What Is the Value of Graphical Displays in Learning?

By Ioanna Vekiri. 2002

384 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Automotive Engineering, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c9f4862d32f4c2bb943d61f6cb899d8c56ba850e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Automotive Engineering

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Show Them the Money: Using Mind Mapping in the Introductory Finance Course (2004, positive): “longer than that received in only one form, and it can be accessed and retrieved more easily via two paths than it can via one [Paivio, 1971, 1990; Svinicki, 2004; Vekiri, 2002].”
What recent research on diagrams suggests about learning with rather than learning from visual representations in science (2016, methodology): “The analysis was undertaken in order to supplement earlier reviews (e.g. Vekiri, 2002) and as part of a move to inform science pedagogy by focusing on a constructive–interpretive view of language, with viewing and representing.”
Cognitive Perspectives in Psychology (2013, methodology): “Vekiri (2002) provides a broader summary of research into the effectiveness of graphics for learning that includes several studies concerned with mental representation.”
Science Textbooks' Use of Graphical Representation: A Descriptive Analysis of Four Sixth Grade Science Texts (2010, background): “Current classification systems of graphical types are, at best, disorganized (Vekiri, 2002).”
A Framework for Evaluating the Quality of Multimedia Learning Resources (2007, background): “We anticipate that clear and widely accepted evaluation rubrics will help potential users identify objects that do achieve high content quality standards.”
Concept mapping, mind mapping and argument mapping: what are the differences and do they matter? (2011, background): “…al. 2005; Leauby and Brazina 1998; Maas and Leauby 2005; Simon 2007; van der Laan and Dean 2006), Finance (Biktimirov and Nilson 2003), Engineering (Walker and King 2002), Statistics (Schau and Mattern 1997), Reading Comprehension (Mealy and Nist 1989), Biology (Kinchin 2000), Nursing (Baugh and…”
Using diagrams as tools for the solution of non-routine mathematical problems (2009, background): “Success or failure to use the diagrams correctly might be due to a number of reasons including students’ inability to interpret the diagram correctly and some students’ lack of experience of solving problems with the presence of diagrams (Vekiri, 2002).”
Learning by Doing Versus Learning by Viewing: Three Experimental Comparisons of Learner-Generated Versus Author-Provided Graphic Organizers (2007, methodology): “Significant contributions of specific graphic organizer forms have been made for concept maps (Novak & Gowin, 1984), knowledge maps (O’Donnell et al., 2002), matrices (Robinson, 1998), and various other visual organizers (reviewed by Vekiri, 2002).”
Collaboration Scripts – A Conceptual Analysis (2006, background): “There is a significant amount of literature about how learners process different forms of external representations and how these affect learning (e.g., Mayer, 2001; Schnotz, 2002; Suthers and Hundhausen, 2003; Vekiri, 2002).”