You are here:

Promoting Computerized Learning via Pictorial Access to On-screen Text

, University of Regensburg, Germany

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Montreal, Quebec, Canada ISBN 978-1-939797-16-2 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC


In two experiments learners used computerized learning material which consisted of static pictures and on-screen text relating to the physiology of vision in one of two formats. The formats differed in method of access to text. It was hypothesized that accessing text by clicking on picture components would produce superior learning to linear access i.e. clicking forwards and backwards buttons (Exps. 1 and 2). Exp. 2 also investigated whether effects were dependent on learners’ domain-specific prior knowledge. Results indicated that pictorial access to text promotes learning about pictures (picture completion and picture labeling) but not texts (verbal retention). Effects of mode of access on transfer performance were inconsistent. Mode of access effects did not depend on prior knowledge.


Stiller, K. (2015). Promoting Computerized Learning via Pictorial Access to On-screen Text. In S. Carliner, C. Fulford & N. Ostashewski (Eds.), Proceedings of EdMedia 2015--World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 59-68). Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved December 11, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map


  1. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Erlbaum.
  2. Eiwan, B. (1998). Lehren und Lernen mit dem Computer. Eine experimentelle Studie zum Einfluß von Lerner-und Programmerkmalen auf Lernprozeß und Lernergebnis. Regensburg: Roderer.
  3. Kalyuga, S. & Renkl, A. (2010). Expertise reversal effect and its instructional implications: Introduction to the special issue. Instructional Science, 38, 209-215.
  4. Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38, 23-31.
  5. Levie, H.W. & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30, 195-232.
  6. 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 illustration. Vol. 1: Basic research (pp. 51-86).
  7. Milheim, D.W. & Martin, B.L. (1991). Theoretical basis for the use of learner control: Three different perspectives. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 18(3), 99-105.
  8. Stiller, K. (2001). Navigation über Bilder und bimodale Textdarbietung beim computerbasierten Lernen. Zeitschrift für Medienpsychologie, 13, 177-187.
  9. Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychological Review, 22, 121-138.
  10. Tabbers, H.K. (2002). The modality of text in multimedia instructions. Refining the design guidelines. Heerlen: Educational Technology Expertise Centre, Open University of the Netherlands.
  11. Williams, M.D. (1996). Learner-control and instructional techniques. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 957-983). New York, NY: Macmillan.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact