My team is having discussions about whether it's better for the learner to learn when the text boxes are close to the action on the screen, versus in a consistent spot on the screen. Thoughts?
I suspect it depends quite a bit on the purpose of the text. Consistency is important. Consistency of these things can be really helpful in reducing load (don't make me think or take my attention away from the thing you'd like me to focus on or over-tax my working memory):
Location
Size
Font size
Font
Color
Background color
Shape / Decoration
However, there are times when strategically breaking consistency can be helpful and maintaining consistency can actually hurt outcomes. One such instance is described by Richard Mayer's contiguity principle. This principle prescribes that graphics and the associated text be close together on the screen.
In my view, as long as some elements of consistency are retained and breaking consistency is done strategically, it's OK to break one or more factors consistency. I always try to retain as many factors of consistency as I can, but break the rules when it makes more sense than following them.
It is much more engaging for learners to have a variety of interactive screens. For consistency each individual template should have content in similar places so the learner intuitively learns where to look. Additional content can be placed in other areas as supporting copy through imagery or in any visual way you deem purposeful.
As long as important information isnt hidden away or difficult to find the page is your oyster.
Clark and Mayer (Science of eLearning) say that it's best to put text as close as possible to the "action." It matters more that they can see the text and "action" (animation/graphics) together at a glance than to put the text in the same place every time.
3 Replies
I suspect it depends quite a bit on the purpose of the text. Consistency is important. Consistency of these things can be really helpful in reducing load (don't make me think or take my attention away from the thing you'd like me to focus on or over-tax my working memory):
However, there are times when strategically breaking consistency can be helpful and maintaining consistency can actually hurt outcomes. One such instance is described by Richard Mayer's contiguity principle. This principle prescribes that graphics and the associated text be close together on the screen.
In my view, as long as some elements of consistency are retained and breaking consistency is done strategically, it's OK to break one or more factors consistency. I always try to retain as many factors of consistency as I can, but break the rules when it makes more sense than following them.
It is much more engaging for learners to have a variety of interactive screens. For consistency each individual template should have content in similar places so the learner intuitively learns where to look. Additional content can be placed in other areas as supporting copy through imagery or in any visual way you deem purposeful.
As long as important information isnt hidden away or difficult to find the page is your oyster.
Clark and Mayer (Science of eLearning) say that it's best to put text as close as possible to the "action." It matters more that they can see the text and "action" (animation/graphics) together at a glance than to put the text in the same place every time.
This discussion is closed. You can start a new discussion or contact Articulate Support.