Working memory capacity interacts with illustration type: seductive illustrations impair comprehension only for low-WMC readers¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i2–i3
Currency · newest study 2006 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 A significant WMC by illustration-condition interaction emerged for essay recall of causal factors (η2 = .09). → Sanchez 2006 q3 i3 A significant WMC by illustration-condition interaction emerged for inference verification task performance (η2 = .15). → Sanchez 2006 (2)

Evidence¶

Sanchez 2006¶

Sanchez, C. A., & Wiley, J. (2006). An examination of the seductive details effect in terms of working memory capacity. Memory & Cognition, 34(2), 344-355. https://link.springer.com/journal/13421

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

Experiment 1: 72 undergraduates (36 high-, 36 low-WMC, prescreened via OSPAN and RSPAN) in a 2x3 between-groups design read an ice ages text that was nonillustrated, conceptually illustrated, or seductively illustrated; essays were scored for "correct causal factors," showing the significant "interaction between WMC and illustration condition" (η2 = .09).

"However, there was a significant interaction between WMC and illustration condition [F(1,66) /H11005 3.23, MSe /H11005 1.39, p /H11021 .05; η2 /H11005 .09]."

Sanchez 2006 (2)¶

Sanchez, C. A., & Wiley, J. (2006). An examination of the seductive details effect in terms of working memory capacity. Memory & Cognition, 34(2), 344-355. https://link.springer.com/journal/13421

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

Experiment 1 inference verification task (25 true/false inferences): the same 2x3 ANOVA found a significant interaction (η2 = .15) "between WMC and illustration condition," with low-WMC readers performing worse only in the seductively illustrated condition.

"As is evident in Figure 2, there was a significant interac- tion between WMC and illustration condition [F(1,66) /H11005 5.64, MSe /H11005 4.50, p /H11021 .01; η2 /H11005 .15]."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• High-WMC readers view fewer seductive illustrations and spend less time on them than low-WMC readers — related
• High-WMC readers make more distant regressions within text, suggesting more cross-text integration — related
• High-WMC readers show no seductive details effect, with seductive illustrations tending to yield the best performance — related
• Low-WMC readers recall fewer correct causes when text contains seductive illustrations compared with nonillustrated text — related
• WMC shows a main effect on inference verification but not on essay recall — related
• Interesting but irrelevant details can impair comprehension and transfer, with effects that vary with the material and the learner — a broader claim this one bears on
• In Study 2 with a longer text and five SD amounts, greater seductive detail amount again worsened recall (b = −0.33, p = .005) — related
• Adding relevant pictures or graphics to text improves learning from it, with a small pooled effect on reading comprehension, though whether dual coding explains the benefit is disputed — related