Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • 18 - The Worked Example Principle in Multimedia Learning

  • from Part IV - Principles for Reducing Extraneous Processing in Multimedia Learning
  • Edited by Richard E. Mayer, University of California, Santa Barbara, Logan Fiorella, University of Georgia
  • Book:
    The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning
    Published online:
    19 November 2021
    Print publication:
    09 December 2021, pp 231-240

  • Summary

    This chapter outlines the tight connections between multimedia learning and worked examples in that worked examples can make multimedia learning more effective, and applying instructional multimedia guidelines makes learning from worked examples more effective. The to-be-expected effect sizes when using worked examples are discussed, and the theoretical rationale of the worked-example effect is explained (e.g., example study replaces unproductive learning by problem-solving). In addition, a set of instructional guidelines for optimizing learning from worked examples is derived from findings on factors that moderate the worked-example effect, such as fading worked steps or including incorrectly worked examples. Furthermore, the theoretical implications of the general pattern of findings on worked examples are discussed (e.g., with respect to the role of generative learning or extraneous processing). Finally, important questions to be addressed in further research are proposed.

  • When Instructional Guidance is Needed

  • Ouhao Chen, Slava Kalyuga, John Sweller
  • Journal:
    The Educational and Developmental Psychologist / Volume 33 / Issue 2 / December 2016
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    05 October 2016, pp. 149-162
    Print publication:
    December 2016
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation

  • Studying worked examples providing problem solutions to learners usually leads to better test performance than solving the equivalent problems without guidance, demonstrating the worked-example effect. The generation effect occurs when learners who generate answers without guidance learn better than those who read answers that provide guidance. The contradiction between these results can be hypothesised to be due to differences in the element interactivity of the learning tasks. Primary school students in Year 6 participated in the experiment, which investigated the hypothesis by using geometry materials. A disordinal interaction was obtained between levels of guidance and levels of element interactivity. Higher levels of guidance facilitated learning using high element interactivity information, while lower levels of guidance facilitated learning for low element interactivity information. Cognitive load theory was used to explain these contrasting results. From an educational perspective, it was suggested that when determining levels of guidance, a consideration of element interactivity is essential.