You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
One size does not fit all: older adults benefit from redundant text in multimedia instruction
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01076 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Barbara Fenesi, Susan Vandermorris, Joseph A. Kim, David I. Shore, Jennifer J. Heisz |
| Abstract |
The multimedia design of presentations typically ignores that younger and older adults have varying cognitive strengths and weaknesses. We examined whether differential instructional design may enhance learning in these populations. Younger and older participants viewed one of three computer-based presentations: Audio only (narration), Redundant (audio narration with redundant text), or Complementary (audio narration with non-redundant text and images). Younger participants learned better when audio narration was paired with relevant images compared to when audio narration was paired with redundant text. However, older participants learned best when audio narration was paired with redundant text. Younger adults, who presumably have a higher working memory capacity (WMC), appear to benefit more from complementary information that may drive deeper conceptual processing. In contrast, older adults learn better from presentations that support redundant coding across modalities, which may help mitigate the effects of age-related decline in WMC. Additionally, several misconceptions of design quality appeared across age groups: both younger and older participants positively rated less effective designs. Findings suggest that one-size does not fit all, with older adults requiring unique multimedia design tailored to their cognitive abilities for effective learning. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Greece | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 31 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 7 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 13 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 April 2017.
All research outputs
#14,818,555
of 22,817,213 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,087
of 29,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,723
of 263,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#382
of 565 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,817,213 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,391 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 565 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.