Cognitive Load Questionnaire (CLQ) by Klepsch et al. (2017)

Product or Programme · All products and programmes
Evidence · 7 claims (6 for, 1 mixed) · 3 studies (2 causal, 1 quant-synthesis), q2–q3 · 1 of 3 report an effect size · 7 claims rest on one study

Description

An eight-item self-report assessment developed by Klepsch and colleagues for measuring learners’ perceived intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load after a learning task.

Components

• Cognitive Load Questionnaire (CLQ) by Klepsch et al. (2017) for differentiated measurement of ICL, ECL, and GCL: The cognitive load questionnaire (CLQ) is an eight-item self-report instrument with three scales: "A scale with two items asking for perceived ICL, a scale with three items asking for perceived ECL, and finally a scale of three items asking for perceived GCL." All items are rated on 7-point Likert-type scales. The article uses it across six studies to test whether intentional variations of one load type are reflected in the corresponding scale, finding prognostic validity to be good. (Melina Klepsch (2020))
• Differentiated subjective Cognitive Load Questionnaire measuring ICL, ECL and GCL: The study employed the paper-based Cognitive Load Questionnaire (Klepsch and Seufert 2012) to differentially assess the three types of cognitive load: three items each for intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load, rated on seven-point Likert scales after learning and after assessing learning outcomes. The authors note that "we were the first to use a differentiated measurement of the three types of CL in disfluency research". The instrument captures only subjective ratings of cognitive load, which the authors acknowledge may not coincide with objective load. (Janina Lehmann et al. (2015))
• Four frequently used multidimensional subjective cognitive load questionnaires (Eysink 2009; Leppink 2013; Leppink 2014; Klepsch 2017): The meta-analysis examines four subjective cognitive load questionnaires that measure the cognitive load types separately with multiple items: the Eysink et al. (2009) six-item instrument (which also includes one item on perceived overall load), the Leppink et al. (2013) ten-item scale (three ICL, three ECL, four GCL items), the revised Leppink et al. (2014) version with added mental-effort items, and the Klepsch et al. (2017) instrument with ICL (two items), ECL (three items), and GCL (three items), which "is not specific to the learning topic and can therefore be easily adapted to the material used in a specific study." Across the meta-analysis sample, the Leppink (2013) questionnaire was used in 33 experiments, Leppink (2014) in seven, Klepsch (2017) in 20, and Eysink (2009) in 10. (Felix Krieglstein et al. (2022))

Claims

• Variations in task difficulty are reflected in the intrinsic cognitive load scale, with boredom conditions reporting the lowest ICL [+M]
• Variations in material design are reflected in the extraneous cognitive load scale: worked examples and integrated formats lower ECL [+M]
• Variations in cognitive activation are reflected in the germane cognitive load scale: prompted imagination and disfluent text raise GCL [+M]
• An unexpected effect: task difficulty variation in the Tetris study also produced differences in reported extraneous cognitive load [~M]
• Disfluency and WMC × disfluency did not affect intrinsic or germane cognitive load [+M]
• Disfluency and WMC × disfluency did not affect extraneous cognitive load, contrary to hypotheses [+M]
• Subjective cognitive load questionnaires show satisfactory internal consistency across the four most frequently used instruments in experimental multimedia learning research [+M]

Related Products and Programmes

• MEL-TS: a translingual set of mental effort and mental load self-rating items in six languages

Key Sources

• Melina Klepsch, Tina Seufert. (2020). Understanding instructional design effects by differentiated measurement of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Instructional Science (2020) 48:45–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09502-9
• 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
• 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

Page metadata

Field	Value
type	product
id	cognitive-load-questionnaire-clq-by-klepsch-et-al-2017
title	Cognitive Load Questionnaire (CLQ) by Klepsch et al. (2017)
description	An eight-item self-report assessment developed by Klepsch and colleagues for measuring learners’ perceived intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load after a learning task.
status	review
product_kind	assessment
generated	by process:settle-candidates on 2026-10-18
trust	unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.