The effectiveness of multimedia learning: the role of working memory capacity

Context and relevance. According to the redundancy principle of cognitive theory of multimedia learning, learning occurs more effectively when verbal text and illustrations are presented rather than verbal text, illustrations and screen text that repeats the verbal content. The principle of reverse redundancy, on the other hand, suggests that the presence of short, relevant text promotes effective learning. The principle of redundancy is based on the fact that working memory has a limited capacity. Objective: to identify the role of working memory capacity in the effectiveness of the principles of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Hypothesis. There is a relationship between the effectiveness of the principles of redundancy and reverse redundancy and working memory capacity considered as an individual difference. Methods and materials. Working memory capacity was measured using the Operation Span task. Short educational videos, which were presentations voiced by the instructor's voice, with full screen text, short text, or no text, were used as stimulus material. Learning effectiveness was assessed using an objective knowledge test after viewing each educational video. Results. There was no interaction between the factors of working memory capacity and presentation type. The group without on-screen text performed best on the knowledge test, while the group with full on-screen text performed worst. Conclusions. The findings of the study demonstrate that individual differences in WM capacity do not mediate the effectiveness of the principles of redundancy and inverse redundancy. The study recommends to avoid duplicating the teacher's narrative on-screen text when creating educational multimedia presentations.

1. Величковский, Б.Б. (2014). Позиционные эффекты в рабочей памяти. Экспериментальная психология, 7(2), 26—36.
   Velichkovsky, B.B. (2014). Position effects in working memory. Experimental Psychology (Russia), 7(2), 26—36. (In Russ.).
2. Adesope, O.O., Nesbit, J.C. (2012). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning environments: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(1), 250—263. 
3. Anmarkrud, Ø., Andresen, A., Bråten, I. (2019). Cognitive load and working memory in multimedia learning: Conceptual and measurement issues. Educational Psychologist, 54(2), 61—83. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1554484
4. Ari, F., Flores, R., Inan, F.A., Cheon, J., Crooks, S.M., Paniukov, D., Kurucay, M. (2014). The effects of verbally redundant information on student learning: An instance of reverse redundancy. Computers & Education, 76, 199—204. 
5. Baddeley, A.D., Hitch, G. (1974). Working Memory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 8, 47—89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60452-1
6. Baddeley, A. (2007). Working memory, thought, and action. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198528012.001.0001
7. Batka, J.A., Peterson, S.A. (2005). The Effects of Individual Differences in Working Memory on Multimedia Learning. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 49(13), 1256—1260. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120504901309
8. Colom, R., Flores-Mendoza, C., Rebollo, I. (2003). Working memory and intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(1), 33—39.
9. Cowan, N. (2010). The Magical Mystery Four: How is Working Memory Capacity Limited, and Why? Current directions in psychological science, 19(1), 51—57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721409359277
10. Cowan, N. (2014). Working memory underpins cognitive development, learning, and education. Educational Psychology Review, 26(2), 197—223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9246-y
11. Cowan, N. (2016). The many faces of working memory and short-term storage. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(4), 1158—1170. 
12. Daneman, M., Carpenter, P.A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450—466. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6
13. D'Esposito, M., Postle, B.R. (2015). The cognitive neuroscience of working memory. Annual review of psychology, 66, 115—142. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015031
14. Doolittle, P.E., Altstaedter, L.L. (2009). The Effect of Working Memory Capacity on Multimedia Learning: Does Attentional Control Result in Improved Performance? Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching, 2, 7—25.
15. Fiorella, L., Mayer, R.E. (2022). Principles for reducing extraneous processing in multimedia learning: Coherence, signaling, redundancy, spatial contiguity, and temporal contiguity principles. In: R.E. Mayer, L. Fiorella (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (3rd ed.; 189—198). New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108894333.019
16. Forsberg, A., Adams, E.J., Cowan, N. (2021). The role of working memory in long-term learning: Implications for childhood development. In: K.D. Federmeier (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 1—45). Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.plm.2021.02.001
17. Jarrold, C., Towse, J.N. (2006). Individual differences in working memory. Neuroscience, 139(1), 39—
18. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., Sweller, J. (1998). Levels of expertise and instructional design. Human Factors, 40(1), 1—17. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872098779480587
19. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., Sweller, J. (2004). When Redundant on-Screen Text in Multimedia Technical Instruction Can Interfere with Learning. Human Factors, 46(3), 567—581. https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.3.567.50405
20. Li, J., Antonenko, P.D., Wang, J. (2019). Trends and issues in multimedia learning research in 1996—2016: A bibliometric analysis. Educational Research Review, 28, 100282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.100282
21. Luck, S.J., Vogel, E.K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390(6657), 279—281. https://doi.org/10.1038/36846
22. Ma, W.J., Husain, M., Bays, P.M. (2014). Changing concepts of working memory. Nature neuroscience, 17(3), 347—356. https://doi.org/1038/nn.3655
23. Mayer, R.E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32(1), 1—19. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3201_1
24. Mayer, R.E. (2014). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In: R.E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 43—71). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139547369.005
25. Mayer, R.E., Johnson, C.I. (2008). Revising the redundancy principle in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 380—386.
26. Mayer, R.E. (2005). Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning. In: R.E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31—48). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816819.004
27. Mayer, R.E. (2020). Multimedia Learning (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Mayer, R.E. (2022). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In: R.E. Mayer, L. Fiorella (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (3rd ed.; 189—198). New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108894333.019
29. Miller, A.L., Unsworth, N. (2018). Individual differences in working memory capacity and search efficiency. Memory & Cognition, 46(7), 1149—1163. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-018-0827-3
30. Mutlu-Bayraktar, D., Cosgun, V., Altan, T. (2019). Cognitive load in multimedia learning environments: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 141, 103618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103618
31. Pachman, M., Ke, F. (2009). Screen captured video tutorials as a special case of multimedia: testing the redundancy principle. Paper presented at the E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education.
32. Samur, Y. (2012). Redundancy effect on retention of vocabulary words using multimedia presentation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43, E166—E170. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01320.x
33. Schneider, S., Beege, M., Nebel, S., Rey, G. D. (2018). A meta-analysis of how signaling affects learning with media. Educational Research Review, 23, 1—24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.11.001
34. Schweppe, J., Rummer, R. (2014). Attention, working memory, and long-term memory in multimedia learning: An integrated perspective based on process models of working memory. Educational Psychology Review, 26(2), 285—306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9242-2
35. Sweller, J. (2010). Element Interactivity and Intrinsic, Extraneous, and Germane Cognitive Load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123—138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5
36. Trypke, M., Stebner, F., Wirth, J. (2023). Two types of redundancy in multimedia learning: a literature review. Frontiers in psychology, 14, 1148035. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1148035
37. Unsworth, N., Heitz, R.P., Schrock, J.C., Engle, R.W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior research methods, 37(3), 498—505. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03192720
38. Çeken, B., Taşkın, N. (2022). Multimedia learning principles in different learning environments: a systematic review. Smart Learning Environments, 9(1), https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00200-2
39. Wiley, J., Sanchez, C.A., Jaeger, A.J. (2014). The individual differences in working memory capacity principle in multimedia learning. In: R.E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 598—619). Cambridge University Press.