The first impression of complexity best predicts the overall post-learning cognitive load assessment, indicating a primacy effect in learning contexts¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r? · q3 · i2–i3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 In a multiple regression, the first ICL assessment was the strongest predictor of the delayed ICL assessment (β = 0.70), exceeding ICL2 (β = 0.34) and ICL3 (β = 0.47). → Krieglstein 2025 q3 i2 Paired t-tests showed the overall assessment was significantly closer to the first than to the last impression in both complexity sequences (d = 0.49 increasing; d = 0.35 decreasing). → Krieglstein 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Krieglstein 2025¶

Krieglstein, F., Beege, M., Wesenberg, L., Rey, G. D., & Schneider, S. (2025). The Distorting Influence of Primacy Effects on Reporting Cognitive Load in Learning Materials of Varying Complexity. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09980-0

q3 · i3 · causal · r?

Multiple linear regression in the main study with ICL1, ICL2, ICL3 as predictors of the delayed ICL assessment; adjusted R² = 0.67. The first assessment was the strongest predictor: "β = 0.70, 95% CI [0.60, 0.80], p < 0.001", with ICL2 and ICL3 significant but to a significantly lesser extent given the confidence intervals.

"it could be shown that the first ICL assessment (ICL1) best predicted the delayed ICL assessment, β = 0.70, 95% CI [0.60, 0.80], p < 0.001."

Krieglstein 2025 (2)¶

Krieglstein, F., Beege, M., Wesenberg, L., Rey, G. D., & Schneider, S. (2025). The Distorting Influence of Primacy Effects on Reporting Cognitive Load in Learning Materials of Varying Complexity. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09980-0

q3 · i2 · causal · r?

Paired samples t-tests in the main study comparing distances of the overall assessment from the first versus last impression. In the increasing condition d = 0.49; in the decreasing condition d = 0.35 (t(46) = 2.40, p < 0.001). Both conditions showed the overall assessment closer to the first impression.

"the difference between the first and the overall assessment (M = 1.69, SD = 1.12) was significantly smaller than the difference between the last and the overall assessment (M = 2.47, SD = 1.23), t(52) = 3.53, p < 0.001, d = 0.49."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Delayed post-learning assessments of ICL, ECL, and GCL do not differ between increasing and decreasing complexity sequences — related
• Delayed cognitive load assessments after learning exceed the average of during-learning assessments only when complexity decreases across the learning material — related
• ICL ratings track the manipulated complexity sequence: increasing across units in the increasing condition and decreasing in the decreasing condition — related
• ECL ratings also follow the complexity sequence, rising in the increasing condition and falling in the decreasing condition, though ECL was not manipulated — related
• Delayed cognitive load ratings appear to be based more on the more complex problems in the series than on a recency effect — 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) — related