Julie Bauer Morrison

Department of Psychology
Stanford University
Email: julie@Psych.Stanford.EDU


In the heart of Silicon Valley, visitors to the Mountain View Public Library may find their way to various places within the library by viewing an animation depicting the route to the desired location. The Silicon GraphicsÒ workstation in the entryway of the library shows the library’s floor plans. After choosing where in the library to go, an animated dotted line on the floor plan shows the visitor how to proceed there. Although this is a technically literate part of the country, the librarian reports that visitors do not like, and do not use, the animated location finder. They prefer instead to ask the librarian for directions or to use a printed paper map to find their way about the library.

The use of computer animation in everyday situations is becoming more popular and the use of animation in instructional settings has become exceedingly common. Matt Lauer, on a recent Today Show, interviewed James Oppenheim, the technology editor of the Oppenheim Toy Portfolio. Oppenheim reviewed and recommended different educational software programs aimed at children from preschool through high school. Each program displayed on the show integrated computer animation into the software. Additionally, Newsweek magazine recently published an article comparing the ease with which someone could learn to play the guitar from a CD-ROM tutorial with learning from a live tutor . With a computer tutorial students may proceed through the lesson at their own pace, but the computer can only provide a limited amount of feedback should the student run into difficulties. Overall, the reviewer concluded that the computer tutor could not compete with a live tutor. This conflict between wanting to use animation and not being assured of its effectiveness is the state in which current researchers of computer animation find themselves. People seem to like computer animation and believe it is a superior educational aid when compared with static or no graphics (e.g. Gurka & Citrin, 1996;. Despite these endorsements, researchers have had difficulty demonstrating conclusively that computer animation positively affects learning.

A demonstration of the general effectiveness of computer animation is not appropriate however. The question, "Is animation effective in facilitating student learning?", cannot be answered with a simple yes or no. There are numerous factors to consider when animation is used in an instructional setting. Animation, like textual information or illustrations, is an instructional tool, not an instructional solution. As with any tool, only appropriate use will result in the optimal outcome. However, with the current popularity of computer use and the ability to animate numerous types of information, instructors and software companies appear to be relying on intuitive notions that animation works rather than investigating its effectiveness before creating animated programs. They seem to think animation can be used indiscriminately and will achieve the desired effect of greater student learning. What needs to be clarified, however, are the conditions under which animation has the best chance of being successful and which provide the least chance.

Animation is an instructional tool, not an instructional solution. The simple process of animating information does not necessarily lead to a student’s development of a conceptual understanding of the presented material. Although many animated programs are being used in instructional settings, the basis for their use has not been empirically established. However, researchers are working to define the circumstances under which animation facilitates learning in an effort to improve animation’s use as an instructional tool.

After considering the many failures of animation to facilitate learning in algorithm animation situations, Gurka and Citrin wondered whether enough evidence could ever be amassed to convince researchers that their intuitive notion of the instructional effectiveness of animation was wrong. Although there have been successful demonstrations of animation’s effectiveness in educational settings which should preclude researchers from giving up on the use of animation, the point Gurka and Citrin are making seems to be that people’s intuitive sense of the effectiveness of animation will keep them continually researching and utilizing it. Hopefully, the research will come to precede animation’s utilization. Regardless, what becomes most important is clarifying what conditions make animation effective so they can be exploited during its use.

The purpose of animation when used in an instructional setting is to serve as an aid to student learning. In order to achieve this purpose, students should be presented with the type of information that will help them develop a conceptual understanding of the material. In many cases, the conceptual understanding will take the form of a mental model which the student can use to make inferences about the informational domain and solve problems relating to the domain. Research into the effects of both illustrations and animation shows that these instructional devices can aid conceptual development (e.g. . However, additional research is needed to identify what other factors are important to the design of animated programs.

In some ways, the effects of animation on learning have been investigated for decades. Since animation can be regarded as a specific form of illustration, illustration research may provide insight into how to use animation optimally. Illustrations have been used as attentional and motivational devices . They appear to facilitate student learning when depicting the type of information essential to the establishment of a conceptual understanding of a domain . Since illustrations are a visual device, they may only facilitate learning when visualization of the information is necessary . In some cases, this visualization shows the workings of actual devices. In other cases, illustrations are used to help the learner visualize the conceptual nature of the information and aid students’ mental model formation . Although an illustration may fulfill the above requirements, it still may not be an effective learning device. Research has suggested that students may need to be schooled in illustration literacy; they may need to be taught how to attend to and interpret illustrations . Finally, differences in ability may affect students’ use of illustrations .

In many ways, research on animation has shown that what affects learning from illustrations affects learning from animation. In most studies of illustrations, the illustrations are used as a supplement to textual information. Researchers of animated displays suggest that animated programs incorporate verbal information to allow the learner the greatest opportunity to develop an understanding of the information . As a result of the limitations of the working memory system, this verbal information is suggested to be auditory and concurrent with the animation . Research also provides evidence that neither illustrations nor animation will be particularly effective if the depicted information is easily imagined or unnecessary due to the skills of the learner . Since animation still is a relatively new medium, many people may not realize how to interpret it or use it for learning. Animation is a potentially more complex form of illustration and as such the necessity to teach people how to utilize it may be greater than the need to teach the interpretation of illustrations. In either case though, it appears as if students would benefit from instruction aimed at helping them extract the appropriate information from an illustration, animated or not . Finally, individual differences in ability seem to affect both learners using illustrations and those learning from animation.

Even if animation is a subset of illustration, there still are substantial differences between the two medium and how each can be used. For this reason, research specifically on animation is crucial for truly understanding animation’s effectiveness in instructional settings. Animation is defined by its ability to display motion and, consequently, may facilitate learning when the information to be learned is motion information . When the animated motion fails to add anything of substance to the display (e.g. when the only difference between an animated and a static condition is that the cursor moves between icons in the animation condition whereas the cursor just points to the icons in the static condition), there may be no facilitation effect . As an instructional device, animation may facilitate learning best when used as it was intended. In this case, this means using animation to depict information contained in the generated motion.

The other area where research on illustration cannot inform those who study animation is interactive or simulation animation. When students use an interactive animation, they actively manipulate variables and view the outcomes rather than passively observing the animation another has designed. While most research suggests that interactive animation positively affects students’ learning , one problem arises when considering what comprises an interactive animation program. Interactive animation programs not only incorporate simple animation, but also include other instructional devices like verbal information as part of their structure. Furthermore, the importance of the students’ interaction with the program cannot be underestimated. Students are actively involved in hypothesis testing when they repeatedly chose input variables and run the animation to see the different outcomes. These additions to the simple use of animation makes it difficult to determine whether animation facilitates learning or whether similar interaction with the material outside an animated setting would affect learning as much. Although this aspect of animation needs to be investigated, it does appear that when animation is used in interactive situations there is a good chance that students’ understanding of the information will be facilitated.

Robert Abel, in a review of the history of computer animation, is quoted as saying, "I think [computer animation is] going to become a standard tool of expression in the same way alphabets became, or hieroglyphics" . Considering the popularity of animation and how often it is used, in educational software, in product demonstrations, on the World Wide Web, one cannot help but think that animation’s use will only expand in the future. It may be that animation will become a standard medium for communication. However, if it is going to be used effectively in instructional settings, designers of animated programs must consider under which conditions animation appears to facilitate learning and how these factors interact with one another. Even more important to the future use of animation will be the research continually exploring animation’s impact on instruction. What is most critical to remember, though, is that animation is what Able said, a tool, and one to be used cautiously and wisely.

References

Atlas, R., Cornett, L., Lane, D. M., & Napier, H. A. (1997). The use of animation in software training: Pitfalls and benefits. In M. A. Quinones & A. Ehrenstein (Eds.), Training for a Rapidly Changing Workplace: Applications of Psychological Research. (pp. 281-302). Washington: American Psychological Association.

Auzenne, V. R. (1994). The Visualization Quest: A History of Computer Animation. Rutherford: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press.

Baecker, R. (1998). Sorting out sorting: A case study of software visualization for teaching computer science. In J. Stasko, J. Domingue, M. H. Brown, & B. A. Price (Eds.), Software Visualization (pp. 369-381). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Baek, Y. K., & Layne, B. H. (1988). Color, graphics, and animation in a computer-assisted learning tutorial lesson. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 15, 131-135.

Dwyer, F. M. (1971). Effect of knowledge of objectives on visualized instruction. Journal of Psychology, 77, 219-221.

Dyck, J. L. (1995). Problem solving by novice Macintosh users: The effects of animated, self-paced written, and no instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12, 29-49.

Grimes, P. W., & Willey, T. E. (1990). The effectiveness of microcomputer simulations in the principles of economics course. Computers in Education, 14, 81-86.

Gurka, J. S., & Citrin, W. (1996). Testing effectiveness of algorithm animation. Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Visual Language (pp. 182-189). Boulder, CO: IEEE.

Harrison, S. M. (1995). A comparison of still, animated, or nonillustrated on-line help with written or spoken instructions in a graphical user interface. In I. R. Katz, R. Mack, L. Marks, M. B. Rosson, & J. Nielsen (Eds.), Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 82-89). Denver, CO: ACM.

Hays, T. A. (1996). Spatial abilities and the effects of computer animation on short-term and long-term comprehension. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 14, 139-155. Hegarty, M., & Just, M. A. (1989). Understanding machines from text and diagrams. In H. Mandl & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Knowledge Acquisition from Text and Pictures (pp. 171-194). Amsterdam: North Holland.

Kieras, D. E. (1992). Diagrammatic displays for engineered systems: Effects on human performance in interacting with malfunctioning systems. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 36, 861-895.

Koran, M. L., & Koran, J. J. (1980). Interaction of learner characteristics with pictorial adjuncts in learning from science text. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17, 477-483.

Kwon, B. (1998, August 31, 1998). Learning to play guitar: Does a computer beat a tutor? Newsweek, 132, 58-59.

Lazarowitz, R., & Huppert, J. (1993). Science process skills of 10th-grade biology students in a computer-assisted learning setting. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25, 366-382.

Levie, W. H., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30, 195-232.

Levin, J. R., Anglin, G. J., & Carney, R. N. (1987). On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. In D. M. Willows & H. A. Houghton (Eds.), The Psychology of Illustrations (Vol. 1, pp. 51-85). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Lowe, R. (in press). Extracting information from an animation during complex visual processing. European Journal of Psychology of Education.

Mayer, R. E. (1989b). Systematic thinking fostered by illustrations in scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 240-246.

Mayer, R. E., & Anderson, R. B. (1991). Animations need narrations: An experimental test of a dual-coding hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 484-490.

Mayer, R. E., & Anderson, R. B. (1992). The instructive animation: Helping students build connections between words and pictures in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 444-452.

Mayer, R. E., & Gallini, J. K. (1990). When is an illustration worth ten thousand words? Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 715-726.

Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 312-320.

Mayer, R. E., & Sims, V. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 389-401.

Mayer, R. E., Steinhoff, K., Bower, G., & Mars, R. (1995). A generative theory of textbook design: Using annotated illustrations to foster meaningful learning of science text. Educational Technology, Research, and Development, 43, 31-44.

Nathan, M. J., Kintsch, W., & Young, E. (1992). A theory of algebra-word-problem comprehension and its implications for the design of learning environments. Cognition and Instruction, 9, 329-389.

Pane, J. F., Corbett, A. T., & John, B. E. (1996). Assessing dynamics in computer-based instruction. In M. J. Tauber (Ed.), Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 797-804), Vancouver: ACM.

Park, O.-c., & Gittelman, S. S. (1992). Selective use of animation and feedback in computer-based instruction. Educational Technology, Research, and Development, 40, 27-38.

Payne, S. J., Chesworth, L., & Hill, E. (1992). Animated demonstrations for exploratory learners. Interacting with Computers, 4, 3-22.

Peeck, J. (1987). The role of illustrations in processing and remembering illustrated text. In D. M. Willows & H. A. Houghton (Eds.), The Psychology of Illustrations (Vol. 1, pp. 115-151). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Picking, R. (1997). Reading music from screens vs. paper. Behaviour and Information Technology, 16, 72-78. Rieber, L. P. (1990b). Using computer animated graphics with science instruction with children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 135-140.

Rieber, L. P., Boyce, M. J., & Assad, C. (1990). The effects of computer animation on adult learning and retrieval tasks. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 17, 46-52.

Rieber, L. P., & Parmley, M. W. (1995). To teach or not to teach? Comparing the use of computer-based simulations in deductive versus inductive approaches to learning with adults in science. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 13, 359-374. Stasko, J., & Lawrence, A. (1998). Empirically assessing algorithm animations as learning aids. In J. Stasko, J. Domingue, M. H. Brown, & B. A. Price (Eds.), Software Visualization (pp. 419-438). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Thompson, S. V., & Riding, R. J. (1990). The effect of animated diagrams on the understanding of a mathematical demonstration in 11- to 14-year-old pupils. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 93-98.

Weidenmann, B. (1989). When good pictures fail: An information-processing approach to the effect of illustrations. In H. Mandl & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Knowledge Acquisition from Text and Pictures (pp. 157-170). Amsterdam: North Holland.

White, B. Y. (1984). Designing computer games to help physics students understanding Newton's laws of motion. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 69-108.

Winn, W. (1987). Charts, graphs, and diagrams in educational materials. In D. M. Willows & H. A. Houghton (Eds.), The Psychology of Illustrations (Vol. 1, pp. 152-198). New York: Springer-Verlag.


This page is currently maintained by Varenius Workshop Webmaster
Last Updated: Oct. 13, 1998