softWare
Bishop and Cates proposed a theoretical foundation for sound’s use in multimedia instruction to enhance learn- ing. They studied the Atkinson-Shiffrin information processing model, which addresses the transformation from environment stimuli to human schemata and their limitation factors due to human cognitive constraints. They adopted Phye’s categorization of this process to three main operations: acquisition, processing, and retrieval. Table 1 summarizes the Atkinson-Shiffrin information processing model and its limitations. “Information-processing theory addressed human cognition.
Communication theory, on the other hand, addressed human interaction” (Bishop & Cates, 2001). Bishop and Cates also investigated the Shannon-Weaver Commu- nication model and its limitations. They also adopted Berio’s suggestion that learning models in terms of communication generally begin with and focus on
Table 1. The Atkinson-Shiffrin information processing theory model and illustrations
F ilter Encoding Environmental Stimuli Human Cognitive Limitation Factors Phye’s (1997) theory in transferring stimuli into schemata Sensory Registry Short-term Storage
Long Term Storage
Bottleneck
Based on prior knowledge analysis Only subset of stimuli goes through
Maximal cognitive load Rehearsed or decay in 5-20 sec
Decay/weakness over time Interference from other memories
Lose access to index of location
Acquisition
Processing
A
Table 2. The Shannon Weaver communication model and illustrationsCommunication: How Messages are sent
Learning: How Messages Are Received
E ncoding
D ecoding
Channel
Receiver
Technical Error Competing external/internal signals preventing selecting communicated signal
Semantic Error Analyzing signal based on ones exiting schemata without conveying intended message
Conceptual Error Making inference about the message not intended by the source
Phases of Learning Selecting Analysis Synthesis Cues/Elements Source
Table 3. The Bishop and Cates instructional communication system--a framework of instructional communica- tion system
Acquisition Noise Competing internal and external message disrupts the signal transmission process
Processing Noise Students fail to isolate the communicated instructional input from other sounds
Retrieval Noise Elements or structure of the message fail to trigger link to existing schema structures Selection Learner has trouble
directing attention to the instructional message
Relationships between the instructional part of message are not isolated/recognized from other stimuli
Prevents evoking the correct prior knowledge structure from memory Analysis Learner has trouble
focusing attention on instructional message
Semantic difficulties cause interpretation errors and poor organization of the information
Learning cannot build upon prior knowledge structures Synthesis Learner has trouble
sustaining attention to the instructional message Learn cannot elaborate on the information in the instructional message
Message prompts fail to support learner’s efforts to construct broader transferable connotative meanings.
0
how messages are received and processed by learners.
The work of a number of authors identifies the three
levels or phases of learning selection, analysis, and synthesis. Table 2 summarizes the Shannon-Weaver communication model, its limitations, and the three phases of learning.
Built on these two theories, Bishop and Cates proposed an instruction communication system where acquisition, processing, and retrieval operations are all applied, in varying amounts, during each phase of learn- ing. This orthogonal relationship is depicted in Table 3. “Instructional communication systems could fail because of errors induced by excessive noise” (Bishop & Cates, 2001). Limitations within three information- processing operations can contribute to problems in instructional communications. Noise encountered within each operation is also shown in Table 3.
The three diagonal cells highlighted represent the heaviest operation within each learning phase. During selection, learning calls on acquisition heavily while during analysis, processing is central. During synthesis, learning calls on retrieval most heavily. The relative strength of potential noise increases and the conse- quences become more serious at each deeper phase of learning when following the cells vertically down the information-processing operations. Bishop and Cates suggested that adding sound to instructional messages may help optimize communication by helping learners overcome various information processing and noise encountered at the selection, the analysis, and at the synthesis phase of the instructional communication process.
Inovercoming acquisition noise, Bishop and Cates suggested that sounds could gain learners attention, help learners focus attention on appropriate infor- mation, and keep distractions of competing stimuli, engage learner’s interest over time. Bishop and Cates believed that sounds could help learners elaborate on visual stimuli by providing information about invisible structure, dynamic change, and abstract concepts. And because of the nature of sound to be organized in time, where images are organized in space, Bishop and Cates believed that sounds could provide a context within which individuals can think actively about connections between new information, therefore overcome pro- cessing noise. Bishop and Cates cited Gaver’s (1993) research that when we hear the sound of a car while walking down the street at night, we compare what we are hearing to our memories for the objects that make that sound, drawing from and linking to existing con-
structs and schemata to support our understanding of what is happening, and we step out of the car’s path. However, if we hear the same automobile sound in a cartoon, we would be able to depict this event in terms of another existing knowledge of event, therefore draw different conclusion. “Sounds could tic into, build upon, and expand existing constructs in order to help relate new information to a larger system of conceptual knowledge, therefore overpower the retrieval noise” (Bishop & Cates, 2001).
Most researchers acknowledge that it is important to employ multiple sensory modalities for deeper processing and better retention. Bishop and Cates used the example provided by Engelkamp and Zimmer that seeing a telephone and hearing it ring should result in better memory performance than only seeing it for hearing. Instructional designers could suppress infor- mation-processing noise by anticipating communica-
tion difficulties and front-loading messages by using
redundancy—sound as the secondary cue. Bishop and
Cates defined redundancy as the part of information
that overlaps. They further explained that in order to overcome the acquisition, processing, and retrieval noise, instructional designers could use sound to employ content redundancy, context redundancy, and construct redundancy respectively. Sound’s content redundancy (“What I asked was, can you pick up some things on your way home?”) could contribute to the instructional
message addressing the learner’s attention difficulties
at each of the three learning phases. Sound;s context
redundancy (“No, I am baking a pie, I need flour not flower.”) could contribute to the instructional mes- sage addressing the learner’s trouble with information manipulation. Finally, sound’s construct redundancy (“I am baking a pie for tonight’s desert.”) could assist learners in connecting new information to existing schemata. Bishop and Cates concluded that sound’s contribution to optimize learning in e-learning could be in the form of secondary cues. Systematically add- ing auditory cues to instructional messages based on the proposed framework might enhance learning by
anticipating learner difficulties and suppressing them
before they occur.
InstructIonal communIcatIon
frameWork
Bishop and Cates’s (2001) instructional communica- tion framework provided a theoretical foundation for
A
answering the question of why we should incorporate sound into multimedia agents for effective e-learning solutions. Barron and Atkins (1994) also suggested that when complex graphics are involved, it might be more feasible to deliver instruction through audio than
through text because there is insufficient room on the
screen for the text. Shih and Alessi (1996) stated that each medium has its own characteristics and interacts with other media to produce different effects when put together. Their report also stated the advantage auditory system has over text: (a) voice is generally considered the more realistic and natural mode than displayed text; (b) voice has the advantage such as being more easily comprehended by children or poor readers; (c) voice does not distract visual attention from stimuli such as diagrams; (d) voice is more lifelike and therefore more engaging; and (e) voice is good for conveying temporal information. Bishop and Cates’s framework provided the answer to how, where, and when instruc- tional designers could use sound in designing software to enhance learning. Instructional designers should understand the cognitive components of sound’s use and the ways sounds could contribute to appropriate
levels of redundancy. By using sound as the second- ary cue to complement the primary message and to provide new information, instructional designers could systematically add sound in the multimedia agent to e-learning to lead to more effective computer-based learning materials. This research leads to a wide range of research questions.
1. Quantitative data collection: The next step in supporting Bishop and Cates’s framework is to conduct experiments with collection of quanti- tative data. Overcome channel noise. What is the appropriate redundancy level? Which sound should be used to overpower channel noises? 2. Audio quality: Pacing, pitch and volume all play
a role in setting the mood of instruction. The voice of a male or female and how its expressiveness affects learners are worth exploring.
3. Cognitive load: How can sound be incorporated into e-learning without exceeding learners’ chan- nel capacity?
4. Redundancy between audio and graphics:
Research showed that the word-for word narrates
Table 4. Summarization of Bishop and Cates framework for sound usage in multimedia based instruction In- structional communication system
Acquisition Noise Content Redundancy Processing Noise Content Redundancy Retrieval Noise Content Redundancy Selection Gain Attention
Hold Attention
Help Focus and Engagement Over Time
Analysis Provide information about abstract ideas
Distinguish multiple temporal information
Help make connection among the information
Synthesis Build upon and
expand constructs relating to new information
redundancy could not improve learner achieve- ment because no new information is supplied. Will there be appropriate redundancy between a complex graphic and audio?
5. Interference factors: Multiple channel cues might complete with each other, resulting in distraction in learning. A syntax and connection needs to be established between primary and secondary cues.
6. Learner control: Learners tend to achieve bet- ter performance when they have control of the learning experience.
7. Logistics: The speed, volume, and the repeatabil- ity should take into consideration when designing e-learning using sounds.
8. Demographic: Is there difference among gender, age group, and ethnic background in achievement and perception? How will learners speaking English as the second language learn differently from a native speaker? How will this affect the design of e-learning using sound?
9. Content area: Are there different consideration factors when designing e-learning using sound for different content subject such as math and science?
10. Second language: In designing e-learning teach- ing foreign languages, will sound be incorporated as the redundancy or should sound play a more essential role? What are the design guidelines for such software?
11. Learning modality: What is the relationship between learner’s preferred learning modality in terms of sound and the delivery mode?
conclusIon
While the debate over pedagogical strategies for sound to reinforce the learning process in e-learning rages on, researchers and instructional developers continues to seek theories for effective applications of sound in the teaching and learning process via e-learning. It seems clear that sound and audio multimedia interventions
are permanent fixture in the future landscape of e-
learning. If appropriately employed, the multimedia within the e-learning program not only becomes a stand alone learning reinforcement agent, but it also helps to extend the learning capabilities of the user, thus assisting the learning in their efforts to gain the
concepts and knowledge presented in the e-learning program. As we continue to look to the future for new innovative strategies developed out of research, we can begin to harness the power of adding effective multi- media agents in the teaching and learning process for e-learning, thus reaching the goal of providing quality teaching and effective training solution via e-learning for organization performance improvement.
references
Barron, E.E., & Atkins, D. (1994). Audio instruction in multimedia education: Is textual redundancy important? Journal of Education Multimedia and Hypermedia, 3(3/4), 295-306.
Beccue, B., & Vila, 1. (2001). The effects of adding audio instructions to a multimedia computer based training environment. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 10(1),47-67.
Bishop, M, & Cates, W. (2000, October 25-28). A
model for the efficacious use of sound in multimedia
instruction. In Proceedings of the Selected Research and Development Papers, Presented at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Com- munications and Technology (vol. 1-2). Denver, CO. Bishop, M., & Cates, W.M. (2001). Theoretical foun- dations for sound’s use in multimedia instruction to enhance learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(3), 5-22.
Kerr, B. (1999). Effective use of audio media in multimedia presentations. Middle Tennessee State University.
Mayer, R. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across dif- ferent media. Learning and Instruction, 13, 125-139. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R.E. (2000a). Meaningful design for meaningful learning: Applying cognitive theory to multimedia explanations. In Proceedings of the ED-MEDIA 2000 (pp. 747-752). Charlottesville, VA: AACE Press.
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R.E. (2000b). A coherence ef- fect in multimedia learning: The case for minimizing irrelevant sounds in the design of multimedia instruc- tional messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 117-125.
A
Shih, Y., & Alessi, S.M. (1996). Effects of text versus voice on learning in multimedia courseware. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 5(2), 203-218.
key terms
Cognitive Load Theory: A term (used in psychol-
ogy and other fields of study) that refers to the level of
effort associated with thinking and reasoning (includ- ing perception, memory, language, etc.). According to this theory people learn better when they can build on words and ideas they already understand. The more things a person has to learn at a single time, the more
difficult it will be to retain the information in their long
term memory.
Communication: Communication is the process of exchanging information and ideas. As an active pro- cess, it involves encoding, transmitting, and decoding intended messages.
Information Processing Theory: The information processing theory approach to the study of cognitive development evolved out of the American experimen- tal tradition in psychology. Information processing theorists proposed that like the computer, the human mind is a system that processes information through the application of logical rules and strategies. Like the computer, the mind has a limited capacity for the amount and nature of the information it can process. Finally, just as the computer can be made into a better information processor by changes in its hardware (e.g.,
circuit boards and microchips) and its software (pro- gramming), so do children become more sophisticated thinkers through changes in their brains and sensory systems (hardware) and in the rules and strategies (software) that they learn.
Instructional Design: Instructional design is the analysis of learning needs and systematic develop- ment of instruction. Instructional designers often use Instructional technology as a method for developing in- struction. Instructional design models typically specify a method, that if followed will facilitate the transfer of knowledge, skills, and attitude to the recipient or acquirer of the instruction.
Instructional Software: The computer programs that allow students to learn new content, practice us- ing content already learned, or be evaluated on how much they know. These programs allow teachers and students to demonstrate concepts, do simulations, and record and analyze data.
Multimedia: The presentation of information by a combination of data, images, animation sounds, and video. This data can be delivered in a variety of ways,
either on a computer disk, through modified televisions,
or using a computer connected to a telecommunica- tions channel.
Sound: The vibrations that travel through air that can be heard by humans. However, scientists and en-
gineers use a wider definition of sound that includes
low and high frequency vibrations in air that cannot be heard by humans, and vibrations that travel through all forms of matter, gases, liquids, and solids.