Educational technology professionals cite Richard Mayer’s 2008 study more than any other research on multimedia instruction.
They are citing the wrong conclusion.
Mayer did not prove multimedia enhances learning.
He proved multimedia creates cognitive problems requiring ten different workarounds – and accidentally built the case for text-based instruction.
What Richard Mayer actually found
Through hundreds of controlled experiments, Richard Mayer identified ten principles for multimedia design.
The pattern is striking: most principles involve removing elements from presentations.
Five principles focus on reducing “extraneous processing” – cognitive waste that multimedia creates.
- Remove irrelevant material.
- Highlight essential information buried among distractions.
- Eliminate simultaneous animation, narration, and text because learners perform better with only two elements.
- Place corresponding words and pictures close together.
- Present them simultaneously, not sequentially.
Three principles manage “essential processing” when content is complex.
- Break presentations into learner-controlled segments.
- Use spoken rather than printed text with graphics.
- Provide pre-training before complex multimedia instruction.
Two principles foster deeper learning.
- Combine words and pictures rather than words alone.
- Use conversational rather than formal language.
The hidden message: multimedia instruction is so cognitively demanding that it requires ten specialized principles to avoid harming learning.
Richard Mayer’s split attention revelation
Mayer’s modality principle seems to endorse multimedia: learners perform better with graphics plus spoken text than graphics plus printed text.
Educational technologists celebrate this as proof that multimedia works.
They miss the real insight.
Graphics with printed text create split attention – learners cannot simultaneously look at pictures while reading words.
They must constantly switch between visual elements, wasting cognitive resources on coordination rather than learning.
Richard Mayer’s solution uses different channels: visual graphics with auditory narration.
But this still requires complex mental coordination between multiple input streams while maintaining focus on learning objectives.
Text-based instruction eliminates split attention entirely.
(There are deeply-rooted cultural and historical reasons for the distrust of text.)
Learners process information through one coherent channel that naturally supports sequential, analytical thinking.
The damage control principles in Richard Mayer’s principles
Step back from individual findings and Mayer’s principles reveal themselves as damage control.
The coherence principle removes distractions that multimedia introduces.
The redundancy principle eliminates conflicts between competing inputs.
The segmenting principle provides control that multimedia complexity demands.
The pre-training principle prepares learners for cognitive challenges that simpler instruction avoids.
Each principle represents additional design constraints requiring specialized expertise and extensive testing.
They exist because multimedia instruction is fundamentally problematic.
Text extends Richard Mayer’s logic
At The Geneva Learning Foundation, we work with 70,000 health practitioners using text-based peer learning.
Nigerian practitioners write about extreme heat forcing people to sleep outdoors, increasing malaria exposure.
Colleagues in Brazil, Chad, Ghana, and India read these accounts, analyze climate-health connections, and provide structured feedback through expert-designed rubrics.
No graphics.
No audio coordination.
No split attention problems.
Read our article: Against chocolate-covered broccoli: text-based alternatives to expensive multimedia content
Direct engagement with content that supports rather than complicates learning.
This approach achieves Richard Mayer’s goals through elimination rather than optimization.
Ultimate coherence by presenting only essential information.
Zero redundancy through single-channel processing.
Natural segmenting through text’s inherent reader control.
No pre-training needed because text presents information in logical, sequential structures.
The multimedia principle reconsidered
Mayer’s most famous finding – people learn better from words and pictures than words alone – deserves scrutiny.
This emerged from comparing passive multimedia consumption to passive text reading.
It equates learning with recall.
Neither condition included structured peer interaction, collaborative analysis, or iterative revision that characterize more complex learning.
When learners create knowledge through text-based peer learning, they achieve outcomes that passive consumption of any media cannot match.
The effect size for active text-based learning exceeds Mayer’s multimedia findings while avoiding cognitive coordination problems.
The economic evidence
Mayer’s ten principles exist because multimedia design is expensive and complex.
Each principle represents additional constraints demanding specialized expertise.
Typical multimedia modules are expensive.
Text-based peer learning costs a fraction of this amount while producing superior outcomes.
Resources should flow toward learning infrastructure such as expert rubrics and facilitated dialogue – elements that actually drive learning rather than manage cognitive problems.
The real choice
Educational technology leaders face a fundamental decision: invest in managing multimedia’s problems or adopt approaches that avoid those problems entirely.
Mayer’s research illuminates multimedia’s cognitive costs.
His ten principles represent sophisticated damage control, not learning enhancement.
They minimize harm rather than maximize potential.
Text-based instruction honors Mayer’s deeper insights while rejecting surface implications.
It achieves the cognitive efficiency his principles attempt to restore to multimedia environments.
References
- Berrocal, Y., Regan, J., Fisher, J., Darr, A., Hammersmith, L., Aiyer, M., 2021. Implementing Rubric-Based Peer Review for Video Microlecture Design in Health Professions Education. Med.Sci.Educ. 31, 1761–1765. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-021-01437-1
- Clark, R.C., Mayer, R.E. (Eds.), 2016. e‐Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning, 1st ed. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119239086
- Feenberg, A. The written world: On the theory and practice of computer conferencing. Mindweave: Communication, computers, and distance education 22–39 (1989).
- Mayer, R.E., 2008. Applying the science of learning: Evidence-based principles for the design of multimedia instruction. American Psychologist 63, 760–769. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.8.760
- Mayer, R.E., 2005. Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning, in: Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press, pp. 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816819.004
- Mayer, R.E., Heiser, J., Lonn, S., 2001. Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology 93, 187–198. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.187
- Mayer, R.E., Moreno, R., 2003. Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning. Educational Psychologist 38, 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6
- Mayer, R.E., Moreno, R., 2002. Animation as an Aid to Multimedia Learning. Educational Psychology Review 14, 87–99. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013184611077
- Plass, J.L., Chun, D.M., Mayer, R.E., Leutner, D., 2003. Cognitive load in reading a foreign language text with multimedia aids and the influence of verbal and spatial abilities. Computers in Human Behavior 19, 221–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00015-8
- Sweller, J., 2005. Implications of Cognitive Load Theory for Multimedia Learning, in: Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press, pp. 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816819.003
Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2025