When Two Become One: Comprehension and Integration Across Mediums

• In Event: Comprehension and Integration of Text, Visual, and Multimedia Sources

Abstract

Students’ comprehension of information has been considered to involve a host of high-level cognitive processes, including integration, or the assemblage and organization of disparate information into a coherent and related whole (Kurby, Britt, & Magliano, 2005). Integration has been central to models of both text and video comprehension. Kintch’s (1998) Construction Integration framework suggests that text comprehension results, in part, from readers’ integration of information presented in text with their prior knowledge. Mayer’s (2002) Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning suggests that students comprehend video by integrating two information streams– one, visual/pictoral, the other, auditory/verbal.
At the same time, students have been found to experience integration challenges when presented with multiple sources of information (Britt et al., 1999). For instance, when integrating multiple texts, students have been found to have difficulty recalling which pieces of information originate from which sources (i.e., forming content-source links, Britt, Rouet, & Braasch, 2013). While much work has focused on how students may integrate multiple textual sources (Britt et al., 1999, Goldman et al., 2012), limited work has examined cross-medium integration, or how students may integrate information presented via text and video.
When students are asked to integrate information presented via text and video, they may be better able to form content-source links, as differences in mediums may make sources more distinct from one another. Alternately, the cognitive load associated with integrating information across mediums may serve to compromise students’ integration, resulting in poorer content-source link development. Two studies were conducted to examine cross-medium source integration.
Study 1 (n=50) examined participants’ performance on an information integration task, after students were presented with two sources of either uniform (i.e., text-text or video-video) or distinct (i.e., text-video) modality. Students were asked to determine whether pieces of information appeared in either of the two sources, both sources, or neither source. Study 2 (n=23) presented students with information from two sources, one text and one video. Single-source comprehension was compared across mediums. Further, students were asked to recall embedded source information (i.e., in-source references and citations) presented via each medium, which has been associated with multiple text integration (Strømsø, Bråten, & Britt, 2010).
In Study 1, there were no significant differences in integration task performance for students in the uniform medium conditions (i.e., two texts: M: 0.57, SD=0.15; two videos: M=0.53, SD=0.13); however, students in the cross-medium integration condition performed significantly worse (M=0.48, SD=0.16) than students integrating information across two texts. Study 2 found no differences in single source comprehension when information was presented via text or video. However, students recalled significantly more embedded source information from videos (M=2.70, SD=1.36) than they did from texts (M=2.00, SD=1.28).
This novel examination of cross-medium integration determined that students may experience challenges with cross-medium, as compared to single medium, integration (Study 1). Additionally, results suggest that while comprehension did not differ across mediums, videos may be more facilitative in helping students to recall source information (Study 2). Overall, these findings emphasize the importance of cross-medium instruction to support comprehension and sourcing.

Author

• Alexandra List, Ball State University