Disfluency and WMC × disfluency did not affect intrinsic or germane cognitive load¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Neither disfluency nor the disfluency × WMC interaction significantly predicted intrinsic or germane cognitive load, as expected. → Janina Lehmann 2015

Evidence¶

Janina Lehmann 2015¶

Janina Lehmann, Christina Goussios, Tina Seufert. (2015). Working memory capacity and disfluency effect: an aptitude-treatment-interaction study. Metacognition Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-015-9149-z

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Regression analyses of subjective cognitive load ratings (Cognitive Load Questionnaire) after learning and after testing in the 47-student experiment found no significant predictors for ICL or GCL, supporting Hypotheses 4 and 5.

"As expected, neither disfluency nor the interaction term disfluency × WMC affected ICL or GCL."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Disfluency and WMC × disfluency did not affect extraneous cognitive load, contrary to hypotheses — related
• In a pre-registered direct replication (N = 96), the disfluency × WMC interaction did not significantly predict retention, failing to replicate Lehmann et al. (2016) — related
• The null effect of the disfluency × WMC interaction on transfer replicated the primary study's null finding, with both studies showing negative coefficients — related
• Neither disfluency nor distinctiveness affected memory across three experiments with alien-list stimuli — related