SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Participatory Educational Research / 2022 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 6

Comparison of input modes: L2 comprehension and cognitive load

Ceyhun KARABIYIK
Sezen ARSLAN
Nurdan KAVAKLI
Pages
173–191
Publication Date
2022-11-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results and possible venues for further research were discussed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The current study investigated L2-based assumptions of the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning and Cognitive Load Theory for the multimedia, modality, and redundancy principles.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this non-equivalent groups quasi-experimental design study, four groups of Turkish-speaking teacher trainees of the English language received a 12-minute non-paced lesson on harp seal pups that included English audio (audio group), English audio with video (video + audio group), English captions with video (video + text group), and English audio with video and captions (video + audio + text group).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results and possible venues for further research were discussed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:multimedia learning · L2 listening comprehension · cognitive load

Abstract

The current study investigated L2-based assumptions of the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning and Cognitive Load Theory for the multimedia, modality, and redundancy principles. In this non-equivalent groups quasi-experimental design study, four groups of Turkish-speaking teacher trainees of the English language received a 12-minute non-paced lesson on harp seal pups that included English audio (audio group), English audio with video (video + audio group), English captions with video (video + text group), and English audio with video and captions (video + audio + text group). A comprehension test as well as measures for difficulty and effort rating were used to collect data. One-way between-groups analyses of variance (ANOVA) were conducted to determine the effects of different modes of presentation on participants’ learning performance and cognitive load. Moreover, Tukey Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) tests were performed to determine the groups that differed from each other. The findings showed that the video + audio group performed better and reported less difficulty and effort expenditure in the foreign/second language (L2) listening comprehension task than the audio-only group. On the other hand, the video + text and video + audio groups did not differ with respect to comprehension, difficulty, and effort expenditure. Lastly, while the video + audio + text and video + audio groups performed equally well in the comprehension task, the video + audio + text group reported less difficulty and effort than the video + audio group. The results and possible venues for further research were discussed.

🔖

Cite This Article

KARABIYIK, C., ARSLAN, S., KAVAKLI, N. (2022). Comparison of input modes: L2 comprehension and cognitive load. Participatory Educational Research, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 6, 173–191. https://ajindex.com/articles/720501

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Aldera, A. S., & Mohsen, M. A. (2013). Annotations in captioned animation: Effects on vocabulary learning and listening skills. Computers & Education, 68, 60–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.018 Anmarkrud, Ø., Andresen, A., & Braten, I. (2019). Cognitive load and working memory in multimedia earning: Conceptual and measurement issues. Educational Psychologist, 54(2), 61-83, https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1554484
  2. Ari, F., Flores, R., İnan, F. A., Cheon, C., Crooks, S. M., Paniukov, & Kurucay, M. (2014). The effects of verbally redundant information on student learning: An instance of reverse redundancy. Computers & Education, 76, 199-204.
  3. Başal, A., Gülözer, K., & Demir, İ. (2015). Use of video and audio texts in EFL listening test. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(6). https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v3i6.1001
  4. Brünken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2003). Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 53-61. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_7
  5. Brünken, R., Seufert, T., & Pass, F. (2010). Measuring cognitive load. In J. L. Pass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive load theory (pp. 181–202).
  6. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  7. Butcher, K. R. (2014). The multimedia principle. In R. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 174–205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9781139547369.010. Cairncross, S., & Mannion, M. (2001). Interactive multimedia and learning: Realizing the benefits. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38(2), 156-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290110035428
  8. Chan, C., Lei, W., & Lena, X. (2014). A study of video effects on English listening comprehension. Studies in Literature and Language, 8(2), 53-58. https://doi.org/10.3968/4348
  9. Chen, J. (2018). KR-20, in B. B. Frey, (Ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation (pp. 932-936). London: Sage. Chen, M. P., Wang, L. C., Zou, D., Lin, S. Y., & Xie, H. (2019). Effects of caption and gender on junior high students’ EFL learning from iMap-enhanced contextualized learning. Computers & Education, 140, 103602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103602
  10. Chen, M. P., Wang, L. C., Zou, D., Lin, S. Y., Xie, H., & Tsai, C. C. (2020). Effects of captions and English proficiency on learning effectiveness, motivation and attitude in augmented-reality-enhanced theme-based contextualized EFL learni