Cognitive load when studying depended on instructional method (highest in the worked-out examples condition), but no prior knowledge or test-phase effects emerged¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2012 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 The interaction between cognitive load and instructional method was statistically significant, F(3, 101) = 3.690, with η² = 0.099; average cognitive load when studying was highest in the worked-out examples condition. → Leppink 2012 q3 i? Hypothesized cognitive load effects involving prior knowledge were not supported: the three-way interaction, the load × prior knowledge interaction, and all effects on load during the test were non-significant. → Leppink 2012 (2)

Evidence¶

Leppink 2012¶

Leppink, J., Broers, N. J., Imbos, T., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Berger, M. P. F. (2012). Self-explanation in the domain of statistics: an expertise reversal effect. Higher Education, 63, 771-785. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-011-9476-1

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

Split-plot ANOVA on Paas' nine-point cognitive load scale with studying and test ratings as repeated measures; the printed effect size is η² = 0.099 (printed g2 = 0.099), in the 0.04-0.13 band. A studying-phase method main effect was also significant, with "the average cognitive load when studying being highest in the worked-out examples condition".

"However, the interaction between cognitive load and instructional method was statistically significant, F(3, 101) = 3.690, p\ .05 ( g2 = 0.099)."

Leppink 2012 (2)¶

Leppink, J., Broers, N. J., Imbos, T., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Berger, M. P. F. (2012). Self-explanation in the domain of statistics: an expertise reversal effect. Higher Education, 63, 771-785. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-011-9476-1

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Split-plot ANOVA null results: the hypothesized prior knowledge effect on load and its interactions were non-significant. For load during the test, the method main effect was also non-significant (F(3, 101) = 0.837); the authors conclude the studying-phase effect "is reduced to small and virtually non-existing" at test.

"revealed a non-significant three-way interaction, F(3, 97) = 0.175, p[ .90 (g2 = 0.005) as well as a non-significant two-way interaction between cognitive load and prior knowledge group, F(1, 97) = 1.087, p[ .30 (g2 = 0.011)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Segmentation Benefits Shrink With Expertise — related
• Prior knowledge and worked-example type (full vs completion) interact significantly on self-reported germane cognitive load, but not on intrinsic or extraneous load — related
• No significant interaction between prior knowledge and task difficulty was observed in a worked-example algebra study — related
• Prior knowledge, worked-example type (full vs completion) and task difficulty show a significant three-way interaction on an algebra posttest, but not on self-reported cognitive load — related
• Cognitive load did not clearly increase during group work under high coercion; a three-way interaction of session time, cognitive load and coercion emerged, with a marginal main effect of coercion — related
• Propositional knowledge showed a prior knowledge main effect but no instructional method × prior knowledge interaction — related
• The effectiveness of instructional techniques and procedures interacts with levels of learner prior knowledge, a pattern known as the expertise reversal effect — related
• Sequence of worked examples and problems had no significant effect on self-reported cognitive load, but higher prior knowledge was associated with lower load in experimental design — related