University students spent longer processing time watching two complementary videos than reading two complementary digital texts¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 In the ANCOVA on processing time, the video condition spent longer time processing the information than the text condition (d = 0.52), while not differing significantly from the mixed condition. → Lucia Mason 2022

Evidence¶

Lucia Mason 2022¶

Lucia Mason, Christian Tarchi, Angelica Ronconi, Lucia Manzione, Natalia Latini, Ivar Bråten. (2022). Do medium and Context Matter when learning from multiple complementary Digital texts and videos? Instructional Science (2022) 50:653–679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-022-09591-8

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

A 3×2 between-participants ANCOVA (medium: texts, videos, mixed; context: Facebook, Moodle) on processing time with 255 higher-education students, covarying reading comprehension and task value for videos. Main effect of medium, F(2, 240) = 7.10, p < .001, η²p = 0.056; the video condition "spent longer time processing the information".

"Participants in the video condition spent longer time processing the information than did those in the text condition ( p = .001, d = 0.52), while their processing time was not statistically significantly different from that of the mixed condition."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• No significant medium, context, or interaction effects on integration of information across complementary texts or videos — related
• Reading comprehension uniquely adjusted behavioral engagement, with better comprehenders investing more time and writing longer responses — related
• Greater time and effort invested in the task correlate with better integration and smaller calibration error — related