Abstract
AbstractSpatial abilities have been found to interact with the design of visualizations in educational materials in different forms: (1) spatial abilities enhanced learning with optimized visual design (ability-as-enhancer) or (2) spatial abilities compensated for suboptimal visual design (ability-as-compensator). A brief review of pertinent studies suggests that these two forms are viewed as mutually exclusive. We propose a novel unifying conceptualization. This conceptualization suggests that the ability-as enhancer interaction will be found in the low-medium range of a broad ability continuum whereas the ability-as-compensator interaction will be found in the medium-high range. The largest difference in learning outcomes between visual design variations is expected for medium ability. A corresponding analytical approach is suggested that includes nonlinear quadratic interactions. The unifying conceptualization was confirmed in an experiment with a consistent visual-spatial task. In addition, the conceptualization was investigated with a reanalysis of pooled data from four multimedia learning experiments. Consistent with the conceptualization, quadratic interactions were found, meaning that interactions depended on ability range. The largest difference between visual design variations was obtained for medium ability, as expected. It is concluded that the unifying conceptualization is a useful theoretical and methodological approach to analyze and interpret aptitude-treatment interactions that go beyond linear interactions.
Highlights
There is abundant evidence that visualizations can foster learning in educational contexts
We argue that the two hypotheses are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but propose a unifying conceptualization of the ability-as-enhancer and the ability-as-compensator hypotheses as two different interaction forms (Fig. 1): These two different forms of interaction will be found if comparisons are made between different points of the ability continuum
Specific learning conditions had been examined in each of the four experiments. These differences, were not considered in the present reanalysis of the data, which focuses on the learning condition variation that was common in all four experiments, i.e., the variation of visual design
Summary
There is abundant evidence that visualizations can foster learning in educational contexts (cf. Levie & Lentz, 1982; Mayer, 2021). Spatial abilities do correlate with learning outcomes, but they may interact with the design of the visualization, such as animations compared to static pictures or two-dimensional compared to three-dimensional visualizations (cf Höffler, 2010). In this regard, two aptitude (spatial ability) × treatment (design of visualization) interaction hypotheses are stated (cf Mayer & Sims, 1994): the ability-as-enhancer hypothesis and the ability-as-compensator hypothesis. According to the ability-as-enhancer hypothesis, a certain amount of spatial ability is necessary to profit from an optimized visualization. The ability-as-compensator hypothesis posits that only learners with higher spatial abilities, but not learners with lower spatial abilities can compensate for a suboptimal (e.g., static) visualization, while this compensating effect of spatial abilities is not necessary when learners receive an optimized (e.g., dynamic) visualization
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
