The Cognitive Basis for The Split-attention Effect

Abstract

The split-attention effect entails that learning from spatially separated, but mutually referring information sources (e.g., text and picture) is less effective than learning from the equivalent spatially integrated sources. According to cognitive load theory, impaired learning is caused by the working memory load imposed by the need to distribute attention between the information sources and mentally integrate them. In this study, we directly tested whether the split-attention effect is caused by spatial separation per se. Spatial distance was varied in basic cognitive tasks involving pictures (Experiment 1) and text-picture combinations (Experiment 2; pre-registered study), and in more ecologically valid learning materials (Experiment 3). Experiment 1 showed that having to integrate two pictorial stimuli at greater distances diminished performance on a secondary visual working memory task, but did not lead to slower integration. When participants had to integrate a picture and written text in Experiment 2, a greater distance led to slower integration of the stimuli, but not to diminished performance on the secondary task. Experiment 3 showed that presenting spatially separated (compared to integrated) textual and pictorial information yielded fewer integrative eye movements, but this was not further exacerbated when increasing spatial distance even further. This effect on learning processes did not lead to differences in learning outcomes between conditions. In conclusion, we provide evidence that larger distances between spatially separated information sources influence learning processes, but that spatial separation on its own is not likely to be the only, nor a sufficient, condition for impacting learning outcomes.

Finger pointing to self‐manage cognitive load in learning from split‐attention examples

“…Other visual features, like text segmentation and picture labelling, were basically the same as the original materials. Several studies have shown that spatial separation/integration on its own may not be sufficient to impact learning outcomes (e.g., Florax & Ploetzner, 2010; Pouw et al, 2019). Therefore, we suspect that the higher visual complexity could be the reason for not finding the split‐attention effect in our study.…”

Measuring the Cognitive Complexity in the Comprehension of Modular Process Models

“…At the same time, the decomposition into smaller modules decreases the inherent process model complexity that may result in a higher ease of use, since the comprehension of smaller modules is associated with less cognitive load. However, note that this aspect, in turn, may cause opposing effects in the modularization of process models (e.g., split-attention effect [63]). In general, such impairing effects should be considered in modularized process models (see Section IV-G) [43].…”

“…Ninth, although a reduction in the cognitive load during process model comprehension can be achieved with the application of modularization (e.g., reduction of process model complexity), however, other cognitive effects may emerge, which in turn have a negative effect on the comprehension of such models. For example, the depiction of a process model into smaller process models leads to the circumstance that the attention of an individual must be split between the smaller modules in order to ensure a proper model comprehension (i.e., split-attention effect [63]). As a result, the split attention may cause a higher cognitive load [43].…”

Cognitive-Load Theory: Methods to Manage Working Memory Load in the Learning of Complex Tasks

“…Split-attention effect. The split-attention effect (Pouw, Rop, De Koning, & Paas, 2019;Tarmizi & Sweller, 1988) holds that students learn more from one integrated source of information than from multiple sources of information distributed either in space (spatial split attention) or time (temporal split attention). Learning from distributed sources of information requires more attentional switching and therefore makes the mental integration process that is needed to understand the learning task more difficult than learning from integrated sources.…”