1. Multimedia Improves Learning and Attitudes
Darrell L. Butler & Nathaniel S. Ring
Department of Psychological Science
Ball State University
ABSTRACT
Our study involved seven university academic departments. We evaluated student
beliefs in all the departments about the role of multimedia on learning. The survey
showed that students using multimedia had many positive attitudes about
multimedia. We also evaluated the impact of multimedia on learning by studying
course exam test scores in two courses. Exam scores were significantly higher for
students using multimedia. However, results were not consistent over semesters.
Address Correspondence to Darrell L. Butler,
DLButler@bsu.edu

2. INTRODUCTION
The popularity and capabilities of the www and related technologies, has
provided new ways to scaffold student learning. Unlike traditional textbooks,
websites can offer a wider range of media, greater interactivity, and faster
feedback. Publishers, researchers, and others are exploring these new technologies
and some have reported positive impact (e.g., Durrington, et. al., 2006).
Multimedia has the added benefit of allowing student to encode material using
both verbal and auditory modes of memory (Paivio, 1990; Mayer & Sims, 1994).
Theoretically, multimedia has the potential to be an effective learning tool, but
some researchers have argued that nonlinear path control can also lead to poor
organization (Conklin, 1987; Thüring, et. al., 1995; Eveland & Dunwoody, 2001;
McDonald & Stevenson, 1996). Furthermore, Sundar (2000) reported that the
presence of audio, video, and other visual imagery can have a negative effect on a
user's perception of coherence.
For our research, we examined the impact on a new multimedia tool called
Viziswap. The tool provides a platform for creating multimedia-learning modules.
The modules can include non-linear or branching capabilities that allow students to
approach the material different ways, and can provide exercises and rapid feedback
to students. Viziswap is has been designed to be pedagogically effective and thus
may not suffer from some of the issues raised by critics. We evaluate this claim in
two ways: student attitudes of multimedia and textbooks across seven
departments and for two departments exam scores.

3. STUDENT ATTITUDES: STUDY 1
Methods
Course evaluations emphasize the course as a whole and/or the faculty member, but not
the materials used in the course. To develop a tool for assessing student attitudes about
Viziswap modules, we ran a number of focus groups with students in various majors to get
some ideas about the factors they thought were important in the materials they had used.
Based on those focus groups, we developed a survey to assess student attitudes. The initial
survey was then reviewed by experts in survey construction, communication, and
evaluation research, and experts in pedagogy, and was revised based on their
recommendations. It was then given to a sample of students who completed it twice
approximately 5 days apart, and results indicated very high reliability.
Procedure
Survey. A total of 478 students in courses in six departments (Biology, Psychological
Science, Criminal Justice, Personal Finance, and Journalism) completed the survey online.
Three of these courses, Biology, Psychological Science, and Personal Finance, were not
currently using the multimedia software but were planning on doing so in the future and
served as a baseline.
Exams. Criminal Justice divided sections of the courses into groups using the multimedia
software or traditional pedagogical materials. Journalism, used the Viziswap software in all
sections of the course and we compared results on the same exams from the previous year.

4. STUDENT ATTITUDES: STUDY 1
Results Objectives
4.02
4.26
4.26
Appropriate
4.46
1. Substantially higher ratings for Up to Date
4.3
4.49
Viziswap than for traditional 3.83
Relevant
educational materials. 4.49
3.85
2. No differences among departments Interesting
4.54
using traditional materials. Attention
3.87
4.51
3. No differences among departments Feedback
3.85
4.4
using Viziswap. 3.96
Helped
4.49
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Text Vizi
t-test for Equality of Means between Textbooks vs Vizi (5 point Likert Scale)
Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval
t df
tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper
Objectives -2.189 538 .030 -.238 .109 -.453 -.023
Appropriate -2.089 539 .037 -.202 .097 -.392 -.012
UpToDate -2.139 538 .033 -.196 .092 -.376 -.016
Relevant -6.311 538 .000 -.659 .104 -.863 -.454
Interesting -7.823 538 .000 -.688 .088 -.861 -.514
Attention -6.806 538 .000 -.643 .094 -.829 -.457
Feedback -5.234 539 .000 -.546 .104 -.751 -.341
Helped -5.275 539 .000 -.535 .101 -.734 -.335

5. STUDENT EXAM PERFORMANCE: STUDY 2
Methods
The Journalism department developed a series of standardized exams that they have used
for several years. This class is taught as in introduction to journalism and design, over five
weeks, three times a semester. We compared student test scores from the multimedia sections
taught this year with the test scores of students taught more traditionally the previous year on
the four exam modules relevant for all sections.
The Criminal Justice department administered an exam for the Fall and Spring academic
terms. Each semester, classes were divided into two sections, one used Viziswap and the other a
textbook. Students took a multiple-choice exam in class, then the same exam a week later.
Results
We ran a One-Way ANOVA for the Journalism exams from the previous year to ensure the
performance before Viziswap was stable between classes and semesters. It was. We thn ran an
independent samples t-test using the previous year of data to the Fall class. Results from the
Journalism class indicate that performance following the introduction of Viziswap was
significantly higher in one module, but not significant for the other modules. This result
suggests that multimedia can increase learning and in no case led to lower performance. We
then compared the data from the Criminal Justice classes. Results indicate learning improved
overall in the Spring compared to the Fall semester. Further, students in the Viziswap condition
improved the greatest overall in both testing periods compared to the textbook condition.

6. STUDENT EXAM PERFORMANCE: STUDY 2
20.00
Results for Journalism Exams 18.00
16.00
t-test for Equality of Means for Journalism Exams 14.00 **
12.00
Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval
t df
tailed) Difference Difference 10.00
Lower Upper Viziswap
8.00
Principles of PreViziswap
-3.315 206 .001 -1.244 .375 -1.984 -.504 6.00
Design
4.00
Gestalt -.058 211 .954 -.022 .383 -.776 .732
2.00
Typography -1.288 208 .199 -.578 .449 -1.464 .307 .00
Color Theory .380 208 .704 .137 .360 -.573 .847 Principles of Typography Gestalt Color Theory
Design
1. Students in the Vizibook condition performed Results for Criminal Justice Exams
1% better than students not using the
Vizibook, but this difference is not statistically 89
Mean Performance on Exams
significant (F (1, 88) = .81, ns). 87
2. Performance on exams did differ significantly
85
across semesters. Test scores were over 5%
higher in the spring. F (1,88) = 16.37, p < 83 Fall 2010
.0001, η2 = .0979).
81 Fall 2010
3. Exam scores were slightly lower in the delayed
testing condition F(1, 88)= 2.04, ns, but this 79 Spring 2011
effect is not significant. Spring 2011
77
4. There were no significant interactions in the
analysis. 75
Immediate Delayed

7. GENERAL DISCUSSION
Overall this study provided evidence that students attitudes towards multimedia
learning materials is more positive than their attitudes towards textbooks. Indeed, students
indicated they were more engaged and hoped to have similar materials in the future. We
conducted a series of focus groups to gain insights from students in those classes. Students
indicated some minor usability problems, but largely preferred a multimedia medium.
We also found that multimedia could improve test performance and performed at least
as well as a textbook otherwise. In some ways we were surprised because the exams were
not designed to test the objectives of the Viziswap modules. In fact, the exams had been
written before the modules were created. We would expect even bigger effects if tests
were specifically designed to measure learning with respect to the goals of the multimedia
modules.
REFERENCES
Conklin, J. (1987). Hypertext: An introduction and survey. IEEE Computer, 209, 17-41.
Durrington, V. A., Berryhill, A. & Swafford, J. (2006). Strategies for enhancing student Interactivity in an online
environment. College Teaching. 54, 190–193.
Eveland, W. P., & Sunwoody, S. (2001). User control and structural isomorphism or disorientation and cognitive load?
Learning from the web versus print. Communication Research, 28, 48-78.
Mayer, R., & Sims, V. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of
multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 389-401.
McDonald, S. & Stevenson, R. J. (1996). Disorientation in hypertext: The effects of three text structures on navigation
performance. Applied Ergonomics, 27, 61-68.
Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York, New York: Oxford University Press.
Sundar, S. S. (2000). Multimedia effects on processing and perception of online news: A study of picture, audio, and
video downloads. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(3), 480-499.
Thüring, M., Hannemann, J., Haake, J. M. (1995). Hypermedia and cognition: Designing for comprehension.
Communications of the ACM, 38(5), 57-66.