Extraneous cognitive load arising from limited scope and high distance in the rule-based game pushed the facilitator toward first- and second-order interventions instead of the third-order interventions the learning goal required¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In the rule-based SG, the facilitator performed 75 FOL and SOL interventions versus only 8 TOL interventions, likely caused by extraneous cognitive load from limited scope, experienced distance and procedural disturbances. → Marieke de Wijse-van Heeswijk 2025

Evidence¶

Marieke de Wijse-van Heeswijk 2025¶

Marieke de Wijse-van Heeswijk, Etienne A. J. A. Rouwette, Sander V. Meijerink. (2025). The learning effects of first, second, and third order interventions in a rule-based and open simulation game. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-025-09715-w

q2 · i? · qualitative · r?

Interpretive analysis of co-occurrence data from the rule-based case study. The article reports "facilitator FOL and SOL interventions (75) is large compared to the number of TOL interventions (8)" and attributes this to extraneous cognitive load from limited scope, distance and procedures.

"The number of facilitator FOL and SOL interventions (75) is large compared to the number of TOL interventions (8). This was likely caused by the combination of ex. cognitive load following from limited scope, experienced distance and the disturbances caused by the many procedures in the rule based game."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Working Memory — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Struggling participants in the rule-based game initiated emergent facilitation — self-organized peer facilitation — which was fuelled by cognitive load, scope disturbances and high distance and supported first- and second-order learning — related
• In a rule-based simulation game with narrow scope and high distance, facilitator interventions were predominantly first- and second-order and participant learning was mainly first- and second-order — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Participants in the rule-based simulation game perceived it as demanding, and learning and applying its procedures and rules hindered investment in their learning goals — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Cognitive Overload Degrades Learning — a broader claim this one bears on
• In an open simulation game with wide scope and low distance, second-order interventions effectively elicited second-order responses — related
• In an open simulation game, third-order interventions effectively evoked third-order responses — related
• High task variability can overload working memory and reduce learning efficiency in some cases — related