Multimedia Learning

Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press.

Type

Book

Intellectual base

Review or monograph

Year

2009

DOI

10.1017/cbo9780511811678

ISBN

9780521514125

DOI registrant

Cambridge University Press

Link

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/multimedia-learning/3D2D862B5DA9C0D5887AB85C7E20A1CB

Cited from

cognitive_science, communication_media_studies, information_theory

Cited by

4 citations across 4 artifacts.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

• Attentional Capacity
  • Mayer's (2009) cognitive theory of multimedia learning treats attentional capacity as a design constraint that mandates redundancy minimization and split-attention mitigation.
• Channel
  • Multimedia-learning research frames teaching as multi-channel transmission under a shared cognitive-load budget, making the design problem one of matching content to channel given capacity.

    This sourceFrames instruction as multi-channel transmission under a shared cognitive-load budget, matching content to channel given capacity.

• Representational Modality
  • The structure is: modality choice → encoding/decoding properties → differential cognitive load and retention → behavioral outcomes, a pipeline systematized by Mayer (2009) in his cognitive theory of multimedia learning.

Mechanisms

• Slide/Narration Alignment Review
  • It operationalizes the multimedia-learning redundancy principle: identical words delivered as both on-screen text and speech can impair comprehension compared with narration alone.

    This sourceShows that identical on-screen words accompanying spoken narration can impair comprehension compared with narration without the duplicate text.

Verification

Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.

Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 4 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.

Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.

See how references were verified.

Links previously used in the corpus

Before the registry existed this work was also linked 2 other ways.

• https://assets.cambridge.org/97805215/14125/frontmatter/9780521514125_frontmatter.pdf ×1
• https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811678 ×1

Registry ID ref:53b0321e4804 · see in the full table