Germane load measurement is problematic: GCL-outcome correlations and item understanding show weaknesses across instruments¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2025: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In the Leppink et al. (2013) validation studies, GCL and learning outcomes did not correlate, contradicting theoretical assumptions of CLT. → Felix Krieglstein 2022 q2 i? Klepsch et al. (2017) found their GCL items should be used with caution because of varying levels of understanding among respondents. → Felix Krieglstein 2022 (2)

Evidence¶

Felix Krieglstein 2022¶

Felix Krieglstein, Maik Beege, Günter Daniel Rey, Paul Ginns, Moritz Krell, Sascha Schneider. (2022). A Systematic Meta-analysis of the Reliability and Validity of Subjective Cognitive Load Questionnaires in Experimental Multimedia Learning Research. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09683-4

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r?

Narrative account of the Leppink et al. (2013) validation studies with participants learning statistics: the three-factorial ten-item structure was supported, though "the GCL and learning outcomes did not correlate" and the model was only partially supported in two studies.

"the GCL and learning outcomes did not correlate — a finding which contradicts theoretical assumptions of CLT."

Felix Krieglstein 2022 (2)¶

Felix Krieglstein, Maik Beege, Günter Daniel Rey, Paul Ginns, Moritz Krell, Sascha Schneider. (2022). A Systematic Meta-analysis of the Reliability and Validity of Subjective Cognitive Load Questionnaires in Experimental Multimedia Learning Research. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09683-4

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r?

Narrative account of the Klepsch et al. (2017) validation using informed and naïve ratings of learning situations. The authors found the GCL items "should be used with caution" and recommend conducting a reliability test.

"the results suggested that the GCL items should be used with caution because of varying levels of under standings on the part of respondents."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Subjective cognitive load questionnaires show satisfactory internal consistency across the four most frequently used instruments in experimental multimedia learning research — related
• Correlations of cognitive load types with learning outcomes and prior knowledge support CLT assumptions, and results support the three-factor model — reports the opposite
• Self-reported germane cognitive load correlates positively with interest (QCM) among college students solving algebra problems — related
• Correlations among cognitive load types partially contradict theory-based assumptions of the additivity hypothesis — related
• GCL-raising activations did not improve learning outcomes: neither prompted imagination nor disfluency produced a significant task-performance advantage — related
• Self-reported intrinsic and germane cognitive load correlate positively among college students solving algebra problems — related
• Prior knowledge correlates negatively with delayed ICL and ECL and positively with delayed GCL, consistent with meta-analytic findings — related
• In the new questionnaire, ICL and ECL correlate positively while both correlate negatively with GCL — related
• Currently available multidimensional cognitive load questionnaires show psychometric limitations, including missing manipulation-check experiments and too few items per factor — a broader claim this one bears on