AIME model

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The AIME model is a model developed by Gavriel Salomon in 1984 with regard to the question of whether certain types of media can be cognitively processed better than others. Salomon's basic assumption is that the "amount of invested mental effort", that is, the mentalEffort that a person actively invests to understand the content of a medium has an impact on learning success. It is assumed that the more effort the learner has expended on the content presented in the media, the greater the learning success. The “amount”, i.e. the amount of mental effort, depends on the preferences that a person has with regard to the medium. The learner's preferences are shaped by two major influencing factors (to which in some cases the user's previous experience is added as a third criterion).

  • Perceived Demand Characteristics (PDC): This is the subjective assumption of the user as to whether the requirement characteristics of the medium are perceived as either high or low, i.e. consequently that the content of a medium is perceived as more strenuous or less strenuous. An example of a low PDC would be an audiovisual medium (e.g. film), since users generally perceive it to be less strenuous.
  • Perceived Self Efficacy (PSE): This is the subjective assumption of how efficiently - cognitively speaking - you as a user can deal with the medium, i.e. how competent you feel in dealing with the medium. An example of a high PSE would be the medium of video / film, as young people in particular often feel more competent in dealing with it and also perceive it as more realistic, which is why it is often easier for them to understand content that is conveyed audiovisually.

These two factors influence a person's preferences for media content or learning content in an interrelated relationship. Only if both influencing factors are high or low at the same time do the learners expend a high degree of mental effort - i.e. a high AIME - on the learning content, which means that the learning success is greater. In the event that both factors are differently high or low, the mental effort and thus also the learning success will be lower. The study carried out by Salomon in 1984 on 124 American sixth graders showed precisely this effect. Due to the fact that the students perceived film media as less strenuous and as more realistic (low PDC), and also felt more competent in dealing with them (high PSE) than in comparison with print media, they invested less effort (lower AIME) in the learning content to understand. This low mental exertion in retrospect meant that the learning content was not processed deeply in the memory and thus the learning success was low. In general, the AIME model must be individually adapted to each learner, as it is based on the subjective assumptions of each individual learner. The two influencing factors PDC and PSE as well as the mental effort itself are therefore also measured by the introspective assessments of the people. In Salomon's study, the subjects' mental exertion was measured by themselves using a 4-rate scale and specific question items.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b M. Tibus: Amount of Invested Mental Effort (AIME). In: N. Krämer, S. Schwan, D. Unz, and M. Suckfüll (eds.): Medienpsychologie. Keywords and Concepts. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 2008, pp. 96-101
  2. ^ A b G. Salomon: Television is "easy" and print is "tough": The differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions. In: Journal of Educational Psychology. Volume 76, No. 4, pp. 647-658, doi: 10.1037 / 0022-0663.76.4.647

literature

  • G. Salomon: Television is "easy" and print is "tough": The differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions. In: Journal of Educational Psychology. Volume 76, No. 4, pp. 647-658, doi: 10.1037 / 0022-0663.76.4.647
  • M. Tibus: Amount of Invested Mental Effort (AIME). In: N. Krämer, S. Schwan, D. Unz, and M. Suckfüll (eds.): Medienpsychologie. Keywords and Concepts. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 2008, pp. 96-101