The Past, Present, and Future of the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning

Even when a theory reaches a somewhat stable state, such as the cognitive theory of multimedia learning, there is still room for further theory development. Today’s version of CTML focuses mainly on cognitive processing during learning—such as selecting, organizing, and integration—as the core mechanism along with assumptions about the architecture of the human information processing system, limited capacity of working memory and dual channels for visual and verbal processing. In this section, I explore future directions for CTML involving the integration of new learning components that go beyond these basic cognitive processes, such as social processes, affective processes, motivational processes, and metacognitive processes. In the future, I also expect an increase in the research base, an increase in the number of evidence-based design principles, and a clearer specification of boundary conditions for design principles.

Integrating New Components into the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning

Progress is being made in integrating understudied components into the cognitive theory of multimedia learning, including social, affective, motivational, and metacognitive processes. Concerning social processes, initial progress is reflected in the incorporation of social agency theory (Atkinson et al., 2005; Mayer et al., 2003), which posits that learners try harder to understand a lesson when they feel that the instructor is working with them. Concerning affective processes, initial progress is reflected in the incorporation of the cognitive-affective model of learning with media (Moreno & Mayer, 2007) and the cognitive-affective model of e-learning (Lawson et al., 2021; Lawson & Mayer, 2022), which posit that learners try harder to understand a lesson when they experience positive emotion while learning. Concerning motivational processes, initial progress is reflected in research showing students learn better from a statistics lesson when they are given prompts intended to boost their self-efficacy and decrease anxiety during learning (Huang & Mayer, 2019; Huang et al., 2020). Concerning metacognitive processes, initial progress is reflected in research assessing learners’ judgements of understanding during pauses in a multimedia science lesson (Pilegard & Mayer, 2015a, 2015b).

Overall, more work is needed to incorporate new components into the cognitive theory of multimedia learning, especially given ongoing advances in theories of self-regulated learning and motivation. For example, Kuhlmann et al. (2023) have shown how the SOI processes in CTML can be expanded through a motivational theory perspective. Clearly, self-regulation plays an important role in understanding how students learn from multimedia materials and in understanding how to design multimedia instructional materials for students with different kinds of self-regulation skills.

Expanding Research Methodologies to Monitor Learning Processes

In order to incorporate new components into the CTML, we need to expand the research methodologies used to monitor learning processes, including the use of eye-tracking, biometric, brain monitoring, and survey techniques. Concerning eye-tracking techniques, progress is being in determining how learners allocate their attention in viewing a multimedia lesson, such as how many times their eyes move between corresponding printed words and graphical elements (Johnson & Mayer, 2012; Ponce et al., 2018) or where students look when viewing a video lecture consisting of an instructor standing next to projected slides (Stull & Mayer, 2021; Stull, et al., 2018). Concerning biometric techniques, initial progress is reflected in studies examining students’ emotional arousal as measured by heart rate variability and electro-dermal activity when learning in immersive virtual reality versus with conventional media (Parong & Mayer, 2021a, 2021b). Concerning brain monitoring techniques, initial progress is reflected in studies examining students’ level of distraction as measured by a portable electroencephalogram (EEG) system when learning in immersive virtual reality versus with conventional media (Parong & Mayer, 2021a, 2021b). Similarly, functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) technology offers a potential avenue for detecting the intensity of activity in brain areas related to cognitive, social, and affective processing (Li et al., 2022). The traditional way to measure learning activities is through self-report surveys administered after learning, but initial progress is being made in injecting brief survey items at pauses within an ongoing lesson (Pilegard & Mayer, 2015a, 2015b). Overall, I expect advances in methodologies aimed at detecting learning processes during an instructional episode, which will complement existing techniques to measure learning outcomes.

Expanding the Knowledge Base

Finally, I expect the cognitive theory of multimedia learning to be fortified with an increase in the research base, which will enable an increase and refinement in design principles and a clearer specification of boundary conditions for when a principle is most likely to apply. As the research base grows, I expect to see more meta-analyses that pinpoint the strength of key multimedia design principles as well as their moderating factors. An important direction for future research is to conduct studies in more natural learning environments such as school classrooms, online courses, and professional training. The ultimate test of the value of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning rests in its practical role in improving instruction and training as reflected in the five editions of e-Learning and the Science of Instruction (Clark & Mayer, 2003, 2008, 2011, 2016, 2024).

Conclusion

The cognitive theory of multimedia represents one of educational psychology’s success stories by showing progress in addressing some of our discipline’s fundamental questions about learning and instruction: How do people learn and how can we help people learn? In particular, the CTML represents our attempts to understand how meaningful learning of academic material works and how to improve the design of academic material to foster meaningful learning. For more than 100 years, our field has grappled with these questions. The development of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning provides a case example of how educational psychology can contribute to psychological theory and educational practice. I will consider this essay to be a success, if it encourages you to join this worthwhile effort, such as by conducting theory-grounded studies of meaningful academic learning, contributing to research-based theories of meaningful academic learning, or developing evidence-based instruction.