Abstract
Visual representations of information are prevalent in many academic domains, and students must learn how to interpret and use these visual representations. How do students acquire this representational competence? Past work has focused on the role of explicit instruction. In this work, we consider another route for acquiring representational competence in the domain of biology. We argue that students develop representational competence with diagrams based on experience with diagrams with specific features. In two studies (Study 1 N = 161, Study 2 N = 195), we presented undergraduates with a lesson on metamorphosis with either a linear or circular depiction of the ladybug life cycle, two common arrangements for this type of diagram. We then assessed students’ life cycle drawings and their preferences for different features of life cycle diagrams. This brief exposure to diagrams with a particular feature led to changes in participants’ self-constructed diagrams and in their preferences for the specific diagrammatic features to which they were exposed. Our studies suggest that people develop representational competence, at least in part, by tracking the features present in the visualizations they see in their environments.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bartel, A. N., Silla, E. M., Vest, N. A., Nagashima, T., Aleven, V., & Alibali, M. W. (2021). Reasoning about equations with tape diagrams: Insights from math teachers and college students. In E. de Vries, Y. Hod, & J. Ahn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th international conference of the learning sciences - ICLS 2021 (pp. 684–688). Bochum, Germany: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Bonawitz, E., Shafto, P., Gweon, H., Goodman, N. D., Spelke, E., & Schulz, L. (2011). The double-edged sword of pedagogy: Instruction limits spontaneous exploration and discovery. Cognition, 120(3), 322–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.001
Brauer, M., & Curtin, J. J. (2018). Linear mixed-effects models and the analysis of nonindependent data: A unified framework to analyze categorical and continuous independent variables that vary within-subjects and/or within-items. Psychological Methods, 23(3), 389–411. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000159
Carney, R. N., & Levin, J. R. (2001). Pictorial illustrations still improve students’ learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 5–26.
Cheng, M. M. (2018). Students’ visualisation of chemical reactions–insights into the particle model and the atomic model. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(1), 227–239.
Cooper, J. L., Sidney, P. G., & Alibali, M. W. (2018). Who benefits from diagrams and illustrations in math problems? Ability and attitudes matter. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 32(1), 24–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3371
diSessa, A. A., & Sherin, B. L. (2000). Meta-representation: An introduction. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19(4), 385–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(01)00051-7
Fisher, A. V., Godwin, K. E., & Seltman, H. (2014). Visual environment, attention allocation, and learning in young children: When too much of a good thing may be bad. Psychological Science, 25(7), 1362–1370. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614533801
Flores, M. M. (2010). Using the concrete-representational-abstract sequence to teach subtraction with regrouping to students at risk for failure. Remedial and Special Education, 31(3), 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508327467
Fyfe, E. R., McNeil, N. M., & Borjas, S. (2015). Benefits of “concreteness fading” for children’s mathematics understanding. Learning and Instruction, 35, 104–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.10.004
Fyfe, E. R., McNeil, N. M., Son, J. Y., & Goldstone, R. L. (2014). Concreteness fading in mathematics and science instruction: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 9–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9249-3
Gibson, E. J. (1963). Perceptual learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 14(1), 29–56. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.14.020163.000333
Goldstone, R. L. (1998). Perceptual learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 585–612. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.585
Goldstone, R. L., Landy, D. H., & Son, J. Y. (2010). The education of perception. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2(2), 265–284. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01055.x
Höffler, T. N. (2010). Spatial ability: Its influence on learning with visualizations—A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 245–269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9126-7
Horn, M. S., Phillips, B. C., Evans, E. M., Block, F., Diamond, J., & Shen, C. (2016). Visualizing biological data in museums: Visitor learning with an interactive tree of life exhibit. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(6), 895–918. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21318
Kellman, P. J., & Massey, C. M. (2013). Perceptual learning, cognition, and expertise. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 58, pp. 117–165). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407237-4.00004-9
Kellman, P. J., Massey, C. M., & Son, J. Y. (2010). Perceptual learning modules in mathematics: Enhancing students’ pattern recognition, structure extraction, and fluency. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2(2), 285–305. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01053.x
Kirkorian, H. L., Travers, B. G., Jiang, M. J., Choi, K., Rosengren, K. S., Pavalko, P., & Tolkin, E. (2020). Drawing across media: A cross-sectional experiment on preschoolers’ drawings produced using traditional versus electronic mediums. Developmental Psychology, 56(1), 28–39. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000825
Kohl, P. B., & Finkelstein, N. D. (2006). Effects of representation on students solving physics problems: A fine-grained characterization. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 2(1), 010106. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.2.010106
Kozma, R. B., & Russell, J. (1997). Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(9), 949–968.
Lindner, M. A. (2020). Representational and decorative pictures in science and mathematics tests: Do they make a difference? Learning and Instruction, 68, 101345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101345
Mayer, R. E. (2008). Applying the science of learning: Evidence-based principles for the design of multimedia instruction. American Psychologist, 63(8), 760–769. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.8.760
Menendez, D., Mathiaparanam, O. N., Liu, D., Seitz, V., Alibali, M. W., & Rosengren, K. S. (2020). Representing variability: The case of life cycle diagrams. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 19(3), ar49. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-11-0251
Menendez, D., Rosengren, K. S., & Alibali, M. W. (2020b). Do details bug you? Effects of perceptual richness in learning about biological change. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 34(5), 1101–1117. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3698
Menendez, D., Rosengren, K. S., & Alibali, M. W. (2022). Detailed bugs or bugging details? The influence of perceptual richness across elementary school years. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 213, 105269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2021.105269
Nagashima, T., Bartel, A. N., Yadav, G., Tseng, S., Vest, N. A., Silla, E. M., Alibali, M. W., & Aleven, V. (2021). Using anticipatory diagrammatic self-explanation to support learning and performance in early algebra. In E. de Vries, J. Ahn, & Y. Hod (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th International conference of the learning sciences - ICLS 2021 (pp. 474–481). Bochum, Germany: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Nancekivell, S. E., Shah, P., & Gelman, S. A. (2020). Maybe they’re born with it, or maybe it’s experience: Toward a deeper understanding of the learning style myth. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(2), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000366
Nitz, S., Ainsworth, S. E., Nerdel, C., & Prechtl, H. (2014). Do student perceptions of teaching predict the development of representational competence and biological knowledge? Learning and Instruction, 31, 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.12.003
Novick, L. R. (2006). The importance of both diagrammatic conventions and domain-specific knowledge for diagram literacy in science: The hierarchy as an illustrative case. In D. Barker-Plummer, R. Cox, & N. Swoboda (Eds.), Diagrammatic representation and inference (Vol. 4045, pp. 1–11). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/11783183_1
Novick, L. R., Shade, C. K., & Catley, K. M. (2011). Linear versus branching depictions of evolutionary history: Implications for diagram design. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3(3), 536–559. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01077.x
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x
Rau, M. A. (2017). How do students learn to see concepts in visualizations? Social learning mechanisms with physical and virtual representations. Journal of Learning Analytics, 4(2), 240–263. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2017a.42.16
Rau, M. A. (2017b). Conditions for the effectiveness of multiple visual representations in enhancing STEM learning. Educational Psychology Review, 29(4), 717–761. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9365-3
Schnotz, W. (2014). Integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In R. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 72–103). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139547369.006
Stieff, M. (2011). Improving representational competence using molecular simulations embedded in inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1137–1158. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20438
Stieff, M., & DeSutter, D. (2020). Sketching, not representational competence, predicts improved science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21650
Tversky, B., & Jamalian, A. (2021). Thinking tools: Gestures change thought about time. Topics in Cognitive Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12566
Wu, S. P. W., & Rau, M. A. (2018). Effectiveness and efficiency of adding drawing prompts to an interactive educational technology when learning with visual representations. Learning and Instruction, 55, 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.09.010
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Kylie Robinson, Gill-Helene Schomaker, and Xinyi Liu for their help coding the data. We would also like to thank Beth Atkinson for creating the diagrams used in the lesson.
Funding
The research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education, through Award #R305B150003 to the University of Wisconsin–Madison. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent the views of the US Department of Education.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Menendez, D., Sabbagh, N.F., Alibali, M.W. et al. Timelines or time cycles: exposure to different spatial representations of time influences sketching and diagram preferences. Educ Res Policy Prac (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-023-09331-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-023-09331-w