Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T15:48:45.209Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - An Integrated Model of Text and Picture Comprehension

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Wolfgang Schnotz
Affiliation:
Faculty of Psychology, University of Koblenz-Landau, Germany
Richard Mayer
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Barbara
Get access

Summary

Abstract

This chapter presents an integrated model of text and picture comprehension that takes into account that learners can use multiple sensory modalities. The model encompasses reading comprehension, listening comprehension, visual picture comprehension, and sound comprehension (i.e., auditory picture comprehension). The model's cognitive architecture consists of sensory registers, working memory, and long-term memory. It furthermore includes a cognitive level and a perceptual level. The cognitive level is characterized by two representational channels: a verbal channel and a pictorial channel. The perceptual level is characterized by multiple sensory channels. After presenting the model, the chapter derives predictions, which can be empirically tested. It reports research findings that can be explained by the model, and it derives practical suggestions for instructional design. Finally, the chapter discusses limitations of the model and points out directions for further research.

Introduction

The term multimedia means different things on different levels. On the level of technology, it means the use of multiple delivery media such as computers, screens, and loudspeakers. On the level of presentation formats, it means the use of different forms of representation such as texts and pictures. On the level of sensory modalities, it means the use of multiple senses such as the eye and the ear. The level of technology is of course very important in practice, but it is not of high interest from a psychological point of view, because comprehension is not fundamentally different when a text passage is delivered either by a computer screen or by a printed book, or if a picture is presented by a poster or by a slide.

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

Adams, B. C., Bell, L., & Perfetti, C. (1995). A trading relationship between reading skill and domain knowledge in children's text comprehension. Discourse Processes, 20, 307–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33, 131–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1971). The control of short-term memory. Scientific American, 225, 82–90CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working memory. Oxford, England: Clarendon PressGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baddeley, A. (2000). The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory?Trends in Cognitive Science, 4, 417–423CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carney, R. N., & Levin, J. R. (2002). Pictorial illustrations still improve students' learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 5–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1996). Cognitive load while learning to use a computer program. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 151–1703.0.CO;2-U>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comenius, J. A. (1999). Orbis pictus (Facsimile of the 1887 edition). Whitefish, MT: Kessinger PublishingGoogle Scholar
Cooney, J. B., & Swanson, H. L. (1987). Memory and learning disabilities: An overview. In Swanson, H. L. (Ed.), Memory and learning disabilities: Advances in learning and behavioral disabilities (pp. 1–40). Greenwich, CT: JAIGoogle Scholar
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1983). Individual differences in integrating information between and within sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 561–583Google Scholar
Dutke, S. (1996). Generic and generative knowledge: Memory schemata in the construction of mental models. In Battmann, W. & Dutke, S. (Eds.), Processes of the molar regulation of behavior (pp. 35–54). Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science PublishersGoogle Scholar
Ellis, A. W., & Young, A. W. (1996). Human cognitive neuropsychology. London: Taylor & FrancisGoogle Scholar
Friedman, N. P., & Miyake, A. (2000). Differential roles for visuospatial and verbal working memory in situation model construction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 61–83CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graesser, A. C., Millis, K. K., & Zwaan, R. A. (1997). Discourse comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 163–189CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle 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
Kintsch, W., & Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, J. R., Moore, P. J., & Schofield, N. J. (1988). Verbal and visual learning styles. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 13, 169–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knauff, M., & Johnson-Laird, P. (2002). Visual imagery can impede reasoning. Memory and Cognition, 30, 363–371CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kosslyn, S. M. (1994). Image and brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Kulhavy, R. W., Stock, W. A., & Caterino, L. C. (1994). Reference maps as a framework for remembering text. In Schnotz, W. & Kulhavy, R. W. (Eds.), Comprehension of graphics (pp. 153–162). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science B.V.Google Scholar
Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levie, H. W., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30, 195–232Google Scholar
Levin, J. R., Anglin, G. J., & Carney, R. N. (1987). On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. In Willows, D. M. & Houghton, H. A., (Eds.), The psychology of illustration. Vol. 1 (pp. 51–86). New York: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, R. K. (1996). Background knowledge and the construction of a situational representation from a diagram. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 11, 377–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E., (1989). Constructing more meaningful relationships: Mnemonic instruction for special populations. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 83–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions?Educational Psychologist, 32, 1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E., & Gallini, J. K. (1990). When is an illustration worth ten thousand words?Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 715–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N. B., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 1–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, L. M. S., & Stine-Morrow, E. A. L. (1998). Aging and the effects of knowledge on on-line reading strategies. Journal of Gerontology: Psychology Sciences, 53B, 223–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Palmer, S. E., Rosch, E., & Chase, P. (1981). Canonical perspective and the perception of objects. In Long, J. & Baddeley, A. (Eds.), Attention and performance. Vol. 9 (p. 135–151). Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Peeck, J. (1989). Trends in the delayed use of information from an illustrated text. In Mandl, H. & Levin, J. R. (Eds.), Knowledge acquisition from text and pictures (pp. 263–277). Amsterdam: North HollandGoogle Scholar
Peirce, C. S. (1931–1958). Collected Writings (Vols. 1–8). (Eds. Hartshorne,, C.Weiss,, P. & Burks, A. W.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
Perfetti, C. A., & Britt, M. A. (1995). Where do propositions come from? In Weaver, C. A. III, Mannes, S., & Fletcher, C. R. (Eds.), Discourse comprehension. Essays in honor of Walter Kintsch (pp. 11–34). Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Plass, J. L., Chun, D. M., Mayer, R. E., & Leutner, D. (1998). Supporting visual and verbal learning preferences in a second-language multimedia learning environment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 25–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13, 141–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sims, V. K., & Hegarty, M. (1997). Mental animation in the visuospatial sketchpad: Evidence from dual-tasks studies. Memory and Cognition, 25, 321–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soederberg Miller, L. M. (2001). The effects of real-world knowledge on text processing among older adults. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 8, 137–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweller, J., Merriënboer, J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychological Review, 10, 251–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vallar, G., & Shallice, T. (Eds.) (1990). Neuropsychological impairments of short-term memory. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic PressGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@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
×