Cited by 158Visual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsOnline and Blended Learning

Learner performance in multimedia learning arrangements. an analysis across instructional approaches.

Open access
Eysink, Tessa H. S., de Jong, Ton, Berthold, Kirsten, Kolloffel, Bas, Opfermann, Maria, Wouters, Pieter·2009·American Educational Research Journal

Abstract

In this study, the authors compared four multimedia learning arrangements differing in instructional approach on effectiveness and efficiency for learning: (a) hypermedia learning, (b) observational learning, (c) self-explanation–based learning, and (d) inquiry learning. The approaches all advocate learners’ active attitude toward the learning material but show differences in the specific learning processes they intend to foster. Learning results were measured on different types of knowledge: conceptual, intuitive, procedural, and situational. The outcomes show that the two approaches asking learners to generate (parts of) the subject matter (either by self-explanations or by conducting experiments) led to better performance on all types of knowledge. However, results also show that emphasis on generating subject matter by the learner resulted in less efficient learning.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3102/0002831209340235

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 105 · Cited by 158

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Busch, C., Renkl, A., & Schworm, S. (2008). Towards a generic self-explanation training intervention for example-based learning. In G. Kanselaar, V. Jonker, P. A. Kirschner, & F. J. Prins (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of the Learning Sciences 2008. Utrecht, the Netherlands: ICLS.
  2. Schunk, D. H., & Hanson, A. R. (1989). Self-modeling and children's cognitive skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 155-163.

Authors
Eysink, T. H. S., de Jong, T., Berthold, K., Kolloffel, B., Opfermann, M., & Wouters, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Twente (NL)
  • University of Twente
  • University of Freiburg (DE)
  • University of Duisburg-Essen (DE)
  • Utrecht University (NL)
Venue
American Educational Research Journal
Published
2009-12
Volume
46
Issue
4
Pages
1107-1149
ISSN
  • 0002-8312 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-1011
OpenAlex
W2107436949
Cited by
158
References
105
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 17
FWCI
13.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Educational Research Journal (publishedVersion)
  • University of Twente Research Information (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • PUB – Publications at Bielefeld University (Bielefeld University) (submittedVersion)
  • Publikationen an der Universität Bielefeld (Universität Bielefeld) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  • Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
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 › Education › Online and Blended Learning
Keywords
multimedia learning, hypermedia learning, observational learning, self-explanation, inquiry-based learning, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, situational knowledge, intuitive knowledge, learning efficiency, teaching methods

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