Tracing and pointing lowers extraneous cognitive load under a floor-effect-adjusted test, but not in the unadjusted comparison¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causalr2·q3·i2medium
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · 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.
q3 i2 Using Liu and Wang's t-test for floor effects, the tracing and pointing group reported lower extraneous load than controls (d = −0.52), supporting H3. → Yining Wang 2025
q3 i? On the standard independent-groups t-test the extraneous load difference was not statistically significant. → Yining Wang 2025 (2)
Evidence¶
Yining Wang 2025¶
Yining Wang, Kexin Han, Paul Ginns. (2025). Tracing and Pointing Support Multimedia Learning: A Cross-Cultural Replication. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10005-7
q3 · i2 · causal · r2
Multi-item extraneous load self-reports were substantially skewed (70.5% of responses at the lowest three options), so the authors applied Liu and Wang's (2021) floor-effect t-test, finding "d = −0.52 [95% CI -∞, −0.03]".
"extraneous load ratings reported by the tracing and pointing group (M = 1.67, SD = 1.19) were lower than those for the non-tracing and pointing group (M = 2.33, SD = 1.31), t(82) = −2.13, p = 0.021, d = −0.52 [95% CI -∞, −0.03]; thus, H3 was supported under this analysis."
Yining Wang 2025 (2)¶
Yining Wang, Kexin Han, Paul Ginns. (2025). Tracing and Pointing Support Multimedia Learning: A Cross-Cultural Replication. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10005-7
q3 · i? · causal · r2
The conventional independent-groups t-test on the same extraneous load ratings did not reach significance ("t(82) = −1.35, p = 0.090"); no effect-size threshold was met for a supported finding under this analysis.
"The difference in self-reported extraneous cognitive load ratings reported by the tracing and pointing condition (M = 1.66, SD = 1.71) and the non-tracing and pointing condition (M = 2.21, SD = 1.99) was also not statistically significant, t(82) = −1.35, p = 0.090, d = −0.30 [95% CI ∞, −0.14]."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Tracing and pointing does not significantly reduce self-reported intrinsic cognitive load — related
- The reviewed tracing studies consistently confirm learning benefits of tracing across retention, comprehension, and transfer measures, though cognitive-load hypotheses were not confirmed in all studies — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
tracing-pointing-lower-extraneous-load-floor-effect |
title |
Tracing and pointing lowers extraneous cognitive load under a floor-effect-adjusted test, but not in the unadjusted comparison |
description |
Tracing and pointing lowers extraneous cognitive load under a floor-effect-adjusted test, but not in the unadjusted comparison |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
mixed |
newest_evidence |
2025 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-21 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — yining-wang-2025, yining-wang-2025-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.