“Video is for emotional learning not for cognitive learning”
I recently came across this quote somewhere. Is this valid?
What is video-based learning really good at? And what is video-based learning really bad at?
8 Likes
Video does work for some emotional learning. But video can ALSO work for cognitive learning.
Think about it. How often do you use YouTube tutorials? If you need to change your car’s headlight bulb, would you choose diagrams or watching someone talking you through it on a video?
This actually happened at my house this week. Husband wanted to help my daughter replace her headlight bulb. Went to the library and got a repair manual. Spent hours trying to figure it out. Eventually I pulled up a YouTube video they watched and my daughter had a “light bulb moment” about what the issue was, and they were able to do it immediately.
(Light bulb moment pun totally intended, as all good puns should be.)
There’s no emotional learning in changing your car’s headlight bulb. But there is cognitive learning, and in this case, video did a better job than the repair manual.
Video (and storytelling) are great for emotional learning, but that doesn’t mean they can’t also be useful for cognitive learning.
3 Likes
As always: it depends. If you want to transport a message about certain values it’s certainly good to have a video of someone talking about it. Because then people can relate to them. But apart from emotional learning it’s also really good for action-oriented learning. In that case you can show instead of telling. If your dealing with theoretical concepts on the other hand - well, video might still be very useful because people have grown fond of this medium and it’s addressing several senses at once.
2 Likes
Context helps as it relates to quotes, but I don’t agree that video is for emotional learning, not for cognitive learning.
Videos have a great way to tell a story and convey both cognitive and emotional principles. It all comes down to how it’s structured and what takeaways the creator want their audience to leave with.
2 Likes
It depends on the video. Talking head videos tend to be there for emotional learning; it’s not that they don’t transmit information, but you could normally put that info in text, cheaper than recording, and, arguably better for the learner.
Demonstration videos can be a great way to transmit certain kinds of information
1 Like
You’re right, I too believe emotion does relate to motivation. I think I was looking at the OP from a behaviour perspective not emotional.
I don’t think you’re missing anything. I think the quote is off.
I think video can be used for both instructivism and constructivism. Video may possibly be able to portray and elicit emotions better, but for the viewer to find an emotional connection it needs to be relevant and not forced (to increase their own motivation to take the training in the first place).
2 Likes
I think that makes sense when you consider that video allows to you to leverage visuals as part of the story telling process.
I love video but have a hard time calling any video based course “Learning”. I think its useful to disseminate information. However, just because someone watched a video in a course, does that mean that they really learned anything? Maybe at a very low recall level yes, but not much more than that.
I think true learning comes from what they can do with that information and how they can apply it. So in that sense, video is a great tool for introducing information, but without application i wouldn’t say learning isn’t really happening.
2 Likes
I would argue that this is true for most content within the broad e-learning space, with the exception of modules that involve more complex simulations. I believe the most important factor is context. If a video or resource addresses a specific need, the learner will find opportunities to apply the knowledge, provided the content is well-written and well-produced. Without clear learning objectives, we won’t see genuine learning occur.
While the following metrics aren’t the best measures of learning, I’ve found over the years that some of the most well-reviewed and recommended content has been simple video series. These videos, on topics like Data Analysis, have been successful because they help people perform their jobs more effectively, motivating them to try and apply what they’ve learned. For the people it was intended, it addressed a specific need and the goals of both the learner and designers were aligned.
I would also argue that the effectiveness of video content depends on the topic and the objective of the training. However, I generally find that the original assertion—that video is mainly good for emotional learning and not cognitive learning—is too broad. I would encourage training professionals in my organization to consider not only the medium of training but also the context in which it is delivered.
2 Likes
Videos are only good for procedural knowledge, and even then sometimes they are poor.
Videos might be ok for prep of learning in that it can provide attentional focus on something general (not something specific).
Alot of the issues with video have to do with something called tha transience effect of cognitive load theory.
Ruth Clark found this in her book on eLearning which summarizes studies related to eLearning. The same has been said by some cognitive scientists on multimedia.
1 Like