Mental effort relates to self-rated certainty in a cubic (declining–flat–declining) rather than linear pattern¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · checked against its sources 2026-10-21 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? In the reanalysis of Blissett et al. (2018) data, a cubic model for the mental effort–certainty relation was preferred, with a significant cubic term. → Jimmie Leppink & Patricia Pérez-Fuster 2019
Evidence¶
Jimmie Leppink & Patricia Pérez-Fuster 2019¶
Jimmie Leppink & Patricia Pérez-Fuster. (2019). Mental Effort, Workload, Time on Task, and Certainty: Beyond Linear Models. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-018-09460-2
q2 · i? · associational · r1
Reanalysis of repeated-measurement data (10 tasks per participant) from Blissett et al. (2018); both AIC and BIC preferred the cubic model, and the cubic term was significant: "F1, 211.183 = 17.910, p < 0.001".
"In Blissett et al. ( 2018), we gain about 0.039 in R2M b yg o i n gf r o mM o d e l2t oM o d e l3 , while the difference between Model 3 (3 df for mental effort) and Model 4 (7 df for mental effort given eight mental effort values observed) is only 0.007. In Model 3, we find for the cubic term: F1, 211.183 = 17.910, p < 0.001."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Certainty predicts diagnostic performance; mental effort adds no predictive value beyond certainty — related
- Mental effort is more suitably modeled as a non-linear than linear predictor of learning outcomes in most re-analyzed studies — a broader claim this one bears on
- Mental effort relates to response time in a J-shaped quadratic rather than linear pattern — related
- Evidence on the mental effort–workload relation is mixed: AIC prefers quadratic, BIC prefers linear — related
- Mental effort relates to article viewing time linearly; no evidence against the linear model was found — related
- In a visual-spatial integration task, the interaction between visual-spatial working memory capacity and visual design is quadratic, with the inverted-U progression more strongly accentuated for the dynamic design — related
- Quadratic and cubic trends significantly improved the linear model of teacher and student behavior, showing the importance of studying nonlinearity — related
- Non-linear (Goldilocks) effects of expectations and aspirations on outcomes are small and largely non-significant — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
mental-effort-certainty-cubic |
title |
Mental effort relates to self-rated certainty in a cubic (declining–flat–declining) rather than linear pattern |
description |
Mental effort relates to self-rated certainty in a cubic (declining–flat–declining) rather than linear pattern |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2019 |
source_checked |
2026-10-21 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-21 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — jimmie-leppink-patricia-pérez-fuster-2019 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.