Fifth and sixth graders showed higher delayed retention and lower cognitive load when learning science from videos than from illustrated texts¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Videos produced significantly higher delayed retention than illustrated texts, with a small effect size (R2mar = .016). → Haavisto 2025 q3 i? Videos imposed significantly lower cognitive load during initial study than illustrated texts, with a small effect size (R2mar = .046). → Haavisto 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Haavisto 2025¶

Haavisto, M., Lepola, J., & Jaakkola, T. (2025). The “simple” view of learning from illustrated texts and videos. Learning and Instruction, 100, 102200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102200

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Within-subjects classroom experiment in which 109 fifth and sixth graders studied two science topics in both modalities; mixed-effects models on standardized delayed-test scores showed "higher delayed retention, with a small effect size (R2mar = .016)" (delayed retention means .598 video vs .549 illustrated text).

"Videos significantly outperformed illustrated texts in two outcome measures (Table 2): lower cognitive load, with a small effect size (R2mar = .046), and higher delayed retention, with a small effect size (R2mar = .016)."

Haavisto 2025 (2)¶

Haavisto, M., Lepola, J., & Jaakkola, T. (2025). The “simple” view of learning from illustrated texts and videos. Learning and Instruction, 100, 102200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102200

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Same within-subjects experiment: cognitive load self-ratings on Paas's nine-point scale after initial study were lower in the video condition (M = 3.74) than the illustrated text condition (M = 4.36), "with a small effect size (R2mar = .046)".

"Videos significantly outperformed illustrated texts in two outcome measures (Table 2): lower cognitive load, with a small effect size (R2mar = .046), and higher delayed retention, with a small effect size (R2mar = .016)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Exploratory analyses found videos more beneficial for retention among boys than girls and among fifth graders more than sixth graders — related
• Videos and illustrated texts showed no significant difference in retrieval from materials or transfer among fifth and sixth graders — related
• Faster initial-pass studying rate predicted better retention, delayed retention, and transfer and lower cognitive load, but the effect was mostly due to modality — related
• Fifth graders study videos significantly faster than content-equivalent illustrated texts during the initial pass — related
• A forward linear review strategy predicted lower cognitive load regardless of modality, while scanning and slowing predicted higher cognitive load — related
• Decoding ability predicted retrieval, transfer, and retention, and interacted with modality so that video retention benefits were largest for children with weaker decoding — related