Skip to main content
Log in

Implications of multi-image for concept acquisition

  • Articles
  • Published:
ECTJ Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study explored a number of questions related to multi-image presentation of information and acquisition of a concept — in this case, classifying plants in the subphylum Pteropsida. Of particular interest was whether redundancy (i.e., additional positive examples of plants in the classes) and an opportunity to view nonexamples as well as examples of classes would be helpful to the seventhgrade subjects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Berliner, D. C., & Cahen, L. C. Trait-treatment interaction and learning. In F. N. Kerlinger (Ed.),Review of research in education (Vol. I). Itasca, I11.: Peacock, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourne, L. E., Goldstein, S., & Link, W. E. Concept learning as a function of availability of previously presented information.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1964,67, 439–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S., Goodnow, J. J., & Austin, G. A.A study of thinking. New York: Wiley, 1956.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, K. Multi-image research.Multi-Images,1977, 6–7.

  • Cahill, H. E., & Hovland, C. I. The role of memory in the acquisition of concepts.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1960,59, 137–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, D. C. Teaching concepts in the classroom: A set of teaching prescriptions derived from experimental research.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1971,62, 253–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Snow, R. E.Aptitudes and instructional methods. New York: Irvington, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J. K.Concept identification as a function of cognitive style, complexity, and training procedures (Tech. Rep. 32). Madison: Wisconsin Research and Development Center for Cognitive Learning, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeCecco, J.The psychology of learning and instruction. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: PrenticeHall, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denny, D. R. The assessment of difference in conceptual style.Child Study Journal, 1971,1, 142–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, W. C.Information processing and concept learning at grades 6, 8, and 10 as a function of cognitive style (Tech. Rep. 44). Madison: Wisconsin Research and Development Center for Cognitive Learning, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • French, J. W., Ekstrom, R. B., & Price, L. A.Manual for kit of reference tests for cognitive factors. Princeton, N.J.: Educational Testing Service, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, E. G. The perception of multiple images.AV Communication Review, 1975,23, 34–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gombrich, E. G. The visual image.Scientific American, 1972,227, 82–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haber, R. How we remember what we see.Scientific American, 1970,222, 104–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartman, F. Recognition learning under multiple channel presentation and test conditions.AV Communication Review, 1961,9, 24–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, D. N., Messick, S., & Meyers, C. T. Evaluation of group and individual forms of embedded figures, measure of field dependence.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1964,24, 177–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagen, J. Development studies. In A. Kidd & J. Rivoire (Eds.),Perceptual and conceptual development in children. New York: International University Press, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagen, J., Moss, H. A., &Sigel, I. E. Psychological significance of styles of conceptualization. In J. C. Wright & J. Kagen (Eds.),Basic cognitive processes in children. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 1963,28 (2, No. 86), 73–124.

  • Kates, S. L., & Yudin, L. Concept attainment and memory.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1964,55, 103–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klausmeier, H. J., Ghatala, E. S., & Frayer, D. A.Concept learning and development: A cognitive view. New York: Academic, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koran, J. J., Koran, M. L., & Freeman, P. Acquisition of a concept: Effects of mode of instruction and length of exposure to biology examples.AV Communication Review, 1976,24, 357–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, L., Kagen, J., & Robson, A. The influence of a preference for analytic categorization upon concept acquisition.Child Development, 1963,34, 433–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mechener, F. Behavioral analyses and instructional sequencing. In P. C. Lange (Ed.),Programmed Instruction (Vol. 66, Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Pt. 2). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D., & Tennyson, R. E.Teaching concepts: An instructional design guide. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Educational Technology Press, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyrowitz, J., & Fradkin, B.Design of multipleimage instructional presentations. Paper presented at annual meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Dallas, April 13–17, 1975.

  • Nelson, B. A.Effects of the analytic-global wet reflective-impulsivity cognitive styles on the acquisition of geometry concepts presented through emphasis or no emphasis and discovery on expository lessons (Tech. Rep. 234). Madison: Wisconsin Research and Development Center for Cognitive Learning, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrin, D.The use and development of simultaneous projected images in educational communication. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, 1969.

  • Salomon, G. Can we affect cognitive skills through visual media? An hypothesis and initial findings.AV Communication Review, 1972,20, 401–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santostefano, S.A biodevelopmental approach to clinical child psychology: Cognitive controls and cognitive control therapy. New York: Wiley, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santostefano, S., & Paley, E. Development of cognitive controls in children.Child Development, 1964,35, 939–949.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santostefano, S., & Rutledge, L. Cognitive styles and reading disabilities.Psychology in Schools, 1965,2, 57–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Severin, W. Another look at cue summation.AV Communication Review, 1967,15, 233–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trohanis, P. L. Information learning and retention with multiple images and audio: A classroom experiment.AV Communication Review, 1975,23, 395–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tukey, J. W.The problem of multiple comparisons. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University, 1956.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witkin, H. A. Individual differences in ease of perception of embedded figures.Journal of Personality, 1950,19, 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yudin, L., & Kates, S. L. Concept attainment and adolescent development.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1963,54, 177–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This study was funded by a Research Council grant, University of North Carolina at Greensboro. The author is grateful to Virginia Henry, Jamestown (N.C.) Junior High School, for her effort and to Douglas Denny, University of Kansas, for his informative cooperation.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jonassen, D.H. Implications of multi-image for concept acquisition. ECTJ 27, 291–302 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02791456

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02791456

Keywords

Navigation