Cited by 995Visual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsLearning Styles and Cognitive Differences

Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes.

Open access
Mousavi, Seyed Yaghoub, Low, Renae, Sweller, John·1995·Journal of Educational Psychology

Abstract

This article reports findings on the use of a partly auditory and partly visual mode of presentation for geometry worked examples. The logic was based on the split-attention effect and the effect of presentation modality on working memory. The split-attention effect occurs when students must split their attention between multiple sources of information, which results in a heavy cognitive load. Presentation-modality effects suggest that working memory has partially independent processors for handling visual and auditory material. Effective working memory may be increased by presenting material in a mixed rather than a unitary mode. If so, the negative consequences of split attention in geometry might be ameliorated by presenting geometry statements in auditory, rather than visual, form. The results of 6 experiments supported this hypothesis. In recent years, working memory limitations have been identified as a major factor that needs to be considered when instruction is designed. Researchers have used cognitive load theory (e.g., Sweller, 1988, 1989, 1993, 1994) to sug-gest that many commonly used instructional procedures are

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-0663.87.2.319

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Mousavi et al. (1995) found the modality effect in geometry learning, and it has since been replicated in many other experiments.

    “They indeed found the modality effect that has since been replicated in many other experiments.”

    From Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design: 20 Years Later (2019) · cites this paper as Mousavi et al. (1995)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J.
Affiliations
UNSW Sydney (AU)
Venue
Journal of Educational Psychology
Published
1995-06
Volume
87
Issue
2
Pages
319-334
ISSN
  • 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2176
OpenAlex
W2140591843
Cited by
995
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 49 · 2013: 63 · 2012: 51
FWCI
7.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Journal of Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • UNSWorks (UNSW Sydney) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • UNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
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
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Learning Styles and Cognitive Differences
Keywords
cognitive load, split-attention effect, presentation modality, auditory presentation, visual presentation, working memory, cognitive load theory, instructional design, mathematics education

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