NARRATED ANIMATIONS AND STILL FRAME FIGURES: A COMPARISON STUDY

This study evaluates and compares the efficacies of the narrated animations as found on the Climate Communication website (www.climatecommunication.org) and their still frame figure counterparts. Participants were undergraduate students at a large university in the Southeast US enrolled in an introductory physical science course. They were divided into two groups: those who interacted with seven narrated animations (N=26) and those who interacted with the seven coordinating still frame figures (N=26). Their eye movements were tracked as they interacted with the animations or still frames to determine where, when, and for how long they fixated on certain aspects of the imagery. Participants were asked to answer two multiple choice questions about each of the animations or still frames after interacting with them. Additionally, both groups completed the same pre- and post-surveys, which measured basic climate knowledge and assessed their attitudes and behaviors toward climate change, and participated in short interviews. Findings suggest narrated animations and still frame figures are both beneficial to students; however, narrated animations are most beneficial when the imagery is complex and for low performers (as determined by participant performance on the multiple choice questions in this study). Specific recommendations are made for the use of both formats for educational purposes.