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¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2018: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In Experiment 1, immediate and delayed mental effort ratings significantly predicted performance while difficulty ratings did not; in Experiment 2 this pattern reversed. → Schmeck 2015

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

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Linear regression analyses predicting problem-solving performance from the rating measures (Tables 4 and 9). In Experiment 1 (N = 168) effort ratings were significant predictors (delayed effort p = 0.049); in Experiment 2 (N = 107) neither cognitive load measure reached significance, with difficulty only marginal (p = 0.059 and p = 0.094).

"we found that mental effort predicted performance in Experiment 1 and that perceived difficulty predicted performance in Experiment 2, but unfortunately, in neither of the two experiments, both dimensions of cognitive load predicted performance at the same time."

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) — 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)
• Repeated measures of invested mental effort, perceived task difficulty, interest, and self-assessed understanding differ significantly across measurement points within complex learning tasks and are not adequately represented by their mean — related
• Informing learners about the to-be-monitored cue before problem-solving did not affect mental effort or problem-solving performance (Experiment 1) — related
• In a preregistered within-subjects experiment (N = 131, eight measurements), the translated scale showed criterion validity via sensitivity to task complexity, extraneous load, and motivation — related
• Mental effort is more suitably modeled as a non-linear than linear predictor of learning outcomes in most re-analyzed studies — 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
• Mental effort did not explain the testing effect: retrieval practice effort did not predict delayed test scores — related