Input Modality and its Effect on Memory Recall
Abstract
One’s learning performance may be influenced by many internal and external factors. In addition to one’s cognitive ability, matters related to the academic context such as learning materials, contents and instruction can regulate and influence learning performance. The study aimed to examine the effects of different input modalities on learning performance by measuring memory recall success. A total of 96 participants took part in an experimental study employing a between-subject design. They were randomly assigned to one of the three groups that were presented with either visual or auditory or a combination of visual-auditory inputs. In the study phase, the visual input group was asked to read the inputs which were visually presented to them. As for the auditory group, the participants were required to listen to the inputs presented auditorily to them. The visual-auditory group did both simultaneously (seeing and listening to the inputs) as the inputs combined both visual and auditory presentation. In the test phase, they were required to recall words that they could best recall from the study phase. Analysis of ANOVA revealed a statistically significant difference between the different input modalities on the participant’s ability to recall words. It signifies that learning materials that are presented both in audio and visual are better recalled compared to materials learned in a single modality (either visual or audio alone). The modality effect uncovered in the present study has important instructional implications related to the presentation of learning materials to optimise learners’ ability to learn.
References
Alemdag, E., & Cagiltay, K. (2018). A systematic review of eye tracking research on multimedia learning. Computational Education, 125, 413–428.
Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K.W. Spence & J. T. Spence. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 2, pp. 89-195). Academic Press.
Baddeley, A. (1998). Recent developments in working memory. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 8(2), 234–238.
Baddeley, A.D., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working Memory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 8, 47-89.
Castro-Alonso, J.C., & Sweller, J. (2020). The Modality Effect of Cognitive Load Theory. In W. Karwowski, T. Ahram, & S. Nazir (Eds.), Advances in human factors in training, education, and learning sciences: Proceedings of the AHFE 2019 International Conference on Human Factors in Training, Education, and Learning Sciences (pp. 75-84). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20135-7_7
Castro-Alonso, J. C., Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2019). Instructional Visualizations, Cognitive Load Theory and Visuospatial Processing. In Visuospatial Processing for Education in Health and Natural Sciences: Chapter: 5. Springer
Cowan, N. (2005). Working memory capacity. Hove, East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.
Cowan, N. (2008). What are the differences between long-term, short-term, and working memory? Program Brain Research, 169, 323- 338.
Cowan, N. (2014). Working Memory Underpins Cognitive Development, Learning and Education. Educational Psychology Review, 26(2), 197-223.
Daniel, D. B., & Woody, W. D. (2010). They hear, but do not listen: Retention for podcasted material in a classroom context. Teaching of Psychology, 37, 199-203.
Diao, Y., & Sweller, J. (2007). Redundancy in foreign language reading comprehension instruction: Concurrent written and spoken presentations. Learning and Instruction, 17, 78-88.
Greenberg, K., Zheng, R., Gardner, M., & Orr, M. (2020). Individual differences in visuospatial working memory capacity influence the modality effect. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37 (3), 735-744.
Goldstein, E.B. (2019). Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research and Everyday Experience (5th ed.). Singapore. Cengage Learning Inc.
Haberlandt, K. (1997). Cognitive Psychology (2nd ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
Holmes, J., Gathercole, S.E., & Dunning, D.L. (2009). Adaptive training leads to sustained enhancement of poor working memory in children. Developmental Science, 12(4), 9-15.
Khelif, L.Y.B., Engkamat, A., & Jack, S. (2014). The Evaluation of Users’ Satisfaction towards the Multimedia Elements in a Courseware. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 123, 249-255
Low, R., & Sweller, J. (2014). The Modality Principle in Multimedia Learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp. 227-246). Cambridge University Press.
Mack, H. & Filipe, H.P. (2018). How to add Metacognition to your continuing professional development: Scoping review and Recommendations. Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology, 8(3), 256-263, https://doi.org/10.22608/APO.2018280
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. & Moreno, R., (2002). Aids to Computer-based Multimedia Learning. Learning and Instruction, 12, 107-119.
Mayer, R. E. (2014). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp. 43–71). Cambridge University Press.
Miyake, A., & Shah, P. (1999) Toward Unified Theories of Working Memory: Emerging General Consensus, Unresolved Theoretical Issues, and Future Research Directions. In: Miyake, A. and Shah, P., Eds., Models of Working Memory: Mechanisms of Active Maintenance and Executive Control, Cambridge University Press,442-482.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174909.016
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 358–368.
Moyer, J. (2011). “Teens today don’t read books anymore”: A study of differences in comprehension and interest across formats (Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, MN). http://readingformatchoicesdissertation. pbworks.com/f/ReadingFormatsFinalJuly27.pdf
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. (2002). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 156-163. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.94.1.156
Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2012). An evolutionary upgrade of cognitive load theory: using the human motor system and collaboration to support the learning of complex cognitive tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 24 (1), 27-45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9179-2
Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45, 255-287.
Park, E.H., & Jon, D.I. (2018). Modality-Specific Working Memory Systems Verified by Clinical Working Memory Tests. Clinical Psychopharmacology and Neuroscience, 16(4), 489-493.
Rogowsky, B.A., Calhoun, B.M., & Tallal, P. (2016). Does Modality Matter? The Effects of Reading, Listening and Dual Modality on Comprehension. SAGE Open 6(3), 1-9.
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive Load Theory. Springer.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 275–285.
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4, 295–312.
Sweller, J., Van Merriënboer J.J.G., & Pass, F. (2019). Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design: 20 Years Later. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 261-292.
Tabbers, H.K., Martens, R.L. & Van Merriënboer, J.J.G. (2004). Multimedia Instructions and Cognitive Load Theory: Effects of Modality and Cueing. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(1), 71-81.
Uchechi Bel-Ann Ordu (2021). The Role of Teaching and Learning Aids/Methods in a Changing World. New Challenges to Education: Lessons from Around the World. BCES Conference Books. 19. Sofia: Bulgarian Comparative Education Society.
Copyright (c) 2023 Unimas Publisher
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright Transfer Statement for Journal
1) In signing this statement, the author(s) grant UNIMAS Publisher an exclusive license to publish their original research papers. The author(s) also grant UNIMAS Publisher permission to reproduce, recreate, translate, extract or summarize, and to distribute and display in any forms, formats, and media. The author(s) can reuse their papers in their future printed work without first requiring permission from UNIMAS Publisher, provided that the author(s) acknowledge and reference publication in the Journal.
2) For open access articles, the author(s) agree that their articles published under UNIMAS Publisher are distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-SA (Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, for non-commercial purposes, provided the original work of the author(s) is properly cited.
3) The author(s) is/are responsible to ensure his or her or their submitted work is original and does not infringe any existing copyright, trademark, patent, statutory right, or propriety right of others. Corresponding author(s) has (have) obtained permission from all co-authors prior to submission to the journal. Upon submission of the manuscript, the author(s) agree that no similar work has been or will be submitted or published elsewhere in any language. If submitted manuscript includes materials from others, the authors have obtained the permission from the copyright owners.
4) In signing this statement, the author(s) declare(s) that the researches in which they have conducted are in compliance with the current laws of the respective country and UNIMAS Journal Publication Ethics Policy. Any experimentation or research involving human or the use of animal samples must obtain approval from Human or Animal Ethics Committee in their respective institutions. The author(s) agree and understand that UNIMAS Publisher is not responsible for any compensational claims or failure caused by the author(s) in fulfilling the above-mentioned requirements. The author(s) must accept the responsibility for releasing their materials upon request by Chief Editor or UNIMAS Publisher.
5) The author(s) should have participated sufficiently in the work and ensured the appropriateness of the content of the article. The author(s) should also agree that he or she has no commercial attachments (e.g. patent or license arrangement, equity interest, consultancies, etc.) that might pose any conflict of interest with the submitted manuscript. The author(s) also agree to make any relevant materials and data available upon request by the editor or UNIMAS Publisher.
