Dual-coding theory: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 05:06, 20 January 2007

Revision as of 05:10, 20 January 2007

Line 1:

'''Dual-code theory''' a theory of cognition was first advanced by [[Allan Paivio]] of the University of Western Ontario. The theory posits that both visual and verbal information are processed differently and along distinct channels with the human mind creating separate representations for information processed in each channel. Both imagined and verbal codes for representing information isare used to organize incoming information into knowledge that can be acted upon, stored, and retrieved for subsequent use.

Each channel also has limitations. For example, humans have difficulty simultaneously attending to multiple auditory or visual cues, depending on expertise with the task or prior knowledge with the subject area. For example, a television documentary that shows images of plant and animal life in a rain forest while also simultaneously providing narration that describes the animal life could potentially provide for improved learning using the dual-code theory because the visual and verbal information does not compete with each other.

A multimedia presentation that shows multiple visuals such as an image of a speaker as well as the text that the speaker is reading, such as a series of bullet points, could overwhelm the viewer, depending on the person and the situation, because the viewer must now attend to two images.

According to Paivio, mental images are analogue codes, while the verbal representation of words are symbolic codes. '''Analogue codes''' represent the physical stimuli we observe in our environment, such as trees and rivers. These codes are a form of knowledge representation that retains the main perceptual features of what is being observed. '''Symbolic codes''', on the other hand, are a form of knowledge representation chosen to represent something arbitrarily, as opposed to perceptually. Similar to the way a watch may represent information in the form of numbers to display the time, symbolic codes represent information in our mind in the form of arbitrary symbols, like words and combinations of words, to represent several ideas. Each symbol (x, y, 1, 2, etc.) can arbitrarily represent something other than itself. For instance, the letter x is often used to represent more than just the concept of an x, the 24th letter of the alphabet. It can be used to represent a variable x in mathematics, or a multiplication symbol in an equation. Concepts like multiplication can be represented symbolically by an "x" because we arbitrarily assign it a deeper concept. Only when we use it to represent this deeper concept does the letter "x" carry this type of meaning.

Line 7 ⟶ 11:

Research with PET scans and fMRI, for example, has shown that participants used the same brain areas to process imagined visuals as images that were actually seen. Participants also had improved memory for spoken words and sentences when paired with an image, imagined or real, and showed increased brain activation to process abstract words not easily paired with an image.

Each channel also has limitations. For example, humans have difficulty simultaneously attending to multiple auditory or visual cues, depending on expertise with the task or prior knowledge with the subject area. For example, a television documentary that shows images of plant and animal life in a rain forest while also simultaneously providing narration that describes the animal life could potentially provide for improved learning using the dual-code theory because the visual and verbal information does not compete with each other.

A multimedia presentation that shows multiple visuals such as an image of a speaker as well as the text that the speaker is reading, such as a series of bullet points, could overwhelm the viewer, depending on the person and the situation, because the viewer must now attend to two images.

Paivio found that participants who were shown a rapid sequence of pictures as well as a rapid sequence of words, when asked to recall the words and pictures (either in order of appearance, or in any order they wanted) were better at recalling images when allowed to do so in any order. Participants, however, more readily recalled the sequential order of the words, rather than the sequence of pictures. These results supported Paivio's hypothesis that verbal information is processed differently than imaginal, or visual, information and that verbal information was superior to visual information when sequential order was also required for the memory task (Paivio, 1969).