Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Features of Computerized Multimedia Environments that Support Vicarious Learning Processes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
New Science of Learning

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to identify specific features of computer-based multimedia environments that support vicarious learning. As used here vicarious learning occurs in contexts, such as distance learning and some classroom settings, in which learners have no opportunities to physically interact in any way with the source of the content they are attempting to master. We primarily focus on research that identified features of multimedia environments that support vicarious comprehension/learning processes and how these features have been (or may be) readily implemented. Research findings from laboratory-style research in these environments are quite promising. For example, providing multiple perspectives on new information and using a personalized presentation style improve comprehension, but these findings have not been widely implemented in web-based environments or in classroom applications. Similarly, introducing new course content in the context of vicarious deep questions enhances learning, as does providing explanations that state something beyond the information given. We also explore selected research in which learners engaged in supplemental overt activities designed to support learning gains in otherwise vicarious environments. The intent in this latter section is to suggest how vicarious analogs of these overt activities may be readily implemented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ainsworth, S., & Burcham, S. (2007). The impact of text coherence on learning by self-explanation. Learning and Instruction, 17, 286–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, A. (1995). Negotiating coherence in dialogue. In M. A. Gernsbacher & T. Givon (Eds.), Coherence in spontaneous text (pp. 1–40). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, A. H., Clark, A., & Mullin, J. (1994). Interactive skills in children. Journal of Child Language, 21, 1–25.

    Article  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), 117–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, J. M. (1906). Mental development in the child and the race (3rd rev. ed.). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1962). Social learning through imitation. In M. R. Jones (Ed.), Nebraska symposium of motivation (pp. 211–269). Lincoln, NB: University of Nebraska Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. (1963). Vicarious reinforcement and initiative learning. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 601–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, L., McKeown, M. G., Sandora, C., Kucan, L., & Worthy, J. (1996). Questioning the author: A yearlong classroom implementation to engage students in text. Elementary School Journal, 96, 385–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1. Cognitive Domain. New York: McKay.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B. S. (1964). The 2-Sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Research, 13, 4–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B. S. (1984). The 2-sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Research, 13, 4–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Britton, B. K., & Gulgoz, S. (1991). Using Kintsch’s computational model to improve instructional text: Effects of repairing inference calls on recall and cognitive structures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 329–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G., Anderson, A. H., Shillcock, R., & Yule, G. (1984). Teaching talk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, K. R. (2006). Learning from text with diagrams: promoting mental model development and inference generation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 182–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1992). The split-attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, 233–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H. (2000). Self-explaining expository texts: The dual processes of generating inferences and repairing mental models. In Glaser, R. (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (pp. 161–238). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Roy, M., & Hausmann, R. G. M. (2008). Observing tutorial dialogues collaboratively: Insights about human tutoring effectiveness from vicarious learning. Cognitive Science, 32, 301–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S. A., Jeong, H., Yamauchi, T., & Hausmann, R. G. (2001). Learning from human tutoring. Cognitive Science, 25, 471–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., de Leew, N., Chiu, M., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. C. (1982). Educational outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 237–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, R., McKendree, J., Tobin, R., Lee, J., & Mayes, T. (1999). Vicarious learning from dialogue and discourse. Instructional Science, 27, 431–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, S. D., Brittingham, J., Williams, J., Cheney, K. R., & Gholson, B. (2009). Incorporating vicarious learning environments with discourse scaffolds into physics classrooms. In V. Dimitrova, R. Mizoguchi, B. du Boulay, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Artificial Intelligence in Education, Building learning systems that care: From Knowledge representation to affective modeling (680–682). Washington, DC: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, S. D., Chi, M. T. H., & VanLehn, K. (2009). Improving classroom learning by collaboratively observing human tutoring videos while problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology 101, 779–789.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, S. D., Driscoll, D., & Gholson, B. (2004). Constructing knowledge from dialogue in an intelligent tutoring system: Interactive learning, vicarious learning, and pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13, 163–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent properties, picture features, and redundancy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 428–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., Ventura, M., Graesser, A. C., & The Tutoring Research Group. (2000). Overhearing dialogues and monologues in virtual tutoring sessions: Effects on questioning and vicarious learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11, 242–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, S. D., Sullins, J., Witherspoon, A., & Gholson, B. (2006). The deep-level- reasoning-question effect: The role of dialogue and deep-level reasoning questions during vicarious learning. Cognition and Instruction, 24(4), 565–591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davey, B., & McBride, S. (1986). Effects of question generating training on reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 256–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, J. T. (1988). Questioning and teaching: A manual of practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, A., & Gabbard, R. (1998). Hypermedia as an educational technology: A review of the quantitative research literature on leaning comprehension, control, and style. Review of Educational Research, 68, 322–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll, D., Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., Ventura, M., Hu, X., & Graesser, A. (2003). Vicarious learning: Effects of overhearing dialogue and monologue-like discourse in a virtual tutoring session. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 29, 431–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H. (1963). The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fox Tree, J. E. (1999). Listening in on monologues and dialogues. Discourse Processes, 27, 35–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox Tree, J. E., & Mayer, S. A. (2008). Overhearing single and multiple perspectives. Discourse Processes, 45, 160–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gavelek, J., & Raphael, T. (1985). Metacognition, instruction, and the role of questioning activities. In D. Forrest-Pressley, G. MacKinnon, & T. Waller (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition, and human performance. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ge, X., Chen, C.-H., & Davis, K. K. (2005). Scaffolding novice instructional designers: Problem-solving processes using question prompts in a web-based learning environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 33, 219–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2003). Scaffolding students’ problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gholson, B., & Craig, S. D. (2006). Promoting constructive activities that support learning during computer-based instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 119–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gholson, B., Witherspoon, A., Morgan, B., Brittingham, J., Coles, R., Graesser, A. C., Sullins, J., & Craig, S. D. (2009). Exploring the deep-level reasoning questions effect during vicarious learning among eighth to eleventh graders in the domains of computer literacy and Newtonian physics. Instructional Science, 37, 487–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., Baggett, W., & Williams, K. (1996). Question-driven explanatory reasoning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, S17–S32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., Lu, S., Jackson, G. T., Mitchell, H., Ventura, M., Olney, A., & Louwerse, M. M. (2004). AutoTutor: A tutor with dialogue in natural language behavior research methods. Instruments & Computers, 36, 180–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., & Person, N. (1994). Question asking during tutoring. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 104–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A. C., Person, N., Harter, D., & The Tutoring Research Group (2001). Teaching tactics and dialog in auto tutor. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 257–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics (Vol. 3, pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausmann, R. G. M., & Chi, M. T. H. (2002). Can a computer interface support self- explaining? Cognitive Technology, 7, 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausmann, R. G. M., & VanLehn, K. (2007). Explaining self-explaining: A contrast between content and generation. Paper presented at the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Marina Del Rey, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, C. L. (1920). Quantitative aspects of the evolution of concepts, an experimental study. Psychological Monographs, 28, (1, Whole No. 123).

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphrey, G. (1921). Imitation and the conditioned reflex. Pedagogical Seminary, 28, 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York: Holt.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (1989). Effects of self-questioning training on college students’ comprehension of lectures. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 14, 366–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effect of teaching children how to question and explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 338–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, A., Staffieri, A., & Adelgais, A. (1998). Mutual peer tutoring: Effects of structuring tutorial interaction to scaffold peer learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 134–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W., Welsch, D. M., Schmalhofer, F., & Zimny, S. (1990). Sentence memory: Aetical analysis. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 133–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lepper, M. R. (1985). Microcomputers in education: Motivational and social issues. American Psychologist, 40, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, H., Kidwai, K., Munyofu, M., Swain, J., Ausman, B., & Dwyer, F. (2005). The effect of verbal advance organizers in complementing animated instruction. Journal of Visual Literacy, 25, 237–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorch, R. F. Jr., & Lorch, E. P. (1995). Effects of organizational signals on text processing strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 537–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Map Task Corpus: http://www.hcrc.ed.ac.uk/maptask/ (accessed: October 12, 2008).

  • Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., & 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, 390–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R.E., Fennell, S., Farmer, L., & Campbell, J. (2004). Personalization effect in multimedia learning: Students learn better when words are in conversational style rather than formal style. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 389–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 312–320.

    Article  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), 419–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDougall, W. (1926). An introduction to social psychology (Rev. ed.). Boston: John W. Luce.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKendree, J., Good, J., & Lee, J. (2001, June). Effects of dialogue characteristics on performance of overhearers. Presented at the International Conference on Communication, Problem-solving, and Learning. Strathclyde, Scotland.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKowen, M. G., Beck, I. L., Sanatra, G. M., & Loxterman, J. A. (1992). The contribution of prior knowledge and coherent text to comprehension. Reading research Quarterly, 27, 78–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S. (2001). Reading both high coherence and effects of text sequence and prior knowledge. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology-Revue Canadienne De Psychologie Experimentale, 55, 51–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., & Kintsch, W (1996). Learning from text: Effects of prior knowledge and coherence. Discourse Processes, 22, 247–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Butler Songer, N., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good tests always better? Interaction of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 1–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., Levinstein, I. B., & Boonthum, C. (2004). iStart: Interactive strategy training for active reading and thinking. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 222–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, D. S., & Shapiro, A. M. (2005). Multimedia and hypermedia solutions for promoting metacognitive engagement, coherence, and learning. Educational Computing Research, 33, 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, N. E., & Dollard, J. (1941). Social learning and imitation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). A coherence effect in multimedia learning: The case for minimizing irrelevant sounds in the design of multimedia instructional messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 117–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otero, J., & Kintsch, W. (1992). Failures to detect contradictions in text: What readers believe vs. what they read. Psychological Science, 3, 229–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, A. M. (1999). Structuring dyadic interaction through scripted cooperation. In O’Donnell, A. M. & King, A. (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (pp. 179–196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension fostering and comprehension monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence. Madison, CT: International University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1968). The mental development of the child. In D. Elkind (Ed.), Six psychological studies (pp. 3–73). New York: Vintage Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, T. B., Kuiper, N. A., & Kirker, W. S. (1977). Self reference and the encoding of personal information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 677–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to ask questions: A review of intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66, 181–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, T. L., & Bandura, A. (1978). Psychological modeling: Theory and practice. In S. L. Garfield & A. E. Bergin (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change: An empirical analysis. (2nd ed., pp. 621–658). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. L., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1978). Social learning and cognition. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy, M., & Chi, M. T. H. (2005). The self-explanation principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 271–286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Learning to collaborate: An instructional approach to promoting problem-solving in computer-mediated settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 201–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scardamelia, M., Bereiter, C., Brett, C., Burtis, P. J., Calhoun, C., & Smith Lea, N. (1992). Educational applications of a networked communal database. Interactive Learning Environments, 2(1), 45–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnotz, W., Boeckheler, J., & Grozondziel, H. (1997). Individual and co-operative acquisition of knowledge with static and animated pictures in computer-based learning environments. Proceedings of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI) (pp. 182–183). Gutenberg University Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schober, M. F., & Clark, H. H. (1989). Understanding by addressees and overhearers. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 211–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S., & Guthrie, E. R. (1921). General psychology in terms of behavior. New York: Appleton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stasko, J., Badre, A., & Lewis, C. (1993). Do algorithm animations assist learning? An empirical study and analysis. Proceedings of the INTERCHI ‘93 conference of human factors in computing systems (pp. 61–66). The Netherlands: Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning, Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4, 295–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Symons, C. S., & Johnson, B. T. (1997). The self-reliance effect in memory: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 371–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike, E. L. (1911). Animal intelligence: Experimental studies. New York: MacMillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Meij, H. (1988). Constraints on question asking in classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 401–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VanLehn, K., Graesser, A. C., Jackson, G. T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., & Rose, C. P. (2007). Natural language tutoring: A comparison of human tutors, computer tutors and text. Cognitive Science, 31, 3–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidale-Abarca, E., Martinez, G., & Gilbert, R. (2000). Two procedures to improve instructional text: Effects on memory and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 107–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, J. B. (1914). Behavior: An introduction to comparative psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, M. D. (1996). Learner-control and instructional technologies. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 957–983). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant # R305H0R0169 to The University of Memphis. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, The University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, 38152, USA

    Barry Gholson, Roby Coles & Scotty D. Craig

Authors
  1. Barry Gholson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roby Coles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Scotty D. Craig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barry Gholson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Emirates College for Advanced Education, Abu Dhabi, POBox 1266, Utd.Arab.Emir.

    Myint Swe Khine

  2. Emirates College for Advanced Education, Abu Dhabi, PO Box 126, Utd.Arab.Emir.

    Issa M. Saleh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gholson, B., Coles, R., Craig, S.D. (2010). Features of Computerized Multimedia Environments that Support Vicarious Learning Processes. In: Khine, M., Saleh, I. (eds) New Science of Learning. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5716-0_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation