Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 177–189

www.elsevier.com/locate/learninstruc

Cognitive strategies for learning from static and

dynamic visuals
D. Lewalter ∗
University of the Armed Forces, Munich, FRG, Werner-Heisenberg-Weg 39, D-85577 Neubiberg,
Germany

Abstract

An experimental study with 60 students investigated the effects of including static or

dynamic visuals in an expository text on a learning outcome and the use of learning strategies
while working with those visuals. For the study, two illustrated and one text-only version of
a computer-based learning text on an astrophysical subject were developed and served as the
learning material. Considering the cognitive task demand in a learning test, we found signifi-
cant differences between the illustrated versions and the text-only version, but not between
the two illustrated ones. We used think-aloud protocols to examine the learning processes
initiated by both types of visuals. The coding of the recorded learning activities was based on
recent theories of learning strategies. The results for both types of illustrations indicate differ-
ent frequencies in the use of learning strategies relevant for the learning outcome, and therefore
indicate the contribution of the cognitive process quality for the supportive function of visuals.
 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Illustrations are frequently integrated in expository text to support learning and to

make the learning process more effective. A large number of studies have substan-
tiated the supportive function of static illustrations in text on learning outcomes under
certain conditions (Rieber, 1994). A theoretical explanation for the positive effects
of visuals is provided by the cognitive theory of multimedia learning from text and
pictures presented by Mayer (1994, 2003). When learners build referential connec-

∗
Fax: +49-89-6004-2841.
E-mail address: doris.lewalter@unibw-muenchen.de (D. Lewalter).

0959-4752/03/$ - see front matter  2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00019-1
178 D. Lewalter / Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 177–189

tions between their separately developed mental representations of verbal and visual
material and their prior knowledge, learning is enhanced.
The integration of illustrations plays an important role in designing effective com-
puter-based learning programs. With the advent of new technologies, dynamic visuals
such as animated graphics are used instead of or in addition to static visuals like
pictures. Comparing both types of illustrations, we find numerous similarities con-
cerning the representation of objects. However, animations seem to be superior for
the visualization of spatial aspects and dynamic processes. They allow a complete
visualization of spatial constellations and dynamic processes, whereas in pictures,
static indicators such as shading or arrows must be used to symbolize this infor-
mation.
Consequently, animations and pictures impose different cognitive demands on the
learner when creating a mental representation of the dynamic learning content.
As dynamic illustrations offer a complete model for generating a mental represen-
tation of motion, thereby reducing the level of abstraction of temporal ideas, they
should support deeper understanding than static visuals do (Park & Hopkins, 1993).
When static visuals like pictures are used, learners are forced to infer this model on
their own. One may, therefore, expect dynamic visuals to be more helpful in fostering
the learning process if motion in three-dimensional space is a relevant aspect of the
learning material. However, only weak empirical evidence supports the assumption
of the superiority of animated illustrations (e.g. Reed, 1985; Rieber, 1989).
How can this lack of superiority of animations over static visuals be explained?
One opportunity to find an answer to this question is to examine the learning process
more closely. The expectation of the higher impact of dynamic visuals on learning
outcomes when compared with static visuals is based on the assumption that learners
use all the information presented in these illustrations. Static and dynamic illus-
trations are seen as “simple media” that do not confront the learner with problems in
processing the presented information. Weidenmann (1988) argues that the cognitive
processing of visuals is not as easy as is frequently supposed. Studies have shown
that learners sometimes have problems establishing connections between visual and
textual information (e.g. Mayer, 1994; Weidenmann, 1988). They also have difficulty
identifying the relevant information presented in an illustration (Mayer & Gallini,
1990). When learning with dynamic illustrations, learners are confronted with similar
or even more challenging problems (Lowe, 1999, 2003). The transitory nature of
dynamic visuals confronts learners with higher levels of cognitive load than would
be expected for static visuals. On the other hand, the apparent simplicity of the
dynamic information presented may influence the learners to adopt less mental effort
and volitional attention (Rieber, 1989).
From an information-processing perspective, it seems reasonable to assume that
there are differences in cognitive processes associated with learning from animated
and static visuals. Therefore we tried to investigate the actual strategies and thought
processes that learners are engaged in when learning from illustrations integrated in
text. These strategies have to be considered as a central factor for the effective use
of visuals.
Activities that support successful learning are generally referred to as learning
 D. Lewalter / Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 177–189 179

strategies (Dansereau, 1985; Pintrich, 1989; Weinstein & Mayer, 1986). We used
the model proposed by Weinstein and Mayer (1986) as an appropriate theoretical
framework for understanding the process of information encoding when learning with
illustrations in text. Weinstein and Mayer (1986, p. 315) defined learning strategies as
“behaviors and thoughts that learners engage in during learning and that are intended
to influence the learner’s encoding process”. Learning strategies are understood as
a schematic structure combining a sequence of specific learning activities that will
be executed by the learner to gain new knowledge. The authors differentiate the
learning strategies by considering their function within the encoding process. This
process can be analyzed with respect to the following four main components: selec-
tion, acquisition, construction and integration. Weinstein and Mayer (1986) dis-
tinguish between cognitive and metacognitive strategies in the process of learning
from text. Cognitive strategies refer to the learners’ cognitive processes during the
process of encoding, for example rehearsal or elaboration behaviors. Metacognitive
strategies refer to the learners’ knowledge of their own cognitive processes and their
ability to control these processes, for example by monitoring and modifying them.
In our study we used these main categories of learning strategies in order to charac-
terize the learners’ activity when engaged in the visual aspects of the learning
material. The material is composed of a text describing and explaining an aspect of
the subject matter, immediately followed by dynamic or static visuals on a separate
frame (see Section 2.1 for a detailed description).
In general, the term “rehearsal strategies” refers to learning techniques like memo-
rizing by recitation and recapitulation. We expected that the statements of the learners
when using rehearsal strategies during working on the visuals would probably be
very similar to the text information they read in the preceding text. Since dynamic
illustrations offer the motion of the pictorial components in a chronological order, the
rehearsal of the information may be more structured. Because of the short duration of
the animation the repeated information may be less complete. Learners may only
mention the most obvious aspects of information presented by the dynamic visual.
Considering the assumption that learning is enhanced when learners build referential
connections between their separately developed verbal and visual representations of
the learning material (Mayer, 2003), this learning strategy may support learning,
particularly when factual knowledge is supposed to be acquired.
In general, “elaboration strategies” include learning techniques such as building
connections between new information and prior knowledge or experiences. Therefore
elaboration strategies seem to be crucial for deeper comprehension. It was assumed
that the illustrations stimulate the learners to use optical links to the learning content,
which were offered to them in addition to verbal links that were offered by the text.
Learners could connect the new information not only to their prior knowledge but
also to their optical experiences stored in memory. For example, they could identify
optical similarities. Compared with static visuals, animations offer the dynamic
aspect of the optical appearance as an additional link for elaborations.
In our study, we used the term “control strategies” to refer to learning techniques
that (a) aim at the planning and regulation of the further steps in learning and (b)
refer to the control of the actual level of comprehension. According to Chi, Bassok,
180 D. Lewalter / Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 177–189

Lewis, Reimann, and Glaser (1989), statements that refer to the “controlling of the
level of comprehension” can be understood either as statements confirming compre-
hension of the learning material or as statements indicating comprehension failure.
These strategies refer to both the comprehension of the illustrations and the building
of referential connections between text and visuals. Because of the transitory and
automatic nature of the dynamic visuals, it might be more difficult for the learners
to detect possible problems in comprehension when compared with static visuals.
Learners who generate a visual impression of the motion on the basis of static sym-
bols on their own may be likely to recognize problems in comprehension because
they have the ability to regulate the speed of their learning, perhaps making them
more able to employ planning and regulation strategies. These strategies are crucial
for deeper comprehension (Entwistle, 1988).
This taxonomy of learning strategies represents an analytical distinction between
learning processes which in fact are highly interrelated. However, this framework
provides a theoretical basis for an attempt to distinguish various kinds of cognitive
and metacognitive learning techniques executed by the learners when they are learn-
ing with different kinds of visuals. In addition, since we do not know how successful
students use learning strategies when working with different kinds of visuals, we
have to investigate the intensity of the strategy use and its impact on learning out-
comes.
In sum, these considerations lead to the following research questions:

1. What are the effects of static and dynamic visuals in an expository text on learn-
ing outcomes?
2. What kind of learning strategies do students use when learning with static and
dynamic visuals and to what extent do they employ them?
3. What effect does the use of learning strategies have on learning outcome when
learning with visuals?

2. Method

In order to answer these questions, we conducted an experimental study with two

experimental and one control group. Subjects were tested individually when learning
with a computer-based learning program on an astrophysical topic.

2.1. Material

The learning material consisted of three versions of a computer-based learning

text, two illustrated versions and one non-illustrated control version. The learning
programs dealt with the external appearance and the explanation of optical phenom-
ena as a result of optical gravitational lensing (see Fig. 1a and b). In general relativity
theory, the presence of a deflector (for example, the gravitational field of a massive
star) can curve spacetime, and the path of a light ray will be deflected as a result
(see Fig. 1b). This process is called gravitational lensing. As a consequence of len-
 D. Lewalter / Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 177–189 181

Fig. 1. (a) Static illustration showing the outward appearance of the optical phenomenon of the apparent
doubling of a star (inverted and transferred to gray scale). (b) Static illustration explaining the optical
phenomenon presented in Fig. 1a by depicting the bending of the light beams (inverted and transferred
to gray scale).

sing, light rays that would not have otherwise reached the observer are bent from
their paths and towards the observer (see Fig. 1b). A gravitational field may cause
a source of light to appear greatly distorted and as multiple images (Fig. 1a).
The learning programs were composed of a learning text (about 2100 words) and
nine units with illustrations. Each text section that described and explained an optical
phenomenon was immediately followed by an illustration. The text was identical in
all three versions. The visuals were extracted from a video-exhibit from the Deut-
sches Museum in Munich. They showed either the changing external appearance of
an optical phenomenon (for example, optical distortions of a star that is revolving
around a smaller but massive star; Fig. 1a) or they illustrated the explanation of the
phenomenon by depicting the effect of bending the path of a light ray because of
gravitational lensing (for example, when a straight light ray becomes bent so it
reaches the eye of the observer; Fig. 1b). Within the latter illustrations the pictorial
components were labeled according to the text. In all illustrations the spatial relations
and the motion were crucial to understanding the principles and laws behind the
phenomenon explained. In the version with dynamic visuals, the learning text was
illustrated by animated graphics which showed the course of motion completely. In
the version with static visuals, motion was symbolized by a single frame or a series
of frames (two to four frames) depicting the steps, showing the position of stars and
the change of their external appearance (see Fig. 1a) or by arrows symbolizing the
development of the light ray (see Fig. 1b). The information presented by both types
of illustrations was equivalent. The text and the illustrations were presented on separ-
ate pages, starting with the text passage which explained what would be seen in the
immediately following illustration(s). To maintain the alternation of text and illus-
tration, the text-only version included content-free pictures showing circles and lines.

2.2. Subjects

A total of 60 education and psychology undergraduate students with an average

age of 25 years participated in the study. The participation was voluntary and was not
182 D. Lewalter / Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 177–189

based on a reward. Each version of the learning program was given to 20 students, 14
females and six males.

2.3. Measure of the use of learning strategies

Measurement of cognitive activities during learning can prove problematic. It

might be supposed that, while learning with illustrations, experienced learners utilize
numerous learning techniques that are beyond their conscious control. These learners
will likely have difficulty remembering the strategies at the end of the learning task.
Therefore, recording the cognitive and metacognitive process activities should be
done simultaneously with the learning process. This is the main reason why we used
think-aloud protocols. In order to overcome methodological problems that have been
discussed with respect to reliability, validity and completeness of the data gained by
this method, we used a procedure that follows the guidelines of Ericsson and Simon
(1984, see Section 2.5).
Using this method, we were able to get a quite unbiased insight into the learning
process and to consider additional learning strategies, in case the strategies mentioned
above were inaccurate or incomplete for categorizing the different forms of learning
techniques used by the students.
The think-aloud protocols were taped and transcribed verbatim. Complete sen-
tences and subordinate clauses were used as coding units. The following examples
of think-aloud protocols show statements of the learners while looking at Fig. 1a or
1b. They will give an impression of how we tried to reconstruct the usage of learning
strategies (further descriptions of the statements we found will be given with the
Results).

Rehearsal: “There are the light rays coming from the star behind the massive star.
They are bent to the right and to the left—so they are reaching the eye of the
observer.” (This statement is an almost verbatim repetition of the preceding text
passage. Therefore it was coded as an indicator of the usage of rehearsal strategy.)
Elaboration: “The bigger star is revolving around the smaller one like one knows it
from the earth. …Because the star is bending the light ray distorting pictures come
up like in a distorting mirror.”
Confirming Comprehension: “OK, clear. I think I understand it now.”
Comprehension Failure: “I do not understand it at all.”
Planning Further Learning: “Now I have to see if I can find something about it in
the text.”

The quantitative data analysis differs with respect to the kind of learning strategy.
As a quantitative indicator of rehearsal strategies, the completeness of the repetition
of the text-based information referring to the particular illustration was used within
each of the nine think-loud periods. A score was derived according to the following
rules: 1 point when only but one aspect was mentioned, 2 points for partial repetition
and 3 points for complete repetition (cf. Lewalter, 1997). Elaboration and control
strategies were coded according to the frequency of their occurrence (at each case
 D. Lewalter / Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 177–189 183

1 point). To assess the reliability two raters categorized all the protocols and reached
94% agreement. Disagreements were resolved in discussion.
2.4. Measure of the learning outcome

Learning was measured with a test consisting of tasks that differ in the cognitive
demand required. The test includes tasks on factual knowledge, which required the
reproduction of specific facts or events (seven items, 56 points, Cronbach’s alpha
0.79), and tasks on comprehension and problem-solving, which require the under-
standing and use of principles and laws (nine items, 54 points, Cronbach’s alpha
0.80). Within both groups of questions, the assessing of the learning outcome covers
pictorial and verbal answer formats. The students had to answer drawing tasks (cf.
draw in the path of a light ray in a certain constellation of stars) and verbal tasks
(cf. describe an optical phenomenon). The test meets the requirements proposed by
Joseph and Dwyer (1984) and others.
2.5. Procedure
The study was conducted in two steps: a pre-test and a main investigation. During
the pre-test, we used a test on topic-specific prior knowledge (11 items, Cronbach’s
alpha 0.70) and five scales of the Wilde-Intelligence-Test measuring spatial imagin-
ation ability, speed of perception and verbal intelligence (WIT, Jäger & Althoff,
1983). The results of the pre-test were used to form parallel groups for the main
investigation, which took place one or two weeks later. In the course of the main
investigation, the students worked with one version of the learning program. These
learning sessions were performed individually. At the beginning of the learning ses-
sion the learners got an introduction to the think-aloud method according to the
Ericsson and Simon guidelines (1984). They indicated that the task of thinking aloud
must be clearly subordinate to the learning task and that students should be instructed
to verbalize all their thoughts immediately and without selection. Then the students
were asked to work on the learning program for about 45 minutes in order to learn
the content and be able to answer questions about it. The think-aloud method was
used only when the students were learning with the visuals. To keep the learning
process as equal as possible, the learners of the text-only version had to think-aloud
when they were looking at the text-irrelevant illustrations. Following the learning
session, the students completed a questionnaire evaluating the learning program and
the quality of the visuals. Finally, they answered the questions on the learning out-
come test.

3. Results
3.1. What are the effects of static vs. dynamic visuals in an expository text on
learning outcome?
In the first step of analysis, the results of the test were compared for the two
experimental groups on the one side and the control group on the other. Significant
184 D. Lewalter / Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 177–189

Table 1
Mean number (M) and standard deviation (SD) of the result in the learning outcome test depending on
learning program version, mean comparison, one-factor variance analysis, Scheffé test, p ⬍ 0.05

Dynamic Static visuals Text-only F- p D-S D-T S-T

visuals version value
(df2,57)

M SD M SD M SD

Factual knowledge 28.55 11.78 28.50 10.24 15.90 10.81 8.84 ⬍0.001 ∗ ∗
Comprehension and 26.80 9.91 21.15 8.64 14.80 9.98 7.94 ⬍0.001 ∗
problem solving

differences were found on factual knowledge for both experimental groups when
compared with the text-only group (control group) (see Table 1). For the measures
on comprehension and problem solving, only the difference between the dynamic
version and text version was significant.
In the second step of analysis, the results of the two experimental groups were
compared. No significant differences were found between the subjects learning with
the two illustrated versions, neither for questions concerning factual knowledge nor
for the tasks on comprehension and problem solving (see Table 1).

3.2. What kind of learning strategies do students use when learning with static
and dynamic visuals and to what extent do they employ them?

Data from the think-aloud protocols show that learners used all three main categor-
ies of learning strategies to varying degrees when learning with static or dynamic
visuals (see Table 2).
Rehearsal strategies were the most frequently used learning strategies in both
learning groups. All students used this kind of strategy almost every time while

Table 2
Mean number (M), standard deviation (SD) and median of the use of learning strategies depending on
learning program version, mean comparison U-test, Mann–Whitney, two-tailed

Learning strategy Dynamic visuals Static visuals U-value z p

M (SD) Median M (SD) Median

Rehearsal 20.0 (6.8) 21.5 25.8 (3.0) 27.0 88.5 ⫺3.03 ⬍0.01
Elaboration 2.3 (3.4) 1.0 1.2 (2.0) 0.5 168.5 ⫺0.91 ns
Control strategies overall 7.6 (5.2) 6.0 7.5 (7.9) 5.0 172.5 ⫺0.75 ns
Confirming comprehension 3.3 (3.3) 3.0 1.2 (2.3) 0.0 112.0 ⫺0.48 ⬍0.05
Comprehension failure 2.6 (2.3) 2.0 2.8 (3.3) 2.0 191.0 ⫺0.25 ns
Planning for further learning 1.7 (1.8) 1.5 3.6 (3.4) 2.0 128.5 ⫺1.97 ⬍0.05
 D. Lewalter / Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 177–189 185

learning with a visual. The intensive use of this learning strategy may be partly
induced by the think-aloud method and the coding system, which does not allow a
distinction between the use of rehearsal strategies and verbalization of the compo-
nents of the illustration. As Table 2 shows, the learners, on average, used rehearsal
strategies significantly more often when learning with static illustrations. The con-
tents of the rehearsal statements mainly refer to the text sequences of the learning
program directly related to the visuals and not to previously given information. State-
ments coded as rehearsal were repetitions of the learning text with exact wording
or the recapitulation of the main idea of the learning content while using the
expressions of the text.
We found that both groups very rarely used elaboration strategies (see Table 2).
When they were used, learners made references only to static optical aspects of the
learning material and very rarely to their prior domain knowledge. The elaborations
we found reflected an effort to comprehend the principles of the subject matter by
making optical analogies. The dynamic visuals group used slightly more elaboration
strategies, but the difference was not significant. It is noteworthy that half of the
students did not verbalize any elaborations whatsoever.
We did not find any significant difference between the two groups on the average
use of control strategies overall. Within the three categories of control strategies we
found relatively small frequencies of mentioning. Nonetheless, we find differences
concerning the expression of these strategies between both groups that might be quite
important for the learning process. The learners reported with significantly higher
frequency on their comprehension when using dynamic illustrations. The frequencies
of statements indicating comprehension failure were similar for both groups. Signifi-
cant differences were found in the statements about planning further steps in learning
in favor of the static visuals group. Statements were coded as indicative of further
planning when learners mentioned learning aims concerning special aspects of the
content or their further learning activities.

3.3. What effect does the use of learning strategies have on learning outcome
when learning with visuals?

To answer the question concerning the effect of strategy use on learning outcome,
we divided the learners into two groups: those who often used a specific strategy
vs. those not using it (with planning strategy) or using it less frequently (with
rehearsal strategy). We carried out two-way analysis of variance (ANOVAs) on the
frequency of strategy use and the version of the learning program. With regard to
learning outcome, we distinguished between factual knowledge and
comprehension/problem solving.
As can be seen in Fig. 2a, the intensity of rehearsal strategy use had a main effect
on factual knowledge (F(1,36) = 5.67, p ⬍ 0.05). As expected, rehearsal strategies
did not have a significant influence on comprehension and problem solving as shown
in Fig. 2b. The program version was a significant factor only when questions on
comprehension and problem solving were considered (F(1,36) = 5.55, p ⬍ 0.05). In
186 D. Lewalter / Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 177–189

Fig. 2. Average result in the test on factual knowledge (a) and comprehension and problem solving (b),
depending on learning program version and intensity of use of rehearsal strategy.

both cases, there are no significant interactions between program version and strategy
use (see Fig. 2a and b).
Within the pattern of the control strategies, an effect on learning outcome that is
based on cognitive information processing can only be expected for planning stra-
tegies and particularly for tasks which demand a deeper comprehension (Entwistle,
1988). This assumption was confirmed by our data. The use of control strategies had
a significant main effect on students’ performance on comprehension and problem
solving tasks (F(1,36) = 5.08, p ⬍ 0.05), but not on the recall of factual knowledge.
In neither case was there a statistical interaction with program version (see Fig. 3a
and b). The effect of program version was significant only for questions requiring
comprehension and problem solving (F(1,36) = 5.87, p ⬍ 0.05).
In addition, we analyzed whether students’ perception of their own understanding
corresponded to their actual performance. We found a positive correlation (r =
0.49, p ⬍ 0.05) between statements indicating comprehension and general learning
outcome for dynamic version learners but not for static version subjects, who very
rarely referred to comprehension. As the learners of both groups mentioned compre-
hension failure very rarely, no significant correlation with learning outcome was
found.

Fig. 3. Average result in the test on factual knowledge (a) and comprehension and problem solving (b),
depending on learning program version and intensity of use of planning for further learning strategy.
 D. Lewalter / Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 177–189 187

4. Discussion

The results of this study confirm the supportive function of the illustrations used
in the learning programs on factual knowledge when compared with text-only infor-
mation. Concerning tasks on comprehension and problem solving, this is only true
for dynamic visuals. The illustrations helped the subjects to store the new information
in memory. However, the data indicate a lack of superiority of dynamic visuals on
learning outcome when compared with static visuals. They confirm the findings of
comparative studies between animations and pictures (e.g. Reed, 1985; Rieber, 1989,
1994). This is even true for different cognitive task demands of the test on learning
outcome. The hypothesis that the use of animations has a positive impact on learning
outcome because of the complete presentation of the dynamic aspects and the
reduction of the level of abstraction (Park & Hopkins, 1993; Rieber & Kini, 1991)
is not supported by our data. Arrows and series of frames, which are quite conven-
tional symbols for motion, may be sufficient for the learners to acquire factual knowl-
edge in this case.
From a media research perspective, this result can be interpreted as an example
of the equality of effectiveness of dynamic and static visuals in supporting the learn-
ing process. The use of static visuals might be completely sufficient in some cases.
Further research is needed to examine the conditions for the specific and effective
use of dynamic visuals.
From the cognitive psychology research perspective, which was applied in this
study, we tried to get information about the impact on the learning process of use
of learning strategies.
The adoption of the concept of learning strategies of Weinstein and Mayer’s
(1986) model was an appropriate basis for the description and classification of cogni-
tive processes during learning with illustrations. The results indicate that the proposed
categories for describing learning strategies are useful, but for a more detailed recon-
struction of these processes the classification system needs further differentiation and
adaptation to the specific characteristics of the learning process with visuals.
The think-aloud method has proved to be an appropriate means for the assessment
of these processes. However, there are also some methodical problems. For example,
it may be the case that the method evokes the salience of one kind of learning
strategies (e.g. rehearsal) to a higher degree than others. With regard to future
research, additional methods like retrospective interviews on the use of learning stra-
tegies should be tried to get closer insight.
Nevertheless, the data show that rehearsal strategies were used often by both
groups, but significantly more frequently by the static visuals group. As the use of
this strategy has an impact on acquiring factual knowledge, this finding seems to
support our central hypothesis that the quality of the cognitive process contributes
to the supportive function of visuals.
The very rare use of elaboration strategies in this study might partly be explained
by a lack of prior domain knowledge. Since most references were made to the optical
aspects of the learning content, the results suggest additional investigation of the
188 D. Lewalter / Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 177–189

expression and the conditions for the use of elaboration strategies when learning
with illustrations.
In our study, learners of both groups used control strategies quite rarely. While
the more successful learners in the dynamic group made comprehension confirming
statements, both groups very rarely referred to comprehension failure. The more
intensive planning of further learning steps by the subjects of the static version indi-
cates that they were aware of the actual learning demand and responded with a
purposeful organization of their learning activities. The possibly supportive effect of
animations may be partly lost due to the lesser use of appropriate learning strategies.
Perhaps the amount of effort invested is—besides other aspects (e.g. complexity of
the material, purpose of the task)—influenced by general expectation about how to
use and engage in these new media of learning, as has been shown by Rieber (1994)
and others.
Several conclusions might be drawn from these results. Further research is needed
to extend our knowledge on cognitive processing of visual information. If the results
reported in this experimental study are replicated in future research approaches, stu-
dents may need additional support to use suitable learning strategies in order to learn
more effectively with animated visuals. Additional research is needed to explore the
nature of the instructional design that encourages students to use dynamic visual
information for reaching a higher level of learning.

References

Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: how
students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145–182.
Dansereau, D. F. (1985). Learning strategy research. In J. W. Segal, S. F. Chipman, & R. Glaser (Eds.),
Relating instruction to research (pp. 209–239). Thinking and learning skills, Vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Entwistle, N. (1988). Motivational factors in students’ approaches to learning. In R. R. Schmeck (Ed.),
Learning strategies and learning styles (pp. 21–51). New York: Plenum Press.
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jäger, A. O., & Althoff, K. (1983). Der Wilde-Intelligenz-Test (WIT). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Joseph, J. H., & Dwyer, F. M. (1984). The effects of prior knowledge, presentation mode, and visual
realism on student achievement. Journal of Experimental Education, 52, 110–121.
Lewalter, D. (1997). Lernen mit Bildern and Animationen. Münster: Waxmann.
Lowe, R. (1999). Extracting information from an animation during complex visual learning. European
Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 225–244.
Lowe, R. (2003). Animation and learning: selective processing of information in dynamic graphics. Learn-
ing and Instruction, 13, 157–176.
Mayer, R. E. (1994). Visual aids to knowledge construction: building mental representations from pictures
and words. In W. Schnotz, & R. W. Kulhavy (Eds.), Comprehension of graphics (pp. 125–138).
Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Mayer, R. M. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: using the same instructional design methods
across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13, 125–139.
Mayer, R. E., & Gallini, J. K. (1990). When is an illustration worth ten thousand words? Journal of
Educational Psychology, 82, 715–726.
Park, O. -C., & Hopkins, R. (1993). Instructional conditions for using dynamic visual displays: a review.
Instructional Science, 21, 427–449.
 D. Lewalter / Learning and Instruction 13 (2003) 177–189 189

Pintrich, P. R. (1989). The dynamic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the college classroom.
Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 6, 117–160.
Reed, S. K. (1985). Effect of computer graphics on improving estimates to algebra word problems. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 77, 285–298.
Rieber, L. P. (1989). The effects of computer animated elaboration strategies and practice on factual and
application learning in an elementary science lesson. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5,
431–444.
Rieber, L. P. (1994). Computers, graphics & learning. Madison, WI: Brown & Benchmark.
Rieber, L. P., & Kini, A. S. (1991). Theoretical foundations of instructional applications of computer-
generated animated visuals. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 18, 83–88.
Weidenmann, B. (1988). 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.
157–171). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.),
Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 315–327). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.