↓ Skip to main content

Creating visual explanations improves learning

Overview of attention for article published in Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
31 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
136 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
379 Mendeley
Title
Creating visual explanations improves learning
Published in
Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s41235-016-0031-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eliza Bobek, Barbara Tversky

Abstract

Many topics in science are notoriously difficult for students to learn. Mechanisms and processes outside student experience present particular challenges. While instruction typically involves visualizations, students usually explain in words. Because visual explanations can show parts and processes of complex systems directly, creating them should have benefits beyond creating verbal explanations. We compared learning from creating visual or verbal explanations for two STEM domains, a mechanical system (bicycle pump) and a chemical system (bonding). Both kinds of explanations were analyzed for content and learning assess by a post-test. For the mechanical system, creating a visual explanation increased understanding particularly for participants of low spatial ability. For the chemical system, creating both visual and verbal explanations improved learning without new teaching. Creating a visual explanation was superior and benefitted participants of both high and low spatial ability. Visual explanations often included crucial yet invisible features. The greater effectiveness of visual explanations appears attributable to the checks they provide for completeness and coherence as well as to their roles as platforms for inference. The benefits should generalize to other domains like the social sciences, history, and archeology where important information can be visualized. Together, the findings provide support for the use of learner-generated visual explanations as a powerful learning tool.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 379 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 379 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 68 18%
Student > Master 45 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 25 7%
Researcher 15 4%
Other 60 16%
Unknown 125 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 27 7%
Psychology 25 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 6%
Arts and Humanities 21 6%
Other 128 34%
Unknown 132 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 49. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 March 2024.
All research outputs
#863,869
of 25,466,764 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#52
of 365 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,596
of 420,771 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#5
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,466,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 365 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 420,771 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.