The Effects of Image Type and Signaling on Learning in Human Anatomy: Schematics versus Dissection‐based Cadaveric Photographs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The multimedia principle states that individuals learn best from a combination of images and text, rather than text alone. In gross anatomy education, images such as schematics and photographs are often utilized to promote the learning of anatomical concepts and effectively prepare students for laboratory sessions and course examinations. Students enrolled in human anatomy courses are typically offered a variety of resources containing either schematics, dissection‐based cadaveric photographs, or both – which are often laden with coloured highlights and text‐based labels. While ‘signalling’ (eg. using colours or labels to highlight important anatomical structures) has been shown to decrease cognitive load (an outcome associated with improved learning), it is unclear whether using schematics or dissection‐based cadaveric photographs influences students' learning efforts differently. The aim of this project was therefore to compare the influences of schematics and dissection‐based cadaveric photographs on students' examination performance and short‐term knowledge retention. At the onset of this project, a pilot study was conducted on students enrolled in an advanced undergraduate human anatomy course. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four modules containing specific image types: cadaveric photographs (CP), coloured cadaveric photographs (cCP), schematics (SC), or coloured schematics (cSC). They then used their assigned module to study an anatomical region prior to completing two examinations; (1) immediately after the study period, and (2) one week after the first examination. Performance on the examinations and short term knowledge retention were compared between groups, and no statistically significant differences in mean examination performance were detected between them ( p > 0.05). However, examination scores of those assigned to modules that contained images subjected to signalling demonstrated less drastic mean performance decreases in the second examination than those who studied the modules containing non‐coloured images. These findings suggested that the images subjected to signaling may have aided short‐term knowledge retention. The present study repeated the pilot study protocol on students enrolled in a large third‐year undergraduate introductory human anatomy course. The preliminary results indicated a similar trend, wherein signaling had beneficial effects on students' short‐term retention. The results of this project suggest that signaling using coloured highlights should be used when creating a novel resource, regardless of the type of image that is used. These findings may be used to inform the development of pedagogical resources and create teaching materials that promote the retention of anatomical knowledge and concepts. This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".