Facilitating student attention with multimedia presentations: examining the effects of segmented PowerPoint presentations on student learning

References

• Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. (Abr. ed., pp. 63–91). New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Apperson, J. M., Laws, E. L., & Scepansky, J. A. (2006). The impact of presentation graphics on students’ experience in the classroom. Computers & Education, 47, 116–126. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2004.09.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Astin, A. W., & Oseguera, L. (2005). Degree attainment rates at American colleges and universities. Los Angeles, CA: Higher Education Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Barron, K. E., & Hulleman, C. S. (2015). Expectancy-value-cost model of motivation. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2nd ed., Vol. 8, pp. 503–509). Oxford: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Bolkan, S. (2017a). Development and validation of the clarity indicators scale. Communication Education, 66, 19–36. doi: 10.1080/03634523.2016.1202994
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolkan, S. (2017b). Instructor clarity, generative processes, and mastery goals: Examining the effects of signaling on student learning. Communication Education, 66, 385–401. doi: 10.1080/03634523.2017.1313438
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolkan, S., Goodboy, A. K., & Kelsey, D. (2016). Instructor clarity and student motivation: Academic performance as a product of students’ ability and motivation to process instructional material. Communication Education, 65, 129–148. doi: 10.1080/03634523.2015.1079329
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolkan, S., Goodboy, A. K., & Myers, S. A. (2017). Conditional processes of effective instructor communication and increases in students’ cognitive learning. Communication Education, 66, 129–147. doi: 10.1080/03634523.2016.1241889
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolkan, S., & Griffin, D. J. (2018). Catch and hold: Instructional interventions and their differential impact on student interest, attention, and autonomous motivation. Communication Education, 67, 269–286. doi: 10.1080/03634523.2018.1465193
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2007). Attention cueing as a means to enhance learning from an animation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 731–746. doi: 10.1002/acp.1346
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Koning, B. B., 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. doi: 10.1007/s10648-009-9098-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives (pp. 75–146). San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression based approach. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F. (2015). An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50, 1–22. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2014.962683
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill, A., Arford, T., Lubitow, A., & Smollin, L. M. (2012). “I’m ambivalent about it”: The dilemmas of PowerPoint. Teaching Sociology, 40, 242–256. doi: 10.1177/0092055X12444071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeffrey, L. M., Milne, J., Suddaby, G., & Higgins, A. (2014). Blended learning: How teachers balance the blend of online and classroom components. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 13, 121–140. doi: 10.28945/1968
   Google Scholar
• Jeung, H.-J., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). The role of visual indicators in dual sensory mode instruction. Educational Psychology, 17, 329–345. doi: 10.1080/0144341970170307
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, D. A., & Christensen, J. (2011). A comparison of simplified-visually rich and traditional presentation styles. Teaching of Psychology, 38, 293–297. doi: 10.1177/0098628311421333
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalyuga, S. (2010). Schema acquisition and sources of cognitive load. In J. L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brunken (Eds.), Cognitive load theory (pp. 48–64). New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kalyuga, S. (2012). Instructional benefits of spoken words: A review of cognitive load factors. Educational Research Review, 7, 145–159. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2011.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalyuga, S. (2014). The expertise reversal principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 576–597). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2004). When redundant on-screen text in multimedia technical instruction can interfere with learning. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 46, 567–581. doi: 10.1518/hfes.46.3.567.50405
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kosovich, J. J., Hulleman, C. S., Barron, K. E., & Getty, S. (2014). A practical measure of student motivation: Establishing validity evidence for the expectancy-value-cost scale in middle school. Journal of Early Adolescence, 35, 1–27. doi: 10.1177/0272431614556890
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation and the transient information effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 943–951. doi: 10.1002/acp.1787
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2016). Cognitive load theory and the effects of transient information on the modality effect. Instructional Science, 44, 107–123. doi: 10.1007/s11251-015-9362-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levasseur, D. G., & Kanan Sawyer, J. (2006). Pedagogy meets PowerPoint: A research review of the effects of computer-generated slides in the classroom. Review of Communication, 6, 101–123. doi: 10.1080/15358590600763383
   Google Scholar
• Lin, L., & Atkinson, R. K. (2011). Using animations and visual cueing to support learning of scientific concepts and processes. Computers & Education, 56, 650–658. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorch Jr., R. F., & Lorch, E. P. (1996). Effects of headings on text recall and summarization. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 261–278. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1996.0022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00848.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahar, S., Yaylacicegi, U., & Janicki, T. N. (2009). Less is more when developing PowerPoint animations. Information Systems Education Journal, 7, 3–11.
   Google Scholar
• Mayer, R. E. (2008). Applying the science of learning: Evidence-based principles for the design of multimedia instruction. American Psychologist, 63, 760–769. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.63.8.760
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multi-media learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 43–52. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, S. T., & James, C. R. (2011). The effect of animations within PowerPoint presentation on learning introductory astronomy. Astronomy Education Review, 10. doi: 10.3847/AER2010041
   Google Scholar
• Moreno, R. (2005). Instructional technology: Promises and pitfalls. In L. PytlikZillig, M. Bodvarsson, & R. Bruning (Eds.), Technology-based education: Bringing researchers and practitioners together (pp. 1–19). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Moreno, R. (2006). Does the modality principle hold for different media? A test of the method affects-learning hypothesis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 149–158. doi:10.1111/j.1365–2729.2006.00170.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00170.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 156–163. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.94.1.156 doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.94.1.156
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nowak, M. K., Speakman, E., & Sayers, P. (2016). Evaluating PowerPoint presentations: A retrospective study examining educational barriers and strategies. Nursing Education Perspectives, 37, 28–31. doi: 10.5480/14-1418
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paas, F. G. W. C. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 4, 429–434. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, T. W. M. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38, 63–71. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3801_8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
   Google Scholar
• Robbins, S. B., Lauver, K., Le, H., Davis, D., Langley, R., & Carlstrom, A. (2004). Do psychological and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 261–288. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.130.2.261
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapiro, E. L., Kerssen-Griep, J., Gayle, B. M., & Allen, M. (2006). How powerful is PowerPoint? Analyzing the educational effects of desktop presentational programs in the classroom. In B. M. Gayle, R. W. Preiss, N. Burrell, & M. Allen (Eds.), Classroom communication and instructional processes: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 61–75). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Spanjers, I. A. E., van Gog, T., & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2010). A theoretical analysis of how segmentation of dynamic visualizations optimizes students’ learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 411–423. doi: 10.1007/s10648-010-9135-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spanjers, I. A. E., Wouters, P., van Gog, T., & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2011). An expertise reversal effect of segmentation in learning from animated worked-out examples. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 46–52. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.05.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparkman, L. A., Maulding, W. S., & Roberts, J. G. (2012). Non-cognitive predictors of student success in college. College Student Journal, 46, 642–652.
   Google Scholar
• Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251–296. doi: 10.1023/A:1022193728205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sugahara, S., & Boland, G. 2006. The effectiveness of PowerPoint presentations in the accounting classroom. Accounting Education: An International Journal, 15, 391–403. doi:10.1080=09639280601011099
   Google Scholar
• Szabo, A., & Hastings, N. (2000). Using IT in the undergraduate classroom: Should we replace the blackboard with PowerPoint? Computers & Education, 35, 175–187. doi: 10.1016/S0360-1315(00)00030-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong, A., Leahy, W., Marcus, N., & Sweller, J. (2012). Cognitive load theory, the transient information effect and e-learning. Learning and Instruction, 22, 449–457. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.05.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wouters, P., Paas, F., & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2008). How to optimize learning from animated models: A review of guidelines based on cognitive load. Review of Educational Research, 78, 645–675. doi: 10.3102/0034654308320320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar