Instructor Visibility in Educational Videos: The Effect of User‐Controlled Visibility on Cognitive Load, Social Presence and Learning Performance—An Eye‐Tracking Study.
Background: Educational videos are increasingly used in higher education as they provide simultaneous visual and auditory information. However, the role of instructor visibility in such videos remains debated. While constant visibility can foster social presence, it may also increase cognitive load,...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol. 42; no. 2; pp. 1 - 13 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Apr2026
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=192476907&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 192476907 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 02664909 6M1 jtl: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning issn: 02664909 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Apr2026 vid: 42 iid: 2 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell place: Malden, Massachusetts artinfo: ui: 192476907 192476907 192476907 10.1002/jcal.70201 192476907 ppf: 1 ppct: 12 formats: tig: atl: Instructor Visibility in Educational Videos: The Effect of User‐Controlled Visibility on Cognitive Load, Social Presence and Learning Performance—An Eye‐Tracking Study. aug: au: Alpsülün, Mustafa Türel, Yalın Kılıç affil: Siverek Vocational School, Harran University, Şanlıurfa, Türkiye sug: subj: Students, College Psychosocial Factors Education, Associate Videorecording Faculty Teaching Methods Student Attitudes Evaluation Cognition Evaluation Social Behavior Evaluation Academic Performance Evaluation Human Study Design Experimental Studies Scales One-Way Analysis of Variance Post Hoc Analysis Analysis of Covariance Descriptive Statistics ab: Background: Educational videos are increasingly used in higher education as they provide simultaneous visual and auditory information. However, the role of instructor visibility in such videos remains debated. While constant visibility can foster social presence, it may also increase cognitive load, whereas lack of visibility can reduce distraction but limit social connectedness. User‐controlled visibility is a relatively new approach with the potential to balance these effects, yet it has been scarcely examined with objective measures such as eye‐tracking. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the effects of different instructor visibility conditions (no instructor visibility, fixed instructor visibility and user‐controlled instructor visibility) on learners' cognitive load, perceived social presence and learning performance. Additionally, eye‐tracking data were employed to analyse learners' visual attention allocation and interaction behaviours in user‐controlled environments. Methods: The study was conducted with 90 associate degree students randomly assigned to three groups: audio‐only narration (IVN), fixed instructor visibility (IVY) and user‐controlled instructor visibility (UC). Data collection instruments included an achievement test (KR‐20 = 0.80), the Cognitive Load Scale (α = 0.93), the Social Presence Scale (α = 0.91) and eye‐tracking metrics (fixation duration, fixation count, visit count, heat maps). Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, ANOVA, Tukey post hoc tests and eye‐tracking visualisations. Results: Findings revealed significant differences in posttest achievement scores across groups (F(2, 87) = 12.013, p < 0.05, η2 = 0.216). The IVN and UC groups outperformed the IVY group, indicating that constant instructor visibility may hinder performance by dividing attention. Cognitive load analysis showed no significant differences in intrinsic and extraneous load but revealed higher germane load in the IVY group compared to IVN (p < 0.05). Social presence perceptions were significantly higher in IVY compared to IVN, with UC showing an intermediate effect. Eye‐tracking data indicated that IVN participants concentrated primarily on content; IVY participants split attention between instructor and material, and UC participants flexibly adjusted attention by toggling visibility. Interaction logs demonstrated frequent use of the 'hide' button during visually dense content and 'show' button during complex tasks. Conclusions: The results highlight that user‐controlled instructor visibility provides a balanced solution by reducing unnecessary cognitive load while sustaining social presence. Audio‐only videos maximise content focus but weaken social connection, whereas constant instructor visibility increases social presence but may impair learning performance due to divided attention. User control empowers learners to regulate attention and interaction according to individual needs, offering a promising design strategy for educational videos. Future research should explore adaptive systems that automatically adjust instructor visibility based on learners' attention and content complexity. Practitioner Notes: What is already known about this subject? ○Educational videos are widely used in higher education for presenting both visual and auditory content.○Instructor visibility can increase students' sense of social presence but may also increase cognitive load by dividing attention.○Lack of instructor visibility reduces distractions and cognitive load but may weaken motivation and social connectedness.○Previous studies have mostly relied on self‐reported measures, with limited use of objective methods such as eye‐tracking.What this paper adds? ○This study systematically compares three instructor visibility conditions: no instructor visibility, fixed instructor visibility and user‐controlled instructor visibility.○It uniquely integrates self‐reported measures (cognitive load, social presence and achievement test) with objective eye‐tracking data (fixation duration, fixation count, visit count and heat maps).○It introduces and evaluates user‐controlled instructor visibility, showing how learners strategically manage attention and interaction through 'show' and 'hide' functions.○Findings highlight that user‐controlled visibility balances cognitive load and social presence more effectively than either constant visibility or no visibility.Implications for practitioners ○Educators and instructional designers should avoid assuming that constant instructor visibility is always beneficial; it may reduce learning performance by splitting attention.○Audio‐only videos can be effective for reducing distractions in highly complex content but may not be sufficient for maintaining social presence.○Allowing learners to control instructor visibility empowers them to regulate their attention according to individual needs, improving engagement and learning outcomes.○Designers of online and blended learning environments should consider integrating flexible visibility options to balance cognitive load and enhance social connectedness. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|