Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning

Abstract

Considerable evidence indicates that domain specific knowledge in the form of schemas is the primary factor distinguishing experts from novices in problem‐solving skill. Evidence that conventional problem‐solving activity is not effective in schema acquisition is also accumulating. It is suggested that a major reason for the ineffectiveness of problem solving as a learning device, is that the cognitive processes required by the two activities overlap insufficiently, and that conventional problem solving in the form of means‐ends analysis requires a relatively large amount of cognitive processing capacity which is consequently unavailable for schema acquisition. A computational model and experimental evidence provide support for this contention. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Effects of simultaneously observing and making gestures while studying grammar animations on cognitive load and learning

“…This is a highly demanding task for working memory, which is limited in capacity (e.g., Cowan, 2001;Miller, 1956). According to Cognitive Load Theory (CLT; Sweller, 1988;Sweller, Van Merriënboer, & Paas, 1998) this causes a high cognitive load. CLT describes three types of cognitive load that play a role in learning (Paas, Tuovinen, Tabbers, & Van Gerven, 2003;Sweller et al, 1998).…”

The effects of predictor method factors on selection outcomes: A modular approach to personnel selection procedures.

“…Cognitive load theory (Sweller, 1988) served as the dominant underlying conceptual framework for predicting differences. For example, in an interpersonal SJT, textual stimuli produced scores with a higher unintended cognitive saturation (e.g., because of wording/sentence complexity) than audiovisual stimuli (Lievens & Sackett, 2006).…”

“…For instance, textual and pictorial stimuli might be presented via a paper-and-pencil or computerized medium (PC, tablet, smartphone, etc.). Cognitive load theory, (Sweller, 1988); media richness theory (Daft & Lengel, 1984;Potosky, 2008); multiple resource theory of attention (Wickens, 1984 (Mischel & Shoda, 1995); procedural justice theory (Gilliland, 1993); information processing theory (Hembree, 1992;Kintsch, 1988); cognitive load theory (Sweller, 1988); pragmatic reasoning schema theory (Cheng & Holyoak, 1985) Large effect of no vs. low on validity of personality ratings: meta-analysis (Schaffer & Postlethwaite, 2012) Higher validity for pastbehavior interviews than for situational interviews, controlling for response evaluation consistency (Taylor & Small, 2002) More error variance for no vs. low in personality scales (Robie et al, 2000;Schmit et al, 1995); Less error variance for no vs. high for cognitive tests (Hattrup et al, 1992) Larger cognitive saturation for situational interviews; larger personality saturation for past-behavior interviews: metaanalysis (Berry et al, 2007) No effect of no vs. high on BlackWhite differences in cognitive tests (DeShon et al, 1998;Hattrup et al, 1992) This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.…”

“…Cognitive load theory (Sweller, 1988); media richness theory (Daft & Lengel, 1984;Potosky, 2008); multiple resource theory of attention (Wickens, 1984); prejudice theories (Koch et al, 2015) Same validity for MC and written constructed knowledge test scores (Edwards & Arthur, 2007) Higher validity for webcam vs. written constructed interpersonal SJT scores (Funke & Schuler, 1998;Lievens, De Corte, & Westerveld, 2015) Higher This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.…”

<i>Ubicua</i> and<i> Dialecta</i>: Two Digital Environments That Support Teaching and Educational Innovation

“…Cognitive overload that traditionally comes from the different templates in the Moodle platform is reduced. And user attention is focused on the important elements of a material or resource available through the new platform (Miller, 1956;Sweller, 1988).…”