The delayed-higher-than-immediate difference for cognitive load ratings replicates regardless of whether problem complexity increases or decreases across the sequence (Experiment 2)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i2–i3
Currency · newest study 2015 · checked against its sources 2026-10-21 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 In Experiment 2's increasing-complexity group, delayed mental effort (d = 0.88) and perceived difficulty (d = 0.81) ratings exceeded immediate averages. → Schmeck 2015 q3 i2 In Experiment 2's decreasing-complexity group, delayed mental effort (d = 0.71) and perceived difficulty (d = 0.71) ratings exceeded immediate averages. → 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 · r2

Experiment 2 randomly assigned 107 students to sequences; Group 1 (n = 56) received increasing complexity. The quote shows the "delayed rating was significantly higher than the average rating" for mental effort, d = 0.88; perceived difficulty showed the same pattern, d = 0.81.

"For mental effort, however, the delayed rating was significantly higher than the average rating for Group 1 ( M = 4.34, SD = 1.17 vs. M = 3.56, SD = 0.60), t(55) = 5.69, p\ .001, d = 0.88"

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 · r2

Experiment 2 Group 2 (n = 51) received problems in decreasing-complexity order. The delayed mental effort rating was again significantly higher than the average rating, d = 0.71; perceived difficulty showed the same pattern (delayed M = 3.75 vs. average M = 3.11, d = 0.71).

"as well as Group 2( M = 4.25, SD = 0.89 vs. M = 3.72, SD = 0.63), t(50) = 5.85, p\ 0.001, d = 0.71."

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
• 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) — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Delayed cognitive load ratings appear to be based more on the more complex problems in the series than on a recency effect — related
• 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
• Delayed cognitive load assessments after learning exceed the average of during-learning assessments only when complexity decreases across the learning material — reports the opposite
• ECL ratings also follow the complexity sequence, rising in the increasing condition and falling in the decreasing condition, though ECL was not manipulated — related
• ICL ratings track the manipulated complexity sequence: increasing across units in the increasing condition and decreasing in the decreasing condition — related
• The first impression of complexity best predicts the overall post-learning cognitive load assessment, indicating a primacy effect in learning contexts — 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 — a narrower finding that bears on this claim