What is the effect of talking heads in educational videos with different types of narrated slides?

IF 3.9 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Contemporary Educational Psychology Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2023.102207
Christina Sondermann, Martin Merkt
{"title":"What is the effect of talking heads in educational videos with different types of narrated slides?","authors":"Christina Sondermann,&nbsp;Martin Merkt","doi":"10.1016/j.cedpsych.2023.102207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Video-based learning plays an increasingly important role and thus the optimal design of video-based learning materials attracts the attention of scientists and practitioners alike. In this context, producers of educational videos often include a talking head in their videos, although theory (e.g., cognitive theory of multimedia learning) also suggests potential disadvantages for this format. Since talking heads attract a lot of visual attention, further empirical research is necessary to investigate whether a talking head can hinder learning, especially presented next to graphic-based learning content. To address this research gap, we conducted two online experiments to investigate the effects of a talking head in educational videos with narrated slides (short slideshow lectures) on learning outcomes (i.e., factual knowledge acquisition) and participants’ subjective ratings of the learning material (e.g., perceived learning). In Experiment<!--> <!-->1 (<em>N</em> = 96), we varied whether the instructor’s talking head was present or absent in the videos as a between-factor, and whether the visual content on the slides was graphic-based (pictures, diagrams, maps) or text-based (bullet points) as a within-factor (slide type). In Experiment<!--> <!-->2 (<em>N</em> = 184), we additionally varied as a between-factor whether the contents appeared sequentially or statically all at once (presentation type). Our results showed that the talking head did not affect learning outcomes, regardless of slide type and presentation type of the videos suggesting that the inclusion of a talking head offers neither clear advantages nor disadvantages. Potential explanations for the findings and directions for future research are discussed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10635,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Educational Psychology","volume":"74 ","pages":"Article 102207"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Educational Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361476X23000619","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Video-based learning plays an increasingly important role and thus the optimal design of video-based learning materials attracts the attention of scientists and practitioners alike. In this context, producers of educational videos often include a talking head in their videos, although theory (e.g., cognitive theory of multimedia learning) also suggests potential disadvantages for this format. Since talking heads attract a lot of visual attention, further empirical research is necessary to investigate whether a talking head can hinder learning, especially presented next to graphic-based learning content. To address this research gap, we conducted two online experiments to investigate the effects of a talking head in educational videos with narrated slides (short slideshow lectures) on learning outcomes (i.e., factual knowledge acquisition) and participants’ subjective ratings of the learning material (e.g., perceived learning). In Experiment 1 (N = 96), we varied whether the instructor’s talking head was present or absent in the videos as a between-factor, and whether the visual content on the slides was graphic-based (pictures, diagrams, maps) or text-based (bullet points) as a within-factor (slide type). In Experiment 2 (N = 184), we additionally varied as a between-factor whether the contents appeared sequentially or statically all at once (presentation type). Our results showed that the talking head did not affect learning outcomes, regardless of slide type and presentation type of the videos suggesting that the inclusion of a talking head offers neither clear advantages nor disadvantages. Potential explanations for the findings and directions for future research are discussed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在带有不同类型解说幻灯片的教育视频中,会说话的人有什么效果?
视频学习在教学中扮演着越来越重要的角色,因此视频学习材料的优化设计受到了科学家和实践者的广泛关注。在这种情况下,教育视频的制作者通常在他们的视频中包括一个说话的头,尽管理论(例如,多媒体学习的认知理论)也表明这种格式的潜在缺点。由于说话头吸引了大量的视觉注意力,因此需要进一步的实证研究来调查说话头是否会阻碍学习,特别是在基于图形的学习内容旁边。为了解决这一研究缺口,我们进行了两个在线实验,以调查在带有叙述幻灯片(短幻灯片讲座)的教育视频中说话的头对学习成果(即事实知识获取)和参与者对学习材料的主观评分(例如感知学习)的影响。在实验1 (N = 96)中,我们改变了讲师说话的头是否出现在视频中作为中间因素,以及幻灯片上的视觉内容是基于图形的(图片,图表,地图)还是基于文本的(项目符号)作为内因素(幻灯片类型)。在实验2 (N = 184)中,我们还作为一个中间因素改变了内容是顺序出现还是静态出现(呈现类型)。我们的研究结果表明,无论幻灯片类型和视频演示类型如何,说话头都不会影响学习结果,这表明加入说话头既没有明显的优势,也没有明显的劣势。对研究结果的可能解释和未来的研究方向进行了讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Contemporary Educational Psychology
Contemporary Educational Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
16.50
自引率
3.90%
发文量
74
期刊介绍: Contemporary Educational Psychology is a scholarly journal that publishes empirical research from various parts of the world. The research aims to substantially advance, extend, or re-envision the ongoing discourse in educational psychology research and practice. To be considered for publication, manuscripts must be well-grounded in a comprehensive theoretical and empirical framework. This framework should raise critical and timely questions that educational psychology currently faces. Additionally, the questions asked should be closely related to the chosen methodological approach, and the authors should provide actionable implications for education research and practice. The journal seeks to publish manuscripts that offer cutting-edge theoretical and methodological perspectives on critical and timely education questions. The journal is abstracted and indexed in various databases, including Contents Pages in Education, Australian Educational Index, Current Contents, EBSCOhost, Education Index, ERA, PsycINFO, Sociology of Education Abstracts, PubMed/Medline, BIOSIS Previews, and others.
期刊最新文献
Race-based trauma: Teacher responses, supports, barriers, and burnout Is studying latin associated with (Non–)linguistic cognitive transfer? A large-scale cross-sectional study To stay, switch, or leave: A four-year longitudinal study of the situated and stable social influences on women’s STEM major choices Student engagement, school involvement, and transfer student success The environment is somewhat alike for different adaptive motivations: Machine learning reveals optimal motivational contexts involve collective support of parents, teachers, and peers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1