By Cliff Atkinson
Many people have opinions about
PowerPoint, but few can speak on the topic with the authority of Richard E. Mayer, Ph.D., professor of psychology at
the University of California, Santa Barbara. Named the most prolific
researcher in the field of educational psychology, Rich is the author of
18 books and more than 250 articles and chapters. His 12 years of
research in multimedia learning and problem solving have important
implications for PowerPoint users.
Cliff Atkinson: Rich, the
past 16 years has seen the rapid and widespread adoption of PowerPoint
in corporations and educational institutions — an estimated 400 million
copies now sit on desktops around the world. What do you make of this
"PowerPoint phenomenon”?
Rich Mayer: The
success of PowerPoint depends in part on the fundamental need of people
to communicate with others within the same community of practice. It is
worthwhile to distinguish between two possible goals in making a
PowerPoint presentation — information presentation, in which
the goal is to present information to the audience, and cognitive
guidance, in which the goal is to guide the audience in their
processing of the presented information. When your goal is information
presentation, PowerPoint slides can be full of information that may be
extremely hard to process by the audience. However, since your goal is
simply information presentation, you are not concerned with whether or
not the audience can process the presented information. When your goal
is cognitive guidance, you want to make sure that the audience members
build appropriate knowledge in their memories. Your job is to
communicate in a way that will have the desired impact on the audience,
so you need to design your slides so they are consistent with how people
learn. In my opinion, many of the examples of misuses of PowerPoint
occur when the slides are designed to present information rather than to
guide cognitive processing. In short, like any communication
medium—including books — PowerPoint can be misused as a device for
presenting information without regard for how the audience will process
the presented information.
CA: In your research you
define multimedia as "the presentation of material using both words and
pictures.” Do your research findings in multimedia apply to PowerPoint
users as well?
RM: Research on multimedia
learning is highly relevant to the design of PowerPoint presentations.
For example, in Multimedia Learning (Cambridge University Press,
2001), I describe some research-based principles for the design of
multimedia instructional messages including the following:
multimedia principle, in which people learn better from words
and pictures than from words alone; coherence principle, in
which people learn better when extraneous material is excluded rather
than included; contiguity principle, in which people learn
better when corresponding words and pictures are presented at the same
time or next to each other on the screen; modality principle,
in which people learn better from animation with spoken text than
animation with printed text; signaling principle, in which
people learn better when the material is organized with clear outlines
and headings; and personalization principle, in which people
learn better from conversational style than formal style. For example,
in designing a PowerPoint slide it is important to not present an
overwhelming amount of information (i.e., coherence principle) and it is
useful to have simple graphics to supplement words (i.e., multimedia
principle). Finally, it is important to note that good design principles
for inexperienced learners might not be the same as for experienced
learners.
CA: If an organization were
interested in the impact of PowerPoint on their organization and wanted
to review any research that has been conducted specifically on
PowerPoint in any dimension, where would you recommend they
go?
RM: Although there is not yet a rich
literature containing high quality research on PowerPoint, there already
is an extensive literature on how to design paper-based instructional
messages. It is worthwhile to make a distinction between media and
methods. Media refer to the delivery systems for communication such as
books, computer screens, or PowerPoint presentations. Methods refer to
the instructional methods used to help people learn, such as the
coherence principle or personalization principle summarized in my
previous answer. Research on instructional design has shown that the
presentation medium does not create learning, but the presentation
method does affect learning. Thus, PowerPoint does not create learning
but the method you use for presenting information on PowerPoint does
affect learning. For this reason, instructional methods that work with
paper or e-learning are likely to also work with PowerPoint.
CA: PowerPoint seems like it
would be a difficult research topic because of the endless variables in
any single presentation context. How have you addressed similar research
problems in research on multimedia?
RM: It
is worthwhile to distinguish between a technology-centered approach
and a learner-centered approach to the use of educational
technologies including PowerPoint. In a technology-centered approach,
the focus is on the capabilities of cutting edge technology. Thus, we
would be interested in the effects of each of the many features of
PowerPoint. In a learner-centered approach, the focus is on the way that
people learn and process information. Thus, we would be interested in
finding ways to use the features of PowerPoint to support people's
natural ways of learning, that is, as aids to human learning. In my
opinion, the learner-centered approach is more productive. For this
reason, I would guide my study of PowerPoint by looking at features that
might prime useful cognitive processing in the audience.
CA: The use of bullet points
in PowerPoint presentations has been widely criticized. Based on your
research, what effect does on-screen text have on
learning?
RM: Bullets don't kill learning,
but improper use of bullets kills learning. In order to create effective
PowerPoint presentations, it is important to understand how people
learn. In particular, cognitive scientists have discovered three
important features of the human information processing system that are
particularly relevant for PowerPoint users: dual-channels, that
is, people have separate information processing channels for visual
material and verbal material; limited capacity, that is, people
can pay attention to only a few pieces of information in each channel at
a time; and active processing, that is, people understand the
presented material when they pay attention to the relevant material,
organize it into a coherent mental structure, and integrate it with
their prior knowledge. The implications are that: 1) PowerPoint
presentations should use both visual and verbal forms of presentation,
2) filling the slides with information will easily overload people's
cognitive systems, and 3) the presentations should help learners to
select, organize, and integrate presented information.
CA: As a researcher, how
would you assess Edward Tufte's analysis of PowerPoint, and how does his
monograph The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint relate to the body
of scientific research on multimedia and related
topics?
RM: Edward Tufte has done much to
draw attention to the design of effective graphics. However, I am not
sure what is meant by the assertion that "PowerPoint is rarely a good
method." If this statement means that PowerPoint is often misused, I
wholeheartedly agree. However, I do not think it makes sense to refer to
PowerPoint as a method. Instead, based on the distinction I made in a
previous answer, PowerPoint is a medium that can be used effectively —
that is, with effective design methods — or ineffectively, that is with
ineffective design methods. We would not necessarily say that books are
rarely a good method, because books can be designed using effective or
ineffective methods. In my opinion, the same principle applies to
PowerPoint.
CA: In Multimedia
Learning, you wrote "...if you designed a technologically
sophisticated, aesthetically-pleasing, information-rich presentation,
you would have failed to take into account an important human criterion:
Is the presentation designed to be compatible with the way that people
learn from words and pictures?” Based on your research, what are the
characteristics of a PowerPoint that is compatible with the way people
learn from words and pictures?
RM: In a
previous answer, I described three cognitive characteristics of how
people learn, which lead to three questions for the design of effective
PowerPoint presentations:
First, does the presentation take
advantage of the dual-channel structure of the human information
processing system, by presenting complementary material in words and
pictures? In presenting a graph, for example, it is useful to have
labels on the slide pointing out the main points.
Second, does
the presentation take into consideration the limited capacity of the
information processing channels, by minimizing the chances of
overloading the cognitive system? In a recent paper, "Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia
Learning" (published in the Educational Psychologist), I
suggest techniques such as eliminating extraneous material. Thus, a bar
graph should not be presented with three-dimensional bars and lots of
cute, but irrelevant, clip art.
Third, does the presentation
promote active cognitive processing by guiding the processes of
selecting, organizing, and integrating information? For example, arrows
can help highlight the main things that the audience should attend to,
an outline can help people organize the material, and concrete examples
— perhaps as video clips — can help people relate abstract concepts to
their concrete experience.
All responses by Rich Mayer are © 2004 Richard E.
Mayer