Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T14:08:48.994Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

38 - Multimedia Learning with Animated Pedagogical Agents

from Part VIII - Multimedia Learning with Media

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2021

Richard E. Mayer
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Barbara
Logan Fiorella
Affiliation:
University of Georgia
Get access

Summary

A pedagogical agent (PA) is a computerized humanlike onscreen image whose purpose is to guide the learner’s attention and facilitate learning. In this chapter, the main findings from research on pedagogical agents are reviewed and a meta-analysis is used to reveal the specific role of PAs on learning outcomes, yielding an effect size of g = .45 on transfer performance and g = .23 on retention performance. We also examine explanations for why PAs could have a positive effect on learning performance based on social agency theory, the embodiment principle, and the signaling principle. In addition, this chapter summarizes the main moderating variables for the effect of PAs, including characteristics of the learner such as the learner's prior knowledge, characteristics of the learning environment such as the subject matter, and characteristics of the PA such as voice and gesture.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

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

Atkinson, R. K. (2002). Optimizing learning from examples using animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 416427.Google Scholar
Atkinson, R. K., Mayer, R. E., & Merrill, M. M. (2005). Fostering social agency in multimedia learning: Examining the impact of an animated agent’s voice. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(1), 117139.Google Scholar
Azevedo, R., Landis, R. S., Feyzi-Behnagh, R., Duffy, M., Trevors, G., Harley, J., Bouchet, F., Burlison, J., Taub, M., & Pacampara, N., Yeasin, M., Rahman, A. K. M. M., Tanveer, M. I., & Hossain, G. (2012). The effectiveness of pedagogical agents’ prompting and feedback in facilitating co-adapted learning with MetaTutor. In Cerri, S. A., Clancey, W. J., Papadourakis, G., & Panourgia, K. (eds.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 212221). Amsterdam: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baylor, A. (2002). Expanding preservice teachers’ metacognitive awareness of instructional planning through pedagogical agents. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50, 522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baylor, A. L., & Kim, S. (2009). Designing nonverbal communication for pedagogical agents: When less is more. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 450457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beege, M., Schneider, S., Nebel, S., & Rey, G. D. (2020). Does the effect of enthusiasm in a pedagogical agent’s voice depend on mental load in the learner’s working memory? Computers in Human Behavior, 112, 106483.Google Scholar
Brucker, B., Ehlis, A. C., Häußinger, F., Fallgatter, A., & Gerjets, P. (2015). Watching corresponding gestures facilitates learning with animations by activating human mirror-neurons: An fNIRS study. Learning and Instruction, 36, 2737.Google Scholar
Carlotto, T., & Jaques, P. A. (2016). The effects of animated pedagogical agents in an English-as-a-foreign-language learning environment. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 95, 1526.Google Scholar
Choi, S., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Cognitive and affective benefits of an animated pedagogical agent for learning English as a second language. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(4), 441466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J. A. (1992). A Power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. M. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent properties, picture features and redundancy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 428434.Google Scholar
Craig, S. D., Twyford, J., Irigoyen, N., & Zipp, S. A. (2015). A test of spatial contiguity for virtual human’s gestures in multimedia learning environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(1), 314.Google Scholar
Davis, R. O. (2018). The impact of pedagogical agent gesturing in multimedia learning environments: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 24, 193209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dehn, D., & van Mulken, S. (2000). The impact of animated interface agents: A review of empirical research. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 52, 122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domagk, S. (2010). Do pedagogical agents facilitate learner motivation and learning outcomes? The role of the appeal of agent’s appearance and voice. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 22(2), 8497.Google Scholar
Dunsworth, Q., & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Fostering multimedia learning of science: Exploring the role of an animated agent’s image. Computers & Education, 49(3), 677690.Google Scholar
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000). Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics, 56(2), 455463.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ Clinical Research, 315, 629634.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Effects of observing the instructor draw diagrams on learning from multimedia messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(4), 528546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2018). What works and doesn’t work with instructional video. Computers in Human Behavior, 89, 465470.Google Scholar
Fiorella, L., Stull, A. T., Kuhlmann, S., & Mayer, R. E. (2019). Instructor presence in video lectures: The role of dynamic drawings, eye contact, and instructor visibility. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(7), 11621171.Google Scholar
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), 653665.Google Scholar
Frechette, C., & Moreno, R. (2010). The roles of animated pedagogical agents’ presence and nonverbal communication in multimedia learning environments. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 22, 6172.Google Scholar
Graesser, A., Jackson, G. T., Ventura, M., Mueller, J., & Hu, X. (2003). The impact of conversational navigational guides on the learning, use, and perceptions of users of a web site. Paper presented at the meeting of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Agent-Mediated Knowledge Management, March 2003, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1998). Fixed- and random-effects models in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 3, 486504.Google Scholar
Heidig, S., & Clarebout, G. (2011). Do pedagogical agents make a difference to student motivation and learning? Educational Research Review, 6(1), 2754.Google Scholar
Hong, Z. W., Chen, Y. L., & Lan, C. H. (2014). A courseware to script animated pedagogical agents in instructional material for elementary students in English education. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(5), 379394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, A. M., Ozogul, G., Moreno, R., & Reisslein, M. (2013). Pedagogical agent signaling of multiple visual engineering representations: The case of the young female agent. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(2), 319337.Google Scholar
Johnson, A. M., Ozogul, G., & Reisslein, M. (2015). Supporting multimedia learning with visual signalling and animated pedagogical agent: Moderating effects of prior knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(2), 97115.Google Scholar
Kalyuga, S. (2007). Expertise reversal effect and its implications for learner-tailored instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 19(4), 509539.Google Scholar
Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 2331.Google Scholar
Kang, S. (2014). The Effect of Animated Pedagogical Agent in Multimedia: The Role of Learner Characteristic and Learning Material [Master’s thesis]. Central China Normal University.Google Scholar
Kim, Y., Baylor, A. L., & Shen, E. (2007). Pedagogical agents as learning companions: The impact of agent emotion and gender. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(3), 220234.Google Scholar
Kizilkaya, G., & Askar, P. (2008). The effect of an embedded pedagogical agent on the students’ science achievement. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 5(4), 208216.Google Scholar
Li, W., Tong, Y., Wang, F., Kang, S., Liu, H., & Yang, C. (2016). Effect of animation pedagogical agent in multimedia learning: The role of learner’s experience and agent preference. Psychological Development and Education, 32(4), 453462.Google Scholar
Li, W., Wang, F., Mayer, R. E., & Liu, H. (2019). Getting the point: Which kinds of gestures by pedagogical agents improve multimedia learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(8), 13821395.Google Scholar
Lin, L., Atkinson, R. K., Christopherson, R. M., Joseph, S. S., & Harrison, C. J. (2013). Animated agents and learning: Does the type of verbal feedback they provide matter? Computers & Education, 67, 239249.Google Scholar
Lin, L., Ginns, P., Wang, T., & Zhang, P. (2020). Using a pedagogical agent to deliver conversational style instruction: What benefits can you obtain? Computers & Education, 143, 103658.Google Scholar
Louwerse, M. M., Graesser, A. C., Lu, S., & Mitchell, H. H. (2005). Social cues in animated conversational agents. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(6), 693704.Google Scholar
Lusk, M. M., & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Animated pedagogical agents: Does their degree of embodiment impact learning from static or animated worked examples? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21(6), 747764.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2005). The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2014a). Principles based on social cues in multimedia learning: Personalization, voice, image, and embodiment. In Mayer, R. E. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (2nd ed., pp. 345370). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2014b). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In Mayer, R. E. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (2nd ed., pp. 4371). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E., & DaPra, C. S. (2012). An embodiment effect in computer-based learning with animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 18(3), 239252.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Dow, G. T., & Mayer, S. (2003). Multimedia learning in an interactive self-explaining environment: What works in the design of agent-based microworlds? Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 806812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E., & Fiorella, L. (2014). Principle for reducing extraneous processing in multimedia learning: Coherence, signaling, redundancy, spatial contiguity, and temporal contiguity principles. In Mayer, R. E. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (2nd ed., pp. 279315). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Sobko, K., & Mautone, P. D. (2003). Social cues in multimedia learning: Role of speaker’s voice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 419425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, R., & Flowerday, T. (2006). Students’ choice of animated pedagogical agents in science learning: A test of the similarity–attraction hypothesis on gender and ethnicity. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31(2), 186207.Google Scholar
Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction, 19(2), 177213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, R., Reislein, M., & Ozogul, G. (2010). Using virtual peers to guide visual attention during learning. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 22, 5260.Google Scholar
Moundridou, M., & Virvou, M. (2002). Evaluating the persona effect of an interface agent in a tutoring system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(3), 253261.Google Scholar
Nye, B. D., Graesser, A. C., & Hu, X. (2014). Multimedia learning with intelligent tutoring systems. In Mayer, R. E. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (2nd ed., pp. 705728). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ozogul, G., Johnson, A. M., Atkinson, R. K., & Reisslein, M. (2013). Investigating the impact of pedagogical agent gender matching and learner choice on learning outcomes and perceptions. Computers & Education, 67, 3650.Google Scholar
Park, S. (2015). The effects of social cue principles on cognitive load, situational interest, motivation, and achievement in pedagogical agent multimedia learning. Educational Technology & Society, 18(4), 211229.Google Scholar
Plant, E. A., Baylor, A. L., Doerr, C. E., & Rosenberg-Kima, R. B. (2009). Changing middle-school students’ attitudes and performance regarding engineering with computer based social models. Computers & Education, 53(2), 209215.Google Scholar
Rodicio, H. G., & Sánchez, E. (2012). Aids to computer-based multimedia learning: A comparison of human tutoring and computer support. Interactive Learning Environments, 20(5), 423439.Google Scholar
Schroeder, N. L. (2017). The influence of a pedagogical agent on learners’ cognitive load. Educational Technology & Society, 20(4), 138147.Google Scholar
Schroeder, N. L., & Adesope, O. O. (2014). A systematic review of pedagogical agents’ persona, motivation, and cognitive load implications for learners. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(3), 229251.Google Scholar
Schroeder, N. L., Adesope, O. O., & Gilbert, R. B. (2013). How effective are pedagogical agents for learning? A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(1), 139.Google Scholar
Singer, M., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2005). Children learn when their teacher’s gestures and speech differ. Psychological Science, 16, 8589.Google Scholar
van der Meij, H., van der Meij, J., & Harmsen, R. (2015). Animated pedagogical agents effects on enhancing student motivation and learning in a science inquiry learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(3), 381403.Google Scholar
van Gog, T. (2014). The signaling (or cueing) principle in multimedia learning. In Mayer, R. E. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (2nd ed., pp. 263278). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
van Vugt, H. C., Konijn, E. A., Hoorn, J. F., Keur, I., & Eliëns, A. (2007). Realism is not all! User engagement with task-related. Interacting with Computers, 19, 267280.Google Scholar
Wang, F., Li, W., Mayer, R. E., & Liu, H. (2018). Animated pedagogical agents as aids in multimedia learning: Effects on eye-fixations during learning and learning outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(2), 250268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, F., Li, W., Xie, H., & Liu, H. (2017). Is pedagogical agent in multimedia learning good for learning? A meta-analysis. Advances in Psychological Science, 25, 1228.Google Scholar
Ward, W., Cole, R., & Bolaños, D. (2013). My science tutor: A conversational multimedia virtual tutor. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 11151125.Google Scholar
Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625636.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xie, H., Mayer, R. E., Wang, F., & Zhou, Z. (2019). Coordinating visual and auditory cueing in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(2), 235255.Google Scholar
Yilmaz, R., & Kılıç-Çakmak, E. (2012). Educational interface agents as social models to influence learner achievement, attitude and retention of learning. Computers & Education, 59(2), 828838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yung, H. I. (2009). Effects of an animated pedagogical agent with instructional strategies in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 18(1), 113126.Google Scholar
Yung, H. I., & Paas, F. (2015). Effects of cueing by a pedagogical agent in an instructional animation: A cognitive load approach. Educational Technology and Society, 18, 153160.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] 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
×