instructional design is the need to tailor instructional formats and procedures to changing levels of expertise. Essential future research directions include identifying instructional procedures that are optimal for different levels of expertise and developing viable instruments of cognitive diagnosis of schematic knowledge structures suitable for real-time online evaluation of learner progress.

What Is the Prior Knowledge Principle?

Design principles for multimedia learning environments depend on the prior knowledge of the learner: design principles that help low-knowledge learners may not help or even hinder high-knowledge learners. Many multimedia design recommendations do not explicitly refer to learner knowledge levels, although most of them have only been tested in experiments with learners who had limited experience in the relevant domain. Could the same recommendation be applied to more experienced learners? Experienced or high-knowledge learners are considered learners who have substantial previously acquired knowledge in a specific domain and who are involved in learning relatively new, more advanced information in this domain. The evidence suggests that multimedia design recommendations for such learners should be different, sometimes contrary to recommendations for novice learners.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Carney, R. N., & Levin, J. R. (2002). Pictorial illustrations still improve students' learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 5–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorisation and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chi, M. T. H., & Glaser, R. (1985). Problem solving ability. In Sternberg, R. (Ed.), Human abilities: An information processing approach, (pp. 227–250). San Francisco: FreemanGoogle Scholar
Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Farr, M. J. (Eds.). (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Cooper, G., Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2001). Learning by imagining procedures and concepts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 68–82Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J., & Snow, R. E. (1977). Aptitudes and instructional methods: A handbook for research on interaction. New York: Irvington PublishersGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory. Psychological Review, 102, 211–245CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ericsson, K. A., & Smith, J. (Eds.). (1991). Toward a general theory of expertise. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Hegarty, M., Quilici, J., Narayanan, N. H., Holmquist, S., & Moreno, R. (1999). Multimedia instruction: Lessons from evaluation of a theory-based design. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 8, 119–150Google Scholar
Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). Expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38, 23–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1998). Levels of expertise and instructional design. Human Factors, 40, 1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2000). Incorporating learner experience into the design of multimedia instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 126–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2001). Learner experience and efficiency of instructional guidance. Educational Psychology, 21, 5–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., Tuovinen, J., & Sweller, J. (2001). When problem solving is superior to studying worked examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 579–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61, 179–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levie, W., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30, 195–232Google Scholar
Lohman, D. F. (1986). Predicting mathemathanic effects in the teaching of higher-order thinking skills. Educational Psychologist, 21, 191–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, R. K. (1993). Constructing a mental representation from an abstract technical diagram. Learning and Instruction, 3, 157–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (1989). Models for understanding. Review of Educational Research, 59, 43–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (1993). Comprehension of graphics in texts: An overview. Learning and Instruction, 3, 239–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (1999). Research-based principles for the design of instructional messages. The case of multimedia explanations. Document Design, 1, 7–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R., & 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, 390–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R., & Gallini, J. (1990). When is an illustration worth ten thousand words? Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 715–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Steinhoff, K., Bower, G., & Mars, R. (1995). A generative theory of textbook design: Using annotated illustrations to foster meaningful learning of science text. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43, 31–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R., Stiehl, C., & Greeno, J. (1975). Acquisition of understanding and skill in relation to subjects' preparation and meaningfulness of instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 331–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ollerenshaw, A., Aidman, E., & Kidd, G. (1997). Is an illustration always worth ten thousand words? Effects of prior knowledge, learning style, and multimedia illustrations on text comprehension. International Journal of Instructional Media, 24, 227–238Google Scholar
Pollock, E., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2002). Assimilating complex information. Learning and Instruction, 12, 61–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reimann, P., & Chi, M. T. H. (1989). Human expertise. In Gilhooly, K. J. (Ed.), Human and machine problem solving (pp. 161–191. New York: Plenum PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renkl, A. (1997). Learning from worked-out examples: A study on individual differences. Cognitive Science, 21, 1–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renkl, A., & Atkinson, R. (2003). Structuring the transition from example study to problem solving in cognitive skills acquisition: A cognitive load perspective. Educational Psychologist, 38, 15–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renkl, A., Atkinson, R. K., & Maier, U. H. (2000). From studying examples to solving problems: Fading worked-out solution steps helps learning. In Gleitman, L. & Joshi, A. K. (Eds.), Proceeding of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 393–398). Mahwah, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Renkl, A., Atkinson, R., Maier, U., & Staley, R. (2002). From example study to problem solving: Smooth transitions help learning. Journal of Experimental Education, 70, 293–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schnotz, W. (2002). Towards an integrated view of learning from text and visual displays. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 101–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schnotz, W., Picard, E., & Hron, A. (1993). How do successful and unsuccessful learners use text and graphics?Learning and Instruction, 3, 181–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, R., & Lohman, D. (1984). Toward a theory of cognitive aptitude for learning from instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 347–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Frensch, P. A. (Eds.). (1991). Complex problem solving: Principles and mechanisms. Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Sweller, J. (2003). Evolution of human cognitive architecture. In Ross, B. (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 43 (pp. 215–266). San Diego: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
Tuovinen, J., & Sweller, J. (1999). A comparison of cognitive load associated with discovery learning and worked examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 334–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merriënboer, J. J. G. (1990). Strategies for programming instruction in high school: Program completion vs. program generation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 6, 265–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Croock, M. B. M. (1992). Strategies for computer-based programming instruction: Program completion vs. program generation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8, 365–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merriënboer, J. J. G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kester, L. (2003). Taking the load off a learner's mind: Instructional design principles for complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 5–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1989). Automation and schema acquisition in learning elementary computer programming: Implications for the design of practice. Computers in Human Behavior, 6, 273–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verdi, M. P., & Kulhavy, R. W. (2002). Learning with maps and texts: An overview. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 27–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×