Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The influence of the multimedia and modality principles on the learning outcomes, satisfaction, and mental effort of college students with and without dyslexia

  • Published:
Annals of Dyslexia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the application of the multimedia and modality principles on cued-recall, recognition, and mental effort of college students with and without dyslexia. The study used a Multimedia (Image Present vs. Image Absent) × Modality (Narration vs. Onscreen Text) × Dyslexia (Dyslexia vs. Non-Dyslexia) 3-way factorial design with each independent variable serving as a between-subject condition. A total of N = 148 participants (73 with dyslexia and 75 without dyslexia) were recruited from five different institutions of higher education in the Southeastern United States and systematically assigned to one of four multimedia learning conditions. After assessing our data for statistical assumptions, we employed factorial Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) models on each dependent measure. Our findings show a reverse modality effect for students with dyslexia who performed better than their peers without dyslexia in Onscreen Text conditions. Although performance was better across groups and conditions when images were present, there were no significant interactions related to the multimedia condition. Similarly, there were no significant interactions related to mental effort even though learners with dyslexia exhibited high instructional efficiency in the Onscreen Text-Image Present condition while learners without dyslexia exhibited low task involvement in the Onscreen Text-Image Absent condition. Our results provide theoretical implications and important avenues for future research and practice as related to how multimedia learning influences students with dyslexia. We also suggest studies that could inform the eventual design of adaptive and personalized multimedia learning solutions for learners with dyslexia.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Available in consultation with the corresponding author.

References

  • Aleven, V., McLaughlin, E. A., Glenn, R. A., & Koedinger, K. R. (2017). Instruction based on adaptive learning technologies. In R. E. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction (2nd ed., pp. 522–560). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alsobhi, A. Y., Khan, N., & Rahanu, H. (2015). Personalised learning materials based on dyslexia types: Ontological approach. Procedia Computer Science, 60, 113–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.08.110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andresen, A., Anmarkrud, Ø., & Bråten, I. (2019). Investigating multiple source use among students with and without dyslexia. Reading and Writing, 32, 1149–1174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9904-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. D. (1992). Working memory: The interface between memory and cognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 4(3), 281–288. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.1992.4.3.281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. D. (1998). Human memory: Theory and practice. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 8, 47–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barron, A. E. (2004). Auditory instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 949–978). Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Beacham, N. A., & Alty, J. L. (2006). An investigation into the effects that digital media can have on the learning outcomes of individuals who have dyslexia. Computers & Education, 47(1), 74–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.10.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brante, E. W., & Holmqvist, M. (2017). Reading from multimedia materials: Benefits of non-congruent pictures on reading comprehension for dyslexia readers. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 1, 16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, K. R. (2014). The multimedia principle. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, 2nd Edition (pp.174-205). Cambridge University Press.

  • Carney, R. N., & Levin, J. R. (2002). Pictorial illustrations still improve students’ learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013176309260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. M., Maughan, B., Goodman, R., & Meltzer, H. (2005). Literacy difficulties and psychiatric disorders: Evidence for comorbidity. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46(5), 524–532. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00366.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casalis, S., Leuwers, C., & Hilton, H. (2013). Syntactic comprehension in reading and listening: A study with French children with dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46(3), 210–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412449423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavalli, E., Duncan, L. G., Elbro, C., El Ahmadi, A., & Colé, P. (2017). Phonemic—morphemic dissociation in university students with dyslexia: an index of reading compensation? Annals of Dyslexia, 67(1), 63–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-016-0138-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4), 293–332. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0804_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and brain sciences, 24(1), 87–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Tufo, S. N., & Earle, F. S. (2020). Skill profiles of college students with a history of developmental language disorder and developmental dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53(3), 228–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219420904348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyson, M. C., & Haselgrove, M. (2001). The influence of reading speed and line length on the effectiveness of reading from screen. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54(4), 585–612. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.2001.0458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edyburn, D. L. (2007). Technology-enhanced reading performance: Defining a research agenda. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(1), 146–152. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.42.1.7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flesch, R. (1949). The art of readable writing. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillingham, A., & Stillman, B. (1956). Remedial training for children with specific disability in reading, spelling and penmanship (5th ed.). Cambridge: Educators Publishing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, R. (1991). The maturing of the relationship between the science of learning and cognition and educational practice. Learning and instruction, 1(2), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(91)90023-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grigorenko, E. L., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, L. S., Wagner, R. K., Willcutt, E. G., & Fletcher, J. M. (2020). Understanding, educating, and supporting children with specific learning disabilities: 50 years of science and practice. American Psychologist, 75(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrar, V., Tammam, J., Pérez-Bellido, A., Pitt, A., Stein, J., & Spence, C. (2014). Multisensory integration and attention in developmental dyslexia. Current Biology, 24(5), 531–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.01.029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinshelwood, J. (1909). Four cases of congenital word-blindness occurring in the same family. British Medical Journal, 2, 1229–1232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houbart, J. C., Quiniou, S., Berthaut, M., Daille, B., & Salomé, C. (2019). Automatic segmentation of texts into units of meaning for reading assistance. arXiv preprint arXiv, 1910.05014.

  • Jordan, A. (2019). How technology supports empowerment, equality, and efficiency: Voices of students with dyslexia. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Florida.

  • Kennedy, M. J., & Boyle, J. R. (2017). The promise and problem with technology in special education: Implications for academic learning. In J. M. Kauffman, D. P. Hallahan, & P. C. Pullen (Eds.), The handbook of special education (pp. 606–614). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S., & Lombardino, L. (2017). Exploring the effects of narration and pictures on learning for students with reading deficits. Clinical Archives of Communication Disorders, 2(2), 116–127. https://doi.org/10.21849/cacd.2017.00136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S., & Lombardino, L. (2019). Multimedia learning: Contributions of learners’ verbal abilities and presentation modalities. International Journal of Learning, Teaching, and Educational Research, 18(1), 76–91. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.18.1.6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S., Lombardino, L. J., Cowles, W., & Altmann, L. J. (2014). Investigating graph comprehension in students with dyslexia: An eye tracking study. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35(7), 1609–1622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.03.043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S., Wiseheart, R., & Walden, P. (2018). Do multimedia instructional designs enhance learning in college students with dyslexia? Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 31(4), 351–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00014-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. A., & Kirschner, F. (2012). Mental Effort. In N. M. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Boston, MA: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_226.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. A., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2013). Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.804395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoop-van Campen, C. A., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2018). The modality and redundancy effects in multimedia learning in children with dyslexia. Dyslexia, 24(2), 140–155. https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoop-van Campen, C. A., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2020). Effects of audio support on multimedia learning processes and outcomes in students with dyslexia. Computers & Education, 150, 103858. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Košak-Babuder, M., Kormos, J., Ratajczak, M., & Pižorn, K. (2019). The effect of read-aloud assistance on the text comprehension of dyslexia and non-dyslexia English language learners. Language Testing, 36(1), 51–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532218756946.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lallier, M., Donnadieu, S., & Valdois, S. (2013). Developmental dyslexia: exploring how much phonological and visual attention span disorders are linked to simultaneous auditory processing deficits. Annals of Dyslexia, 63(2), 97–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-012-0074-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaVoie, N., Parker, J., Legree, P. J., Ardison, S., & Kilcullen, R. N. (2020). Using latent semantic analysis to score short answer constructed responses: Automated scoring of the consequences test. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 80(2), 399–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164419860575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation and the transient information effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(6), 943–951. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1787.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lombardino, L. (2012). Assessing and differentiating reading and writing disorders: multidimensional model. New York, NY: Delmar/Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Low, R., & Sweller, J. (2014). The modality principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, 2nd Edition (pp.227-246). Cambridge University Press.

  • Marinelli, C. V., Angelelli, P., Di Filippo, G., & Zoccolotti, P. (2011). Is developmental dyslexia modality specific? A visual-auditory comparison of Italian dyslexics. Neuropsychologia, 49(7), 1718–1729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.02.050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (1999). Multimedia aids to problem-solving transfer. International Journal of Educational Research, 31(7), 611–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(99)00027-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2014). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp. 43–71). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A cognitive theory of multimedia learning: Implications for design principles. Journal of educational psychology, 91(2), 358–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGonnell, M., Parrila, R., & Deacon, H. (2007). The recruitment and description of university students who self-report difficulty acquiring early reading skills. Exceptionality Education International, 17(2), 155–174. https://doi.org/10.5206/eei.v17i2.7602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montali, J., & Lewandowski, L. (1996). Bimodal reading: Benefits of a talking computer for average and less skilled readers. Journal of learning disabilities, 29(3), 271–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949602900305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nobel, P. A., & Shiffrin, R. M. (2001). Retrieval processes in recognition and cued recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(2), 384–413. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.2.384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olander, M. H., Brante, E. W., & Nyström, M. (2017). The effect of illustration on improving text comprehension in dyslexia adults. Dyslexia, 23(1), 42–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orton, S. T. (1925). “Word blindness” in school children. Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, 14, 581–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & van Gerven, P. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38, 63–71. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Darabi, A. A. (2005). A motivational perspective on the relation between mental effort and performance: Optimizing learner involvement in instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paas, F., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Adam, J. J. (1994). Measurement of cognitive load in instructional research. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79, 419–430. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1994.79.1.419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paas, F. G. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 429–434. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representation: A dual coding approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paivio, A. (1991). Images in mind: the evolution of a theory. Harvester Wheatsheaf.

  • Ramus, F., & Ahissar, M. (2012). Developmental dyslexia: The difficulties of interpreting poor performance, and the importance of normal performance. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 29(1-2), 104–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643294.2012.677420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raveh, M., & Schiff, R. (2008). Visual and auditory morphological priming in adults with developmental dyslexia. Scientific Studies of Reading, 12(3), 221–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430801917068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ring, J. J., Avrit, K. J., & Black, J. L. (2017). Take flight: The evolution of an Orton Gillingham-based curriculum. Annals of Dyslexia, 67(3), 383–400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-017-0151-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritzhaupt, A. D., Gomes, N. D., & Barron, A. E. (2008). The effects of time-compressed audio and verbal redundancy on learner performance and satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 2434–2445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritzhaupt, A. D., Barron, A. E., & Kealy, W. A. (2011). Conjoint processing of time-compressed narration in multimedia instruction: The effects on recall, but not recognition. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(2), 203–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, M., & Albano, A. (2017). The College Instructor’s Guide to Writing Test Items: Measuring Student Learning. Taylor & Francis.

  • Rose, D. H., Johnston, S. C., & Vanden Boogart, A. E. (2013). Theme editors’ introduction. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 39(4), 7–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (1984). Television is “easy” and print is “tough”: The differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(647), 658–658. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.76.4.647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, S. F. (2009). Analysis of variance: the fundamental concepts. Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy, 17(2), 27E–38E. https://doi.org/10.1179/jmt.2009.17.2.27E.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheiter, K., Schubert, C., & Schüler, A. (2018). Self-regulated learning from illustrated text: Eye movement modeling to support use and regulation of cognitive processes during learning from multimedia. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 80–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheiter, K., Schubert, C., Schüler, A., Schmidt, H., Zimmermann, G., Wassermann, B., Krebs, M., & Eder, T. (2019). Adaptive multimedia: Using gaze-contingent instructional guidance to provide personalized processing support. Computers and Education., 139, 31–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.05.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneps, M., Chen, C., Pomplun, M., Wang, J., Crosby, A., & Kent, K. (2016). Re-inventing reading: Rapid multi-channel processing of language accelerates reading. Journal of Vision, 16(12), 462. https://doi.org/10.1167/16.12.462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneps, M. H., Thomson, J. M., Chen, C., Sonnert, G., & Pomplun, M. (2013). E-readers are more effective than paper for some with dyslexia. PloS one, 8(9), e75634. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0075634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneps, M. H., Thomson, J. M., Sonnert, G., Pomplun, M., Chen, C., & Heffner-Wong, A. (2013). Shorter lines facilitate reading in those who struggle. PloS one, 8(8), e71161. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0071161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schrank, F. A., McGrew, K. S., Mather, N., Wendling, B. J., & LaForte, E. M. (2014). Woodcock-Johnson IV tests of cognitive abilities. Riverside.

  • Serra, M. J., & Dunlosky, J. (2010). Metacomprehension judgements reflect the belief that diagrams improve learning from text. Memory, 18(7), 698–711. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2010.506441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaywitz, S. (2008). Overcoming dyslexia: A new and complete science-based program for reading problems at any level. New York, NY: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, A. M., Marcus, N., & Ayres, P. (2012). The transient information effect: Investigating the impact of segmentation on spoken and written text. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(6), 848–853. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2885.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stampoltzis, A., & Polychronopoulou, S. (2009). Greek university students with dyslexia: An interview study. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 24(3), 307–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250903020195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, M., Duffy, S., & Hughes, G. (2007). The use of animation in higher education teaching to support students with dyslexia. Education + Training, 49(1), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400910710729857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tejero, P., Pi-Ruano, M., & Roca, J. (2020). Better read it to me: Benefits of audio versions of variable message signs in drivers with dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 70(3), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-020-00199-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, A. O., Antonenko, P. D., & Davis, R. (2016). Understanding metacomprehension accuracy within video annotation systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 269–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R., & Rashotte, C. (2012). Test of Word Reading Efficiency:(TOWRE-2). Pearson Clinical Assessment.

  • Van Gog, T., & Paas, F. (2008). Instructional efficiency: Revisiting the original construct in educational research. Educational psychologist, 43(1), 16–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., & Pearson, N. A. (1999). Comprehensive test of phonological processing: CTOPP. Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J., Dawson, K., Saunders, K., Ritzhaupt, A. D., Antonenko, P. P., Lombardino, L., et al. (2018). Investigating the effects of modality and multimedia on the learning performance of college students with dyslexia. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33(3), 182–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 (pp. 615–636). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willcutt, E. G., Pennington, B. F., & DeFries, J. C. (2000). Twin study of the etiology of comorbidity between reading disability and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 96(3), 293–301. https://doi.org/10.1002/1096-8628(20000612)96:3<293::AID-AJMG12>3.0.CO;2-C.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, B. A., & Oxford, M. A. (2015). Testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.

  • Wise, S. L., & DeMars, C. E. (2005). Low examinee effort in low-stakes assessment: Problems and potential solutions. Educational Assessment, 10(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326977ea1001_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiseheart, R., Altmann, L. J., Park, H., & Lombardino, L. J. (2009). Sentence comprehension in young adults with developmental dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 59(2), 151–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-009-0028-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witteman, M. J., & Segers, E. (2010). The modality effect tested in children in a user-paced multimedia environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(2), 132–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00335.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittrock, M. C. (1989). Generative processes of comprehension. Educational psychologist, 24(4), 345–376. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2404_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, A., Leahy, W., Marcus, N., & Sweller, J. (2012). Cognitive load theory, the transient information effect and e-learning. Learning and Instruction, 22(6), 449–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.05.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, S. G., Moxley, J. H., Tighe, E. L., & Wagner, R. K. (2018). Does use of text-to-speech and related read-aloud tools improve reading comprehension for students with reading disabilities? A meta-analysis. Journal of learning disabilities, 51(1), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219416688170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Youman, M., & Mather, N. (2013). Dyslexia laws in the USA. Annals of Dyslexia, 63(2), 133–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, J., Dawson, K., Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Antonenko, P. (2020). Investigating how multimedia and modality design principles influence student learning performance, satisfaction, mental effort, and visual attention. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 29(3), 265–284.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Code availability

SPSS.

Funding

This work was funded internal university grant funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Teaching and Learning, College of Education, University of Florida, 2423 Norman Hall, PO BOX 117048, Gainesville, FL, 32611, USA

    Kara Dawson, Jiawen Zhu, Albert D. Ritzhaupt & Pavlo Antonenko

  2. Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA

    Jiahui Wang

  3. Nemours Children’s Specialty Care, Jacksonville, FL, USA

    Kendra Saunders

  4. School of Special Education, School Pyschology and Early Childhood Studies, University of Florida, Kent, OH, USA

    Linda Lombardino

Authors
  1. Kara Dawson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jiawen Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Albert D. Ritzhaupt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pavlo Antonenko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kendra Saunders
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jiahui Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Linda Lombardino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kara Dawson.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dawson, K., Zhu, J., Ritzhaupt, A.D. et al. The influence of the multimedia and modality principles on the learning outcomes, satisfaction, and mental effort of college students with and without dyslexia. Ann. of Dyslexia 71, 188–210 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-021-00219-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-021-00219-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation