ABSTRACT
Instructional videos are frequently used in online courses and websites. Such videos may include an instructor delivering a monologue-style presentation, or alternatively, engaging in a dialogue with a student who appears in the video alongside of the instructor. We compared three instructional video designs (N = 77), including monologue and dialogue style presentations. To obtain a comprehensive view of the impact of video design, we used a variety of measures, including eye tracking data, learning gains, self-efficacy, cognitive load, social presence, and interest. Despite eye tracking data showing that participants in speaker-visible conditions spent significantly less time on the domain content, learning and related variables were similar in all three conditions, a result we confirmed with Bayesian statistics that provided substantial evidence for the null model. Altogether, we provide evidence that learning and interest are not enhanced by a dialogue-style presentation or visual presence of the instructor. However, further work is needed to investigate the effect of other domains, speaker persona and saliency, and configuration of the speakers in the instructional video.
References
- Richard A. Abrams and Shawn E. Christ. 2003. Motion Onset Captures Attention. Psychological Science 14, 5 (2003), 427--432.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- A. B. Adcock and R. N. Van Eck. 2005. Reliability and factor structure of the Attitude Toward Tutoring Agent Scale (ATTAS). Journal of Interactive Learning Research 16, 2 (2005), 195--212.Google Scholar
- I. E. Allen and J. Seaman. 2017. Digital learning compass: Distance education enrollment report 2017. Technical Report. Babson College/eLiterate/WCET, Wellesley.Google Scholar
- Elisha Babad. 2007. Teachers' Nonverbal Behavior and its Effects on Students. 201--261.Google Scholar
- Albert Bandura. 1982. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist 37, 2 (02 1982), 122--147.Google Scholar
- Tony Bates. 2018. The 2017 national survey of online learning in Canadian post-secondary education: methodology and results. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 15, 29 (2018).Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Eta S Berner and Barbara Adams. 2004. Added value of video compared to audio lectures for distance learning. International Journal of Medical Informatics 73, 2 (2004), 189 -- 193.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Michelene T. H. Chi, Seokmin Kang, and David L. Yaghmourian. 2017. Why students learn more from dialogue- than monologue-videos: Analyses of peer interactions. Journal of the Learning Sciences 26, 1 (2017), 10--50.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Michelene T. H. Chi and Marguerite Roy. 2010. How Adaptive Is an Expert Human Tutor?. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Vincent Aleven, Judy Kay, and Jack Mostow (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 401--412.Google Scholar
- Tiphaine Colliot and Éric Jamet. 2018. Understanding the effects of a teacher video on learning from a multimedia document: An eye-tracking study. Educational Technology Research and Development 66, 6 (01 Dec 2018), 1415--1433.Google Scholar
- C. Connolly, E. Murphy, and S. Moore. 2009. Programming anxiety amongst computing students -- A key in the retention debate? IEEE Transactions on Education 51, 1 (2009), 52--56.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Scotty D. Craig, Michelene T. H. Chi, and Kurt VanLehn. 2009. Improving classroom learning by collaboratively observing human tutoring videos while problem solving. Journal of educational psychology 101, 4 (11 2009), 779--789.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Scotty D. Craig, Jeremiah Sullins, Amy Witherspoon, and Barry Gholson. 2006. The Deep-Level-Reasoning Question Effect: The Role of Dialogue and Deep-Level-Reasoning Questions During Vicarious Learning. Cognition and Instruction 24, 4 (2006), 565--591.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Stefan Van der Stigchel, Artem V. Belopolsky, Judith C. Peters, Jasper G. Wijnen, Martijn Meeter, and Jan Theeuwes. 2009. The limits of top-down control of visual attention. Acta Psychologica 132, 3 (2009), 201 -- 212.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Tricia Donovan, Tony Bates, Jeff Seaman, Denis Mayer, Éric Martel, Ross Paul, Brian Desbiens, Vivian Forssman, and Russ Poulin. 2019. Tracking Online and Distance Education in Canadian Universities and Colleges: 2018. Technical Report. Canadian Digital Learning Research Association.Google Scholar
- David M. Driscoll, Scotty D. Craig, Barry Gholson, Matthew Ventura, Xiangen Hu, and Arthur C. Graesser. 2003. Vicarious Learning: Effects of Overhearing Dialog and Monologue-like Discourse in a Virtual Tutoring Session. Journal of Educational Computing Research 29, 4 (2003), 431--450.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Andrew T. Duchowski, Krzysztof Krejtz, Izabela Krejtz, Cezary Biele, Anna Niedzielska, Peter Kiefer, Martin Raubal, and Ioannis Giannopoulos. 2018. The Index of Pupillary Activity: Measuring Cognitive Load Vis-à-Vis Task Difficulty with Pupil Oscillation.Google Scholar
- Q. Dunsworth and R. K. Atkinson. 2007. Fostering multimedia learning of science: Exploring the role of an animated agent's image. Computers & Education 49, 3 (2007), 677--690.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- B. Gholson, A. Witherspoon, B. Morgan, J. K. Brittingham, R. Coles, A. C. Graesser, J. Sullins, and S. D Craig. 2009. Exploring the deep-level reasoning questions effect during vicarious learning among eighth to eleventh graders in the domains of computer literacy and Newtonian physics. Instructional Science 37, 5 (2009), 487--493.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Philip J. Guo, Juho Kim, and Rob Rubin. 2014. How Video Production Affects Student Engagement: An Empirical Study of MOOC Videos. In Proceedings of the First ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale Conference ([email protected] '14). ACM, NY, NY, USA, 41--50.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- A. Hansch, C. Newman, L. Hillers, T. Schildhauer, K. McConachie, and P. Schmidt. 2015. Video and online learning: Critical reflections from the field. HIIG Discussion Paper Series 2015, 2 (2015), 1--34.Google Scholar
- Helen M. Hendy, Nancy Schorschinsky, and Barbara Wade. 2014. Measurement of math beliefs and their associations with math behaviors in college students. Psychological assessment 26, 4 (12 2014), 1225--1234.Google Scholar
- B. Homer, J. Plass, and L. Blake. 2008. The effects of video on cognitive load and social presence in multimedia-learning. Journal of Educational Psychology 24, 3 (2008), 786--797.Google Scholar
- Andrew F. Jarosz and Jennifer Wiley. 2014. What Are the Odds? A Practical Guide to Computing and Reporting Bayes Factors. Journal of Problem Solving 7, 1 (2014).Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- JASP Team. 2019. JASP (Version 0.10.2)[Computer software]. (2019). https://jasp-stats.org/Google Scholar
- Tony Jenkins. 2002. On the difficulty of learning to program. In Proc. 3rd Ann. Conf. HEA Learning Teaching Support Netw. 53--58.Google Scholar
- Melanie Keller, Anita Hoy, Goetz Thomas, and Anne Frenzel. 2015. Teacher Enthusiasm: Reviewing and Redefining a Complex Construct. Educational Psychology Review 28 (12 2015).Google Scholar
- René F. Kizilcec, Jeremy N. Bailenson, and Charles J. Gomez. 2015. The instructor's face in video instruction: Evidence from two large-scale field studies. Journal of Educational Psychology 107, 3 (08 2015), 724--739.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- René F. Kizilcec, Kathryn Papadopoulos, and Lalida Sritanyaratana. 2014. Showing face in video instruction: Effects on information retention, visual attention, and affect. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '14). ACM, NY, NY, USA, 2095--2102.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Thomas Kosch, Mariam Hassib, Pawel W. Woundefinedniak, Daniel Buschek, and Florian Alt. 2018. Your Eyes Tell: Leveraging Smooth Pursuit for Assessing Cognitive Workload. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article Paper 436, 13 pages.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Jimmie Leppink, Fred Paas, Cees P. M. Van der Vleuten, Tamara Van Gog, and Jeroen J. G. Van Merriënboer. 2013. Development of an instrument for measuring different types of cognitive load. Behavior Research Methods 45, 4 (01 Dec 2013), 1058--1072.Google Scholar
- A. Lyons, S. Reysen, and L. Pierce. 2012. Video lecture format, student technological efficacy, and social presence in online courses. Computers in Human Behaviour 28 (2012), 181--186.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- R. E. Mayer. 2014. Principles based on social cues in multimedia learning: Personalization, voice, image, and embodiment principles (2 ed.). Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 345--368", booktitle = "The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning.Google Scholar
- Richard E. Mayer, Sherry Fennell, Lindsay Farmer, and Julie Campbell. 2004. A personalization effect in multimedia learning: Students learn better when words are in conversational style rather than formal style. Journal of Educational Psychology 96, 2 (06 2004), 389--395.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Richard E. Mayer and Roxana Moreno. 1998. A Split-Attention Effect in Multimedia Learning: Evidence for Dual Processing Systems in Working Memory. Journal of Educational Psychology 90, 2 (1998), 312--320.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- R. E. Mayer, K. Sobko, and P. D. Mautone. 2003. Social cues in multimedia learning: Role of speaker's voice. Journal of Educational Psychology 95, 2 (06 2003), 419--425.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- R. Moreno, R. E. Mayer, H. A. Spires, and J.C. Lester. 2001. The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction 19, 2 (2001), 177--213.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Kasia Muldner, Rachel Lam, and Michelene T. H. Chi. 2014. Comparing Learning from Observing and from Human Tutoring. Journal of Educational Psychology 106, 1 (2014), 69--85.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- D. A. Muller, J. Bewes, M. D. Sharma, and P Reimann. 2008. Saying the wrong thing: improving learning with multimedia by including misconceptions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 24 (2008), 144--155.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Derek A. Muller, Manjula D. Sharma, John Eklund, and Peter Reimann. 2007. Conceptual change through vicarious learning in an authentic physics setting. Instructional Science 35, 6 (01 Nov 2007), 519--533.Google Scholar
- Daniel S. Quintana and Donald R. Williams. 2018. Bayesian alternatives for common null-hypothesis significance tests in psychiatry: a non-technical guide using JASP. BMC Psychiatry 18, 1 (07 Jun 2018), 178.Google Scholar
- J. Rotgans and H. Schmidt. 2011. Situational interest and academic achievement in the active-learning classroom. Learning and Instruction 21, 1 (2011), 58--67.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Dale H. Schunk and Antoinette R. Hanson. 1985. Peer models: Influence on children's self-efficacy and achievement. Journal of educational psychology 77, 3 (06 1985), 313--322.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Johnny van Doorn, Don van den Bergh, Udo Bohm, Fabian Dablander, Koen Derks, Tim Draws, Alexander Etz, Nathan J Evans, Quentin F Gronau, Max Hinne, and et al. 2019. The JASP Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting a Bayesian Analysis. (Jan 2019).Google Scholar
- T. van Gog, I. Verveer, and L. Verveer. 2014. Learning from video modeling examples: Effects of seeing the human model's face. Computers & Education 72 (2014), 323--327.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- M. van Wermeskerken, S. Ravensbergen, and T. van Gog. 2018. Effects of instructor presence in video modeling examples on attention and learning. Computers in Human Behavior 89 (2018), 430--438.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- M. van Wermeskerken and T. van Gog. 2017. Seeing the instructor's face and gaze in demonstration video examples affects attention allocation but not learning. Computers & Education 113 (2017), 98--112.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- J. Wang and P. D. Antonenko. 2017. Instructor presence in instructional video: Effects on visual attention, recall, and perceived learning. Computers in Human Behavior 71 (2017), 78--89.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Ning Wang, W. Lewis Johnson, Richard E. Mayer, Paola Rizzo, Erin Shaw, and Heather Collins. 2008. The politeness effect: Pedagogical agents and learning outcomes. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 66, 2 (2008), 98 -- 112.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- K. Wilson, M. Martinez, C. Mills, S. D'Mello, D. Smilek, and E. Risko. 2018. Instructor presence effect: Liking does not always lead to learning. Computers & Education 122 (2018), 205--220.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
Supplemental Material
Available for Download
Index Terms
Instructional Video Design: Investigating the Impact of Monologue- and Dialogue-style Presentations





Comments