Measuring Cognitive Load with Subjective Rating Scales during Problem Solving: Differences between Immediate and Delayed Ratings
ISAIJLS Volume 43, Number 1, ISSN 0020-4277
Subjective cognitive load (CL) rating scales are widely used in educational research. However, there are still some open questions regarding the point of time at which such scales should be applied. Whereas some studies apply rating scales directly after each step or task and use an average of these ratings, others assess CL only once after the whole learning or problem-solving phase. To investigate if these two approaches are comparable indicators of experienced CL, two experiments were conducted, in which 168 and 107 teacher education university students, respectively, worked through a sequence of six problems. CL was assessed by means of subjective ratings of mental effort and perceived task difficulty after each problem and after the whole process. Results showed that the delayed ratings of both effort and difficulty were significantly higher than the average of the six ratings made during problem solving. In addition, the problems we assumed to be of higher complexity seemed to be the best predictors for the delayed ratings. Interestingly, for ratings of affective variables, such as interest and motivation, the delayed rating did not differ from the average of immediate ratings.
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: An International Journal of the Learning Sciences, 43(1), 93-114.
Cited ByView References & Citations Map
The effect of the “Prediction-observation-quiz-explanation” inquiry-based e-learning model on flow experience in green energy learning
Jon-Chao Hong, Chi-Ruei Tsai, Hsien-Sheng Hsiao, Po-Hsi Chen & Kuan-Cheng Chu, Institute for Research Excellence in Learning Sciences, Taiwan; Jianjun Gu, School of Education Science; Jirarat Sitthiworachart, King Mongkut's Institute of Technology Ladkrabang, Thailand
Computers & Education Vol. 133, No. 1 (May 2019) pp. 127–138
Why do learners who draw perform well? Investigating the role of visualization, generation and externalization in learner-generated drawing
Steffen P. Schmidgall, Alexander Eitel & Katharina Scheiter, Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Germany
Learning and Instruction Vol. 60, No. 1 (April 2019) pp. 138–153
These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.