Do medium and Context Matter when learning from multiple complementary Digital texts and videos
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21335909 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Lucia Mason (0000-0001-7134-0510, University of Padua, corresponding author), Christian Tarchi (0000-0003-4013-4794, University of Florence), Angelica Ronconi (0000-0001-8944-8765, University of Padua), Lucia Manzione (0000-0001-9161-4785, University of Padua), Natalia Latini (University of Oslo), Ivar Bråten (0000-0002-9242-9087, University of Oslo) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 653-679 |
| Publication date | 2022-10-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Instructional Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-4277 • E-ISSN: 1573-1952 |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s11251-022-09591-8 |
| PMID | 36118135 |
| OpenAlex | W4295162281 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 61 |
Students more than ever learn from online sources, such as digital texts or videos. Little research has compared processes and outcomes across these two mediums. Using a between-participants experimental design, this study investigated whether medium (texts vs. videos) and context (less authoritative vs. more authoritative), independently and in concert, affected students’ engagement, integrated understanding, and calibration. The two mediums presented identical information on the topic of social media, which was distributed across two complementary texts in the text condition and across two complementary videos in the video condition. In the less authoritative context, the two information sources (texts or videos) were posted by a friend on Facebook; in the more authoritative context, the same information sources (texts or videos) were posted by a professor on Moodle. Results showed a main effect of medium on behavioral engagement in terms of processing time, as students used longer time watching the two videos than reading the two digital texts. No other main medium or context effects were statistically significant; nor were there any interaction effects of medium with context on any of the outcome variables. The findings are discussed in light of the alternative hypotheses that guided the study and the directions it suggests for future research
Cognitive science · Context (archaeology) · Educational psychology · Mathematics education · Multimedia · Computer Science · Educational Strategies and Epistemologies · History · Literacy, Media, and Education · Psychology · Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
Comparison of reading performance on screen and on paper
Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I
Social media, texting, and personality
Statistical Evidence in Experimental Psychology
Reading from paper compared to screens
Resolv
Assessing miserly information processing
What Are the Odds? A Practical Guide to Computing and Reporting Bayes Factors
Chapter 9 Toward a Comprehensive Model of Comprehension
Investigating the multidimensionality of engagement
Promoting Integration of Multiple Texts
Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning
G*Power 3
Using Internet videos to learn about controversies
Expository multimedia comprehension in E‐learning
Constructing a model of engagement in scientific inquiry
The Development and Testing of a New Version of the Cognitive Reflection Test Applying Item Response Theory (IRT)
Is This Information Source Commercially Biased? How Contradictions Between Web Pages Stimulate the Consideration of Source Information
Bayesian Model Selection in Social Research
On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability
The Challenges of Defining and Measuring Student Engagement in Science
Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making
Doing the Reading
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 3 |
| Citation span | 2025 - 2025 (1) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |