Learning from split-attention materials: effects of teaching physical and mental learning strategies
Open accessAbstract
Learners learn more from spatially separated text and pictures after they have been instructed to physically integrate these sources than without such an instruction. We investigated whether instructing learners to mentally integrate textual and pictorial information would yield similar results. Eighty-seven participants studied a picture with accompanying text about an electrical circuit. Text and picture were presented as spatially separated sources or in an integrated format. In the separated format, participants were instructed to use (1) a mental learning strategy, (2) a physical learning strategy, or (3) no learning strategy. Participants in the separated condition using a mental learning strategy and the integrated condition obtained higher recall and comprehension (but not causal inference) performance than participants in the separate conditions with the physical- or no learning strategy. This indicates that instructing learners to mentally integrate spatially separated text and pictures when studying split-attention material can be an effective learning strategy.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Learners with higher prior knowledge employ mental strategies to overcome some effects of instructional design, such as the split-attention effect.
“Previous research also shows that learners with higher prior knowledge employ mental strategies to overcome some of the effects (i.e., split-attention effect) of instructional design (de Koning et al., 2020).”
From Rethinking pre-training: cognitive load implications for learners with varying prior knowledge (2025) · cites this paper as de Koning et al., 2020
Cites
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100612453266 · Cited by 3,138 · see citing works
Cognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0804_2 · Cited by 2,894 · see citing works
Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design: 20 Years Later
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5 · Cited by 2,337 · see citing works
Self-citationPaas, F. G. W. C. (1992) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429 · Cited by 2,150 · see citing works
Self-citationIntegrating information: A meta-analysis of the spatial contiguity and temporal contiguity effects
Ginns, P. (2006) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.10.001 · Cited by 403 · cited 3× · see citing works
“This finding is commonly referred to as the split-attention effect (Ayres & Sweller, 2014; Liu, Lin, Tsai, & Paas, 2012; Pouw, Rop, De Koning, & Paas, 2019), or the spatial contiguity effect (Ginns, 2006; Johnson & Mayer, 2012; Mayer, 1989; Mayer, Steinhoff, Bower, & Mars, 1995).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialCognitive load theory, modality of presentation and the transient information effect
Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2011) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.1787 · Cited by 344 · see citing works
A three-pronged method for studying inference generation in literary text
Magliano, J. P., & Graesser, A. C. (1991) · Poetics · doi:10.1016/0304-422x(91)90007-c · Cited by 151 · see citing works
Managing One's Own Cognitive Load when Evidence of Split Attention is Present
Roodenrys, K., Agostinho, S., Roodenrys, S., & Chandler, P. (2012) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.2889 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Castro-Alonso, J. C., de Koning, B. B., Fiorella, L., & Paas, F. (2021) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-021-09606-9 · Cited by 278 · see citing works
“As different techniques to measure cognitive load have been developed, such as physiological or objective measures (see Castro-Alonso & de Koning, 2020; Charles & Nixon, 2019), a future direction of research is to include these measures when investigating the instructor- and learner-managed…”
MethodSelf-citationThe Split-Attention Principle in Multimedia Learning
Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2021) · The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning · doi:10.1017/9781108894333.020 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Rethinking pre-training: cognitive load implications for learners with varying prior knowledge
Gorbunova, A., Kapuza, A., Chen, O., & Costley, J. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1628047 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
- Authors
- de Koning, B. B., Rop, G., & Paas, F.
- Affiliations
- Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
- University of Wollongong (AU)
- Venue
- Contemporary Educational Psychology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-04
- Volume
- 61
- Pages
- 101873
- ISSN
- 0361-476X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3017867235
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 5.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Contemporary Educational Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Keywords
- split-attention effect, mental integration, physical integration, text-picture integration, learning strategies, memory retrieval, comprehension, causal inference, electrical circuits, instructional design
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
