Learning from Two‐Dimensional (2D) versus Three‐Dimensional Anatomical Models: Assessing Working Memory Requirements Using Electroencephalography (EEG)
Authors: Anderson Sarah J. , Jamniczky Heather , Williams Chad , Krigolson Olave , Coderre Sylvain , Hecker Kent 
Published: June 2021

Technological advances enabling presentation of content stereoscopically provide a new forum for instructional design in anatomy education that instructors are keen to explore. Studies comparing the effectiveness of learning from two‐dimensional (2D) versus three‐dimensional (3D) visualizations are limited by sole reliance on behavioural evidence like learner preferences and test performance. Though it is reasonable to assume that student performance on knowledge‐based tests is indicative of success, these tests fail to illuminate the subtleties of a learner's interaction with visualization tools in the process of learning. Quantitative measurement of the learning process through direct monitoring of neural processes offers an alternative means of assessment to compare learning 2D and 3D learning in anatomy. Frequency band oscillation activity measured by electroencephalography (EEG) may give direct insight into cognitive resources required during a learning task. Medial frontal theta (MFT) oscillations (4–8 Hz) have been shown to increase with increased working memory requirements. The aim of this study was to compare MFT neural activity as measured by EEG as participants learn from 2D versus 3D anatomical visualizations. MFT activity was compared as novice participants (n = 21) learned to identify and localize neuroanatomical structures using a reinforcement‐based learning paradigm. Participants learned from neuroanatomical models that were presented both with and without stereoscopic disparity using NVIDIA 3D Vision® 2 goggles while EEG data were collected. Data were processed using Brain Vision Analyzer 2 software and statistical analysis was performed using SPSS statistics. This study was approved by the Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board at the University of Calgary (Ethics ID: REB14‐088). We found that MFT was greater when participants were viewing 3D models compared to 2D models (p < .05), indicating that greater working memory engagement is required to view 3D models. In the context of cognitive load theory (CLT), these findings are important for educators. If students are participating in a learning activity that uses 3D models (which requires greater working memory resources), then less free capacity remains in the total working memory to engage with the learning activity itself. Therefore when educators are designing learning activities that use 3D models, activities may have to be simplified or use techniques that promote germane load as a compensatory strategy to ensure successful learning.Support or Funding InformationThis research was supported by University of Calgary grants (competitive) awarded to the authors including: Teaching and Learning Grant; University Research Grants Committee (URGC) Seed Grant; and the Data and Technology Fund. SA would like to acknowledge scholarship funding provided by: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) Doctoral Fellowship; Alberta Innovates Health Solutions (AIHS) Graduate Studentship, and the Queen Elizabeth II Graduate Doctoral Scholarship.This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.