The realism paradox: Realism can act as a form of signaling despite being associated with cognitive load

Abstract

Realistic graphics have been found to result in a worse learning performance than schematic visualizations. These negative results of realism are usually explained by assuming that realistic visualizations induce more cognitive load. Therefore, realism has been linked to the facet of extraneous cognitive load in the model of cognitive load theory. However, recent results indicate that realism may be used to good advantage when it is utilized only in selected parts of visualizations. We tested the hypothesis that realism can be used as a form of signaling. In an experimental study (N = 50), we presented each participant with one realistic and one schematic anatomical visualization. As predicted, retention performance was highest for the realistic components. Furthermore, we found that extraneous load ratings were overall higher when a particularly detailed visualization was shown to participants (although no main effect of realism was found). Our results can be explained in terms of the disfluency effect, which holds that more visually demanding learning materials can in some cases enhance learning. An important implication of the study is that educators may use the degree of realism to focus learners' attention.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 50 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.