How anthropomorphic graphics support students’ understanding of abstract concepts
a qualitative study in geography education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23925/2179-3565.2026v17i2e77433Keywords:
Anthropomorphic graphics, Visual representation, Conceptual understanding, Abstract concept learning, Prior knowledge, Instructional designAbstract
Students’ understanding of abstract concepts has long been a major challenge in school learning. In geography learning, visual representations are widely used, and anthropomorphic graphics have attracted attention for their potential to make abstract content more accessible. However, existing research has primarily focused on their effects on attention and affect, with limited attention to their role in supporting conceptual understanding. This study explores how anthropomorphic graphics support students’ learning of complex abstract concepts and how such support varies according to learners’ prior knowledge. Using a qualitative approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with six Chinese high school students aged 16-17. The findings indicate that anthropomorphic graphics help students relate abstract concepts to everyday experiences, making complex ideas easier to understand and remember. Differences emerged across learners: students with higher prior knowledge tended to use these graphics as explanatory tools for interpreting conceptual relationships, whereas those with lower prior knowledge viewed them primarily as memory aids. The effectiveness of anthropomorphic graphics was also influenced by instructional factors such as teacher guidance and textual support. The study highlights the role of anthropomorphic graphics as instructional tools in supporting abstract concept learning and suggests their effectiveness depends on learners’ prior knowledge and instructional design.
Downloads
References
Abubakar, A., Bello, Z., Hussai̇N, A., & Bello, N. I. (2023). Availability and Use of Visual Teaching and Learning Materials in Teaching Geography at Nassarawa Education Zonal Office. The Universal Academic Research Journal, 5(1), 17–26.
Amin, M., Olu‐Lafe, O., Claessen, L. E., Sobczak‐Edmans, M., Ward, J., Williams, A. L., & Sagiv, N. (2011). Understanding grapheme personification: A social synaesthesia? Journal of Neuropsychology, 5(2), 255–282.
Bach, B., Wang, Z., Farinella, M., Murray-Rust, D., & Henry Riche, N. (2018). Design Patterns for Data Comics. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–12.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Macmillan.
Bansah, A., Antwi, S., & Franklin, T. (2018). The Information Technology Challenge in Teaching Senior High School Geography in Ghana. Issues and Trends in Educational Technology, 6(1).
Bednarz, S., Heffron, S., & Huynh, N. (2013). A road map for 21st century geography education. Washington, DC: Association of American Geographers.
Bendl, T., Storrøsæter, H., Madsen, L. M., Trokšiar, D., De La Martinière, R., Liu, S., Serame, S., Mitchell, J. T., Bagoly-Simó, P., Duan, Y., & Kidman, G. (2025). An international perspective on geography curricula: Paving a way forward for geographical thinking. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 34(3), 294–317.
Bentz, J. (2020). Learning about climate change in, with and through art. Climatic Change, 162(3), 1595–1612.
Chen, J., Li, M., & Ham, J. (2024). Different dimensions of anthropomorphic design cues: How visual appearance and conversational style influence users’ information disclosure tendency towards chatbots. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 190, 103320.
Craik, F. I. M. (2001). Memory: Levels of Processing. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 9593–9597). Elsevier.
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671–684.
Day, S. B., Motz, B. A., & Goldstone, R. L. (2015). The Cognitive Costs of Context: The Effects of Concreteness and Immersiveness in Instructional Examples. Frontiers in Psychology, 6.
Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864–886.
Ericson, K., & Häikiö, T. K. (2025). Visuality and Multimodality as Tools for Learning in Geography and Art Education. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 59(2), 50–73.
Farinella, M. (2018). The potential of comics in science communication. Journal of Science Communication, 17(01), Y01.
Forišek, M., & Steinová, M. (2012). Metaphors and analogies for teaching algorithms. Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 15–20.
Fyfe, E. R., McNeil, N. M., Son, J. Y., & Goldstone, R. L. (2014). Concreteness Fading in Mathematics and Science Instruction: A Systematic Review. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 9–25.
Galli, G. (2014). What makes deeply encoded items memorable? Insights into the levels of processing framework from neuroimaging and neuromodulation. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 5.
Gao, Z., & Huang, J. (2022). Human-computer interaction emotional design and innovative cultural and creative product design. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 982303.
Genovesi, C., & Hesse, J. (2025). Deviance and the literal-metaphorical distinction revisited. Inquiry, 1–25.
Gibbs, R. W. (1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. Cambridge University Press.
Iyamuremye, E., & Burns, D. (2025). Concrete-Pictorial-Abstract instruction: Enhancing students’ learning motivation and achievement in mathematics. Cogent Education, 12(1), 2558303.
Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought.
Kallery, M., & Psillos, D. (2004). Anthropomorphism and Animism in Early Years Science: Why Teachers Use Them, how They Conceptualise Them and What Are Their Views on Their Use. Research in Science Education, 34(3), 291–311.
Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2021). The Redundancy Principle in Multimedia Learning. In R. E. Mayer & L. Fiorella (Eds), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (3rd edn, pp. 212–220). Cambridge University Press.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge university press.
Kovecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford university press.
Kriewaldt, J., Robertson, L., & Ziebell, N. (2023). Creating the Conditions for Geographic Conceptual Development in Post-Primary Students through Collaborative Guided Inquiry. Education Sciences, 13(11), 1098.
Kumar, J. A. (2024). Facial animacy in anthropomorphised designs: Insights from leveraging self-report and facial expression analysis for multimedia learning. Computers & Education, 223, 105150.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live by (M. Black, Ed.; Vol. 40). University of Chicago Press.
Lee, C.-R., & Lee, C.-Y. (2024). Cognitive differences in the perception of metaphorical images among Taiwanese high school students. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 11(1), 2408865.
Li, X. (2020). An analysis of learning difficulties in high school geography under the new curriculum reform and corresponding strategies [in Chinese]. Journal of International Education Forum, 2(8), 7.
Liew, T. W., Pang, W. M., Leow, M. C., & Tan, S.-M. (2022). Anthropomorphizing malware, bots, and servers with human‑like images and dialogues: The emotional design effects in a multimedia learning environment. Smart Learning Environments, 9(1), 5.
Liu, J., & Sanmugam, M. (2024). Do Anthropomorphic Graphics in Multimedia Learning Materials Help Learning by Capturing Learners’ Attention?: In J. Zhang, W. A. J. Wan Yahaya, M. Sanmugam, & D. Lim (Eds), Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design (pp. 321–340). IGI Global.
Matsuia, T. (2024). Power of ‘Nekomimi’: Animal-like anthropomorphic agents in environmental education. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2295172.
Mayer, R. E. (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge university press.
Mayer, R. E. (2014a). Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (2nd edn, pp. 43–71). Cambridge University Press. Cambridge Core.
Mayer, R. E. (Ed.). (2014b). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (Second Edition). Cambridge University Press.
McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. (2009). Chapter 9 Toward a Comprehensive Model of Comprehension. In Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 51, pp. 297–384). Elsevier.
McRae, K., Nedjadrasul, D., Pau, R., Lo, B. P., & King, L. (2018). Abstract Concepts and Pictures of Real‐World Situations Activate One Another. Topics in Cognitive Science, 10(3), 518–532.
Menendez, D., Richardson, E., McNeil, K., & Gelman, S. A. (2024). Discovering the world of viruses: Testing the influence of anthropomorphic representations on children’s learning about COVID.
Moremoholo, T. P., & de Lange, R. W. (2018). Anthropomorphic graphics: How useful are they as an instructional aid to facilitate learning? 13.
Münchow, H., & Bannert, M. (2018). Feeling good, learning better? Effectivity of an emotional design procedure in multimedia learning. Educational Psychology, 39(4), 530–549.
Ni, X. (2023). The Deep Teaching Exploration and Practice Pointing to the Cultivation of High School Geography Core Literacy. Creative Education Studies, 11(05), 1149–1156.
Özgür, A., & Altun, A. (2021). Emotional Design and Engagement With Multimedia Learning Materials in E-Learning: In H. Ucar & A. T. Kumtepe (Eds), Advances in Mobile and Distance Learning (pp. 168–191). IGI Global.
Park, B., Knörzer, L., Plass, J. L., & Brünken, R. (2015). Emotional design and positive emotions in multimedia learning: An eyetracking study on the use of anthropomorphisms. Computers & Education, 86, 30–42.
Phillips, B. J., & McQuarrie, E. F. (2004). Beyond Visual Metaphor: A New Typology of Visual Rhetoric in Advertising. Marketing Theory, 4(1–2), 113–136.
Piaget, J. (1976). Piaget’s Theory. In B. Inhelder, H. H. Chipman, & C. Zwingmann (Eds), Piaget and His School (pp. 11–23). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Plass, J. L., Heidig, S., Hayward, E. O., Homer, B. D., & Um, E. (2014). Emotional design in multimedia learning: Effects of shape and color on affect and learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 128–140.
Renkl, A. (2002). Worked-out examples: Instructional explanations support learning by self-explanations. Learning and Instruction, 12(5), 529–556.
Salminen, J., Kaate, I., Kamel, A. M. S., Jung, S.-G., & Jansen, B. J. (2021). How Does Personification Impact Ad Performance and Empathy? An Experiment with Online Advertising. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 37(2), 141–155.
Sanmugam, M., Abdullah, Z., & Zaid, N. M. (2014). Gamification: Cognitive impact and creating a meaningful experience in learning. 2014 IEEE 6th Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED), 123–128.
Schneider, S., Häßler, A., Habermeyer, T., Beege, M., & Rey, G. D. (2019). The more human, the higher the performance? Examining the effects of anthropomorphism on learning with media. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(1), 57–72.
Shawalludin, S., Sanmugam, M., Rabu, S. N. A., Salim, N. A. M., & Rahman, A. A. (2021). Gamified learning experience and adaptation of Malaysian warriors: User interface by the ADDIE model. In The teachers’ lounge: Tales told and lessons learned. Nova Science Publishers.
Slabbert, C., De Lange, R. W., & Mason, H. (2022). Anthropomorphisms in multimedia learning: Do they facilitate learning in primary school learners? Cogent Education, 9(1), 2034390.
Street, K. E. S., Malmberg, L.-E., & Stylianides, G. J. (2017). Level, strength, and facet-specific self-efficacy in mathematics test performance. ZDM, 49(3), 379–395.
Su, P., & Liu, K. (2024). Effects of anthropomorphic design on comprehension of self-monitoring test results: Integrating evidence of eye-tracking and event-related potential. Displays, 82, 102664.
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive Load Theory. Springer New York.
Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296.
Tatalovic, M. (2009). Science comics as tools for science education and communication: A brief, exploratory study. Journal of Science Communication, 08(04), A02.
Tribull, C. M. (2017). Sequential Science: A Guide to Communication Through Comics. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 110(5), 457–466.
Von Reumont, F., & Budke, A. (2023). Learning about climate change with comics and text: A comparative study. Sustainability Science, 18(6), 2661–2676.
Wang, H. (2025). Instructional strategies for teaching process knowledge in senior high school geography oriented toward the development of higher-order thinking skills [Master’s thesis]. Qufu Normal University.
Waytz, A., Cacioppo, J., & Epley, N. (2010). Who Sees Human?: The Stability and Importance of Individual Differences in Anthropomorphism. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(3), 219–232.
Wu, C.-H., Tang, K.-D., Peng, K.-L., Huang, Y.-M., & Liu, C.-H. (2024). The effects of matching/mismatching cognitive styles in E-learning. Educational Psychology, 44(9–10), 1048–1072.
Zhang, Y., Cao, Y., Proctor, R. W., & Liu, Y. (2023). Emotional experiences of service robots’ anthropomorphic appearance: A multimodal measurement method. Ergonomics, 66(12), 2039–2057.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This Journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivers 4.0 International license.
1.The author (s) authorize the publication of the article in the journal;
2.The author (s) warrant that the contribution is original and unpublished and is not in the process of being evaluated in other journal (s);
3. The journal is not responsible for the opinions, ideas and concepts emitted in the texts, as they are the sole responsibility of its author (s);
4. The editors are entitled to make textual adjustments and to adapt the articles to the standards of publication.
