Symbol Systems Theory...How Media is used/can be used in classrooms.

Introduction and Overview

Gavriel Salomon, a professor in educational psychology, initially developed the ‘symbol systems theory’ in 1979 to explain the effects of media on learning. Through his book, “Interaction of Media, Cognition and Learning”, the Dean of Israel’s University of Haifa’s School of Education, attempts to use the symbol systems theory to shift the current thinking at this time about the relationship of media and knowledge acquisition from an “isolationist and unsystematic exploration” (Moore and Hall, 2004) to a more “focused, systematic and theoretically oriented” inquiry (Salomon, 1979 p.3). In particular, this theory was used as a tool by Salomon to explore and examine how specific media interacts with or impacts cognition in learning. Salomon (1979, p.3) states that learning and thinking are based on internal symbolic representations and hence, "if symbol systems are central to media of communication and to thinking, then the interactions and interdependence between the two systems cannot be ignored." As summarized by Hall and Moore (2004), other key considerations of the symbol systems theory were to:
Propose a new approach to media, as seen from an educational-psychological viewpoint.
Acknowledge differences in the role of symbol systems in the acquisition of knowledge and in the cultivation of mental skills.
Acknowledge the distinction between what symbol systems can be made to affect and what they typically affect and;
Recognize and include individual differences when studying the interrelations of media, cognition and learning.
To summarize how symbol systems of the media affect knowledge acquisition, Salomon (1979) identifies five main characteristics of this process. He states: “First, they highlight different aspects of content. Second, they vary with respect to ease of recoding. Third, specific coding elements can save the learner from difficult mental elaborations by overtly supplanting or short-circuiting specific elaboration. Fourth, symbol systems differ with respect to how much processing they demand or allow. Fifth, symbol systems differ with respect to the kinds of mental processes they call on for recoding and elaboration. Thus, symbol systems partly determine who will acquire how much knowledge from what kinds of messages.” (Salomon, 1979 pp. 226-227). By further reviewing subsequent publications by Salomon and those of other writers who have used the above mentioned characteristics of the symbol systems theory to demonstrate the relationship between mind and media, we will explore in the course of this essay how and why the different symbolic forms and representations of the media will “determine who will acquire how much knowledge” and from “what kinds of messages” (Salomon, 1979 pp. 227).

Guiding Factors and Basis of the Theory

Differing Mental Capacities

One of the main reasons Salomon (1979) chose to focus on symbol systems was due to its ability to explain the relationship between learning from the media and cognition. While each medium is capable of conveying content via inherent symbol systems, the meaning which is interpreted or extracted from a medium is largely dependent on the learner and is influenced by his/her experiences, cultural sphere and cognitive ability. Salomon (1997, p.378) reasons that “if different symbolic forms of representation, elaborate, render, convey, and express them in particular ways….then "reading" (them) would (also) require different sets of mental processing capacities.” To support his claim, Salomon (1997) cites two fields of research study (neuropsychological analysis and media studies) which suggest that reading and interpreting different symbolic forms of representation require varying mental skills and capacities. However, he does acknowledge that both these lines of study have limitations but validates that the convergence of their findings supports the conclusion that “different symbolic forms of representation require different symbolic capacities…(and)…the larger the difference between the symbolic forms of representation, the greater the qualitative difference between the required capacities” (Salomon, 1997, p.378).
This part of Salomon’s theory of symbol systems links closely with Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences which states that the seven intelligences (linguistic, musical, logical/mathematical, spatial, bodily/kinesthetic, intrapersonal, and interpersonal) have different neurological functions in the brain and every individual will have certain functions which are more or lesser developed than others. This concept explains the basis of differentiated symbolic capacities since each such symbolic capacity has its own unique developmental progression which depends on both the structure of the symbol system under consideration and the development of various psychological functions (Gardner, 1993). For example, a person with a well-developed musical neurological function may interpret or decipher an advertisement on television which uses a lot of emotive songs differently from another person who has a lesser developed musical neurological function but a more advanced sense of spatial intelligence. Hence, Salomon (1979, p.112) explains that for effective instructional communication, “a match needs to be established between the cognitive demands of a learning task, the skills that are required by the codes of the message, and the learner's level of mastery of these skills."

Different Perceptions of the Media

The form of a medium exerts differential influence on learning not only because of what they are but also what they are perceived to be. This happens in the case of children in particular who tend to handle a media more often on the basis of the general image they hold of it rather than on its particular offering or intrinsic attributes. In his article, “How Culture’s Symbolic Forms Affect Learning and Thinking”, Salomon (1997), demonstrates using two different media forms (television and print) how differential preference can bring about discrepancies in learning. Television which is generally considered to be “simple, fun and easy to understand” may not be treated as a serious learning tool in comparison to a print media item which may be perceived as “academic, serious and important” (Salomon, 1997 p.380). Hence, children who are largely influenced by the socially held and communicated views of the media may approach an equivalent story or document on both mediums differently and this would inevitably affect the effectiveness of the medium as a learning tool for the child.

Differences in Meaning

According to some scholars, meaning is not ‘acquisition’ from external sources, but rather, the meaning we derive or construe during human communication is a function of the mental activity we engage in (Hobson, 2003; Salomon, 1981). In my opinion, this segment of the theory plays a significant role in explaining why learning is and should be a constructivist development. Learning is essentially a process whereby learners construct their own knowledge by applying their existing knowledge and mental skills to novel incoming information, constructing their own meanings as they go along. The knowledge that students finally acquire is only the knowledge they have actively constructed themselves, not the information transmitted to them in ready-made packages (Philips 1995). Therefore, it allows one to conclude that the same set of symbols (information) can be interpreted and processed very differently by individuals with differing prior knowledge and experiences.
Salomon (1997) says that much of how meaning is derived depends largely on the richness and organization of the knowledge schemata one brings to bear on the incoming information. He asserts that when the assimilatory schemata is well-organized, well-developed and rich with content knowledge, then the new piece of information which is being encountered will be easily absorbed and assimilated into the existing knowledge schema and the meaning which is given to the new incoming information will more or less be the same regardless of the mode in which it is contained in. However, when the relevant knowledge schema is not well-developed, then the relevance of the symbolic forms of representation may be far more profound. Simply put, the less knowledge already available to a learner, the more the symbolic forms of representation will make a difference in the meanings the learner arrives at.

Symbolic Forms of Representation

The symbol systems theory brought much attention to the study of how various symbolic forms of representation affect learning outcomes. Various studies in the 1960s and 1970s which were pitted against each other to see which media form brought about the best learning outcomes yielded very disappointing results (Masterman, 1997). They showed that it did not really matter what form of symbolic representation one used since they all resulted in the same learning outcomes. However, Salomon (1997, p.377) states that each form of representation is “uniquely capable of selecting, packaging, transmitting, and conveying its own information in its own way” and hence offers its own unique experience. In other words, Salomon (1997) says that different symbolic forms of representation address different aspects of the world around us and thus afford us the opportunity to learn something different about the world from each form of representation. For example, if a person wanted to learn more about the course structure of Bond University’s education program, they can read about it over the internet, speak to a course coordinator or enroll in the program and find out for themselves. While all the various symbolic forms would have resulted in achieving the same learning outcome, the experiential learning which would have taken place through the various modes would have differed.

Media’s Impact on the Mind: Reciprocal Relationship

Salomon (1979) argues that since media forms are a part and parcel of information itself, they influence the meanings one arrives at, the mental capacities that are called for, and the ways one comes to view the world. According to Salomon (1979), media’s symbolic forms of representation are never neutral and every medium is capable of conveying content via certain inherent symbol systems. Salomon (1997) says that one of the most important functions of the symbol systems theory is its analysis of how media’s symbolic forms of representation affect or represent the way we come to perceive the world to ourselves. To put simply, it analyses if the media influences the way in which we start thinking or seeing the world. According to Salomon (1997), his research in the 1970s and 1980s has proven that symbolic forms of representation do impact the format in which people think. He says “…children exposed to novel symbolic forms of representation typical of film and television (e.g., zooming in and out, long shots and close-ups, animated breakup of space) have shown evidence of coming to use these forms in their thinking” (Salomon, 1997, p.379).
An interesting early study which Salomon conducted was on the impact of American television programs such as Sesame Street on Israeli school children. He found that heavy exposure to its fun and jazzed-up format resulted in an observable decrease in the children’s perseverance with a continuous school-like task and they preferred to "jump around impatiently, emulating in their thinking the program's formats” (Salomon, 1997, p. 379). Salomon (1997) points out that current technological media such as the internet and other multimedia packages which are available today may also affect their user’s minds in similar ways and as interactivity replaces sheer exposure, such effects become even stronger.
In summary, mind and technological media are not two unrelated entities and affect each other in a variety of ways. Although technological media is a creation of the human mind, they in turn affect their creator. As Salomon highlights, “…the culture that creates the media and develops their symbolic forms of representation also opens the door for those forms to act on the minds of the young in both more and less desirable ways” (Salomon, 1997, p.390).

CONCLUSION

As discussed in the paper, the symbols systems theory is especially relevant in recent years where the advent of multimedia technology is changing the learning environments of children around the world. I personally feel that it has become increasingly important for educationists and psychologists alike to understand how symbol systems and the media forms which represent them influence learning and thinking of children if they want to know how to best utilize media systems to bring about desired learning outcomes.
As elaborated in the paper, the following principles can be summarized as being fundamental to the concept of the symbol systems theory:

1) There is a reciprocal relationship between the media and learner – they both influence each other.

2) The social context of media presentations and the symbolic representational forms of the media can influence how messages are perceived.

3) Differing cognitive skills and prior knowledge are required to decode symbolic elements which are represented in various media forms.

4) The level of knowledge and skills which a receiver possesses will affect the impact of specific media sequences.

References

Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice. New York: Basic.

Hobson, P. (2003). The Cradle of Thought: Exploring the Origins of Thinking. UK: Oxford University Press.

Masterman, L. (1997). A Rationale for Media Education. In R. Kubey (Ed.). Media Literacy in the Information Age: Current perspectives (pp. 15-68). New Brunswick, U.S.A.: Transaction Publishers.


Moore, S. and Hall, E. (2004). Review of Interaction of Media, Cognition, and Learning by Gavriel Salomon. Retrieved July 6th, 2006, from <http://novationsjournal.org/content/original_story.pl?story=6>.

Phillips, D. C. (1995). The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational Researcher, 24(7), 5-12.

Salomon, G. (1979). Interaction of media, cognition and learning. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Salomon, G. (1981). Communication and Education. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Salomon, G. (1997). How Culture's Symbolic Forms Affect Learning and Thinking. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(5), 375-380.