Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T19:00:02.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

31 - Multimedia Learning with Animated Pedagogical Agents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Roxana Moreno
Edited by
Richard Mayer
Roxana Moreno
Affiliation:
University of New Mexico
Richard Mayer
Affiliation:
University of California, Santa Barbara
Get access

Summary

Abstract

In this chapter, I review the theoretical and empirical work on the use of animated pedagogical agents (APAs) in multimedia learning. After defining APAs and reviewing some of the existing applications, I present a cognitive theory of multimedia learning (CTML) from which predictions for APA design are derived. More specifically, I contrast the potential beneficial and detrimental effects for using APAs in interactive multimedia environments. Then, I provide a critical analysis of the literature summarizing what we know about APAs and discuss the implications of this research for instructional design. Finally, I explore future directions for advancing our understanding about the role of APAs in multimedia learning.

Introduction

The goal of this chapter is to review the theoretical and empirical work on the use of animated software pedagogical agents (APAs) in multimedia environments and to propose directions for future research based on a cognitive theory of multimedia learning (CTML). Multimedia instructional environments are widely recognized to hold great potential for improving the way that people learn (Mayer, 2001). Examples of multimedia environments for science and math learning are abundant and usually combine a description of a complex system or procedure in written or spoken words along with corresponding illustrations or animations depicting the system. This format of instruction, when made concise and coherent, has been shown to be effective in fostering student understanding as indicated by performance on solving problem-solving transfer questions (Mayer & Moreno, 2003).

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning , pp. 507 - 524
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

André, E., Rist, T., & Muller, J. (1999). Employing AI methods to control the behavior of animated interface agents. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 13, 415–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, R. K. (2002). Optimizing learning from examples using pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 416–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baddeley, A. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556–559CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Badler, N., Phillips, C. B., & Webber, B. L. (1993). Simulating humans: Computer graphics, animation, and control. Oxford, England: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Bates, J. (1994). The role of emotion in believable agents. Communications of the ACM, 37, 122–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baylor, A. L. (1999). Intelligent agents as cognitive tools for education. Educational Technology, 39(2), 36–40Google Scholar
Baylor, A. L., & Ryu, J. (2003). Does the presence of image and animation enhance pedagogical agent persona?Journal of Educational Computing Research, 28(4), 373–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosseler, A., & Massaro, D. (2003). Development and evaluation of a computer-animated tutor for vocabulary and language learning in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 33(6), 653–672CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bradshaw, J. M. (Ed.). (1997). Software agents. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press/MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Brenner, W., Zarnekow, R., & Wittig, H. (1998). Intelligent Software Agents. Berlin: Springer-VerlagCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2003). Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 53–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgoon, J. K., Bonito, J. A., Bengtsson, B., Cederberg, C., Lundeberg, M., & Allspach, L. (2000). Interactivity in human-computer interaction: A study of credibility, understanding, and influence. Computers in Human Behavior, 16, 553–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassell, J., & Thorisson, K. R. (1999). The power of a nod and a glance: Envelope vs. emotional feedback in animated conversational agents. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 13, 519–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chi, M. T. H. (2000). Self-explaining: The dual processes of generating inference and repairing mental models. In Glaser, R. (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology: Vol 5. Educational design and cognitive science (pp. 161–238). Mahwah, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Clarebout, G., Elen, J., Johnson, W. L., & Shaw, E. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents: An opportunity to be grasped?Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 11(3), 267–286Google Scholar
Clark, R. C. (1999). Developing technical training (2nd ed). Washington, DC: International Society for Performance ImprovementGoogle Scholar
Clark, R. E. (2003). Research on web-based learning: A half-full glass. In Brunings, R., Horn, C. A., & Zillig, L. M. Pytlik (Eds.), Web-based learning: What do we know? Where do we go? (pp. 1–22). Greenwich, CT: Information Age PublishingGoogle Scholar
Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. M. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent properties, picture features, and redundancy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 428–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dehn, D. M., & Mulken, S. (2000). The impact of animated interface agents: A review of empirical research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 52, 1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doctorow, M., Wittrock, M. C., and Marks, C. (1978). Generative processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 109–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fogg, B. J., & Tseng, H. (1999). The elements of computer credibility. In Proceedings of the CHI 99 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 80–87). New York: ACM PressGoogle Scholar
Ganeshan, R., Johnson, W. L., Shaw, E., & Wood, B. (2000). Tutoring diagnostic problem solving. In Gauthier, G., Frasson, C., & Lehn, K. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Berlin: Springer-VerlagCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grégoire, J. P., Zettlemoyer, L. S., & Lester, J. C. (1999). Detecting and correcting misconceptions with lifelike avatars in 3D environments. In Proceedings of the Ninth World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 586–593). Le Mans, France: AE-ED-Society
Graesser, A. C., Wiemer-Hastings, K., Wiemer-Hastings, P., & Kreuz, R. (1999). AutoTutor: A simulation of a human tutor. Journal of Cognitive Systems Research, 1, 35–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes-Roth, B., Sinkoff, E., Brownston, L., Huard, R., & Lent, B. (1995) Directed improvisation with animated puppets. In CHI'95 Conference Companion, 79–80. New York: ACM PressGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W. L., Rickel, J. W., & Lester, J. (2000). Animated pedagogical agents: Face-to-face interaction in interactive learning environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11, 47–78Google Scholar
Laurel, B. (1997). Interface agents: Metaphors with character. In Bradshaw, J. M. (Ed.), Software agents. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Lester, J. C., Stone, B., & Stelling, G. (1999). Lifelike pedagogical agents for mixed-initiative problem solving in constructivist learning environments. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 9, 1–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lester, J. C., Towns, S. G., & Fitzgerald, P. J. (1999). Achieving affective impact: Visual emotive communication in lifelike pedagogical agents. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10(3–4), 278–291Google Scholar
Maes, P. (Ed.). (1991). Designing autonomous agents. Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Dow, G. T., & Mayer, S. (2003). Multimedia learning in an interactive self-explaining environment: What works in the design of agent-based microworlds?Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 806–812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 187–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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, 312–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 43–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitrovic, A., & Suraweera, P. (2000) Evaluating an animated pedagogical agent. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1839, 73–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, R. (2004). Decreasing cognitive load for novice students: Effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery-based multimedia. Instructional Science, 32, 99–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, R., & Durán, R. (2004). Do multiple representations need explanations? The role of verbal guidance and individual differences in multimedia mathematics learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 492–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (in press). Balancing discovery and guidance in an agent-based multimedia game: Role of interactivity and reflection. Journal of Educational PsychologyGoogle Scholar
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). Engaging students in active learning: The case for personalized multimedia messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 724–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2002a). Learning science in virtual reality multimedia environments: Role of methods and media. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 598–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2002b). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 156–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2004). Personalized messages that promote science learning in virtual environments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 165–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, A. H., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents?Cognition and Instruction, 19(2), 177–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moundridou, M., & Virvou, M. (2002). Evaluating the personal effect of an interface agent in a tutoring system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 253–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 319–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nass, C., Moon, Y., Fogg, B. J., Reeves, B., & Dryer, C. (1995). Can computer personalities be human personalities?International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43, 223–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norman, D. A. (1994). How might people interact with agents?Communications of the ACM, 37, 68–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okonkwo, C., & Vassileva, J. (2001) Affective pedagogical agents and user persuasion. In Stephanidis, C. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 397–401). New Orleans: AACEGoogle Scholar
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, England: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Parise, S., Kiesler, S., Sproull, L., & Waters, K. (1999). Cooperating with life-like interface agents. Computers in Human Behavior, 15, 123–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education; Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). Colombus, OH: Merrill-Prentice HallGoogle Scholar
Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Stanford, CA: CSLI PublicationsGoogle Scholar
Ryan, R. L., & Deci, E. M. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shaw, R., Effken, J. A., Fajen, B., Garrett, S. R., & Morris, A. (1997). An ecological approach to the on-line assessment of problem-solving paths: Principles and applications. Instructional Science, 25, 151–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shneiderman, B. (1997). Direct manipulation versus agents: Paths to predictable, controllable, and comprehensible interfaces. In Bradshaw, J. M. (Ed.), Software agents. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press/MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Shneiderman, B., & Maes, P. (1997). Direct manipulations vs. interface agents: Excerpts from debates at IUI'97 and CHI'97. Interactions, 4, 42–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Symons, C. S., & Johnson, B. T. (1997). The self-reference effect in memory: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 371–394CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Camberwell, Australia: ACER PressGoogle Scholar
Takeuchi, A., & Nagao, K. (1993). Communicative facial displays as a new conversational modality. In INTERCHI'93 Conference Proceedings (pp. 187–193). New York: ACM PressGoogle Scholar
Towns, S., Callaway, C., & Lester, J. (1998). Generating coordinated natural language and 3D animations for complete spatial explanations. In Rich, C. & Mostow, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifteenth Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 112–119). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Towns, S., FitzGerald, P., & Lester, J. (1998). Visual emotive communication in lifelike pedagogical agents. In Goettl, B., Half, H., Redfield, C., & Shute, V. (Eds.) Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, (pp. 474–483), San Antonio: Springer-VerlagCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuovinen, J. E., and Sweller, J. (1999). A comparison of cognitive load associated with discovery learning and worked examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 334–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Mulken, S., André, E., & Muller, J. (1998). The persona effect: How substantial is it? In Johnson, H., Nigay, L., & Roast, C. (Eds.), People and computers XIII: Proceedings of HCI'98 (pp. 53–66). Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, J. H., Sproull, L., & Subramani, R. (1994). Using a human face in an interface. In Adelson, B., Dumais, S., & Olson, J. (Eds.), Human factors in computing systems: CHI'94 conference proceedings, (pp. 85–91). New York: ACM PressGoogle Scholar
Wilson, M. (1997). Metaphor to personality: The role of animation in intelligent interface agents. In Proceedings of the IJCAI-97 workshop on animated interface agents: Making them intelligent. Nagoya, Japan: Morgan KauffmanGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×