A single delayed cognitive load rating after a problem sequence is significantly higher than the average of immediate ratings for both mental effort and perceived difficulty (Experiment 1)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1 · q3 · i2–i3
Currency · newest study 2015 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2018: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 In Experiment 1, delayed mental effort ratings were significantly higher than the average of the six immediate ratings (d = 0.85). → Schmeck 2015 q3 i2 In Experiment 1, delayed perceived difficulty ratings were significantly higher than the average of the six immediate ratings (d = 0.78). → Schmeck 2015 (2)

Evidence¶

Schmeck 2015¶

Schmeck, A., Opfermann, M., van Gog, T., Paas, F., & Leutner, D. (2015). Measuring cognitive load with subjective rating scales during problem solving: differences between immediate and delayed ratings. Instructional Science, 43, 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9328-3

q3 · i3 · causal · r1

Repeated-measures classroom experiment with 168 German undergraduate educational science students solving six weekday-problems of increasing complexity. The paired t-test showed "significant differences between the average of ratings after each task versus single delayed ratings" for invested mental effort, d = 0.85.

"two paired samples t-tests revealed significant differences between the average of ratings after each task versus single delayed ratings of both invested mental effort ( M = 3.43, SD = 0.81 vs. M = 4.32, SD = 1.24, t(167) = 13.54, p\ 0.001, d = 0.85), and perceived task difficulty"

Schmeck 2015 (2)¶

Schmeck, A., Opfermann, M., van Gog, T., Paas, F., & Leutner, D. (2015). Measuring cognitive load with subjective rating scales during problem solving: differences between immediate and delayed ratings. Instructional Science, 43, 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9328-3

q3 · i2 · causal · r1

Same Experiment 1 repeated-measures classroom study (N = 168): the paired t-tests revealed "significant differences between the average of ratings after each task versus single delayed ratings" for perceived task difficulty (M = 2.96 vs. M = 3.74, d = 0.78).

"two paired samples t-tests revealed significant differences between the average of ratings after each task versus single delayed ratings of both invested mental effort ( M = 3.43, SD = 0.81 vs. M = 4.32, SD = 1.24, t(167) = 13.54, p\ 0.001, d = 0.85), and perceived task difficulty"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Delayed ratings of affective variables (interest and motivation) do not differ from the average of immediate ratings, unlike cognitive load ratings — related
• The delayed-higher-than-immediate difference for cognitive load ratings replicates regardless of whether problem complexity increases or decreases across the sequence (Experiment 2) — a broader claim this one bears on
• The predictive value of cognitive load ratings for problem performance was mixed: mental effort predicted performance in Experiment 1, perceived difficulty in Experiment 2, but never both at once — related
• Delayed cognitive load ratings appear to be based more on the more complex problems in the series than on a recency effect — related
• Delayed cognitive load assessments after learning exceed the average of during-learning assessments only when complexity decreases across the learning material — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Invested mental effort and perceived task difficulty are strongly correlated yet relate differently to relative task difficulty, indicating the two ratings measure different aspects of overall cognitive load — related
• Taking an immediate plus delayed final test yields higher delayed test performance with less invested effort than taking only a delayed test (Experiment 2) — related
• Delayed effort ratings are higher than the average of immediate ratings, suggesting itemized appraisals are more sensitive to effort fluctuations — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)