Effects of Varied Temporal Visual Overlapping in Multi‐Image Tape‐Slide Presentations

Abstract

Despite the proliferation of descriptive and technical literature advocating the use of the technique, there is limited empirical support advancing the superiority of multi-image vs single image presentations. A possible reason for the dearth of significant discrimination has been the projection strategy employed. This study compares three multi-stage versions of a tape-slide presentation with a parallel single image format. Multi-image treatments differed in the amount of time two images were simultaneously in view: three seconds, six seconds or a complete visual overlap. A post-test-only control group factorial design incorporating two moderator variables, sex and scholastic ability, was employed for testing 215 grade eight subjects. The data analysis produced no significant differences between single and multi-image treatments for transmission of pictorial information. Multi-image formats were significantly more effective for transmitting factual auditory information with the six-second visual overlap being the more powerful strategy. Regardless of visual format, males achieved significantly higher results than females and high scholastic ability subjects scored significantly better than those of low scholastic ability. The results accrued to scholastic ability are consistent across varied media/presentation studies, while the sex variance is attributed primarily to differential subject matter appeal. The superiority of multi-image presentations for communicating factual information is discussed in terms of a theory of visual bridging.

Using Multi-Image Presentations to Enhance Continuing Engineering Education

“…Owens and Coldevin [44] studied the effects of the time that images were shown in a dual-image presentation. The three treatments studied included a visual overlap of three seconds, six seconds, and fully overlapping.…”

“…Much research has been done studying how multiple channels can be used to enhance learning (e.g., [41]), where two different screens may be considered as two different channels [42]. The research on whether multi-image presentations enhance learning compared to singleimage presentations was generally considered inconclusive [43,44]. Some researchers argued this was because multi-image had not been properly used because too many senses had been engaged which overloaded the viewer's cognitive abilities to process the information [44].…”

“…It may also include the use of audio synchronization [27]. Various labels have been used to describe this instructional design method including multi-media, multi-screen, wide screen, multiple-image, multiple-screen, and nonlinear projection [28]. Multi-image presentations apparently date back to 1896 when Frenchman Claude Autant-Lara used multiple screens for a presentation on gold exploration [29].…”