Revisiting the debate on germane cognitive load versus germane resources

IF 1.2 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Journal of Cognitive Psychology Pub Date : 2022-12-28 DOI:10.1080/20445911.2022.2159416
Kevin Greenberg, Robert Z. Zheng
{"title":"Revisiting the debate on germane cognitive load versus germane resources","authors":"Kevin Greenberg, Robert Z. Zheng","doi":"10.1080/20445911.2022.2159416","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The debate on germane load versus germane resources has drawn attention from researchers and practitioners. This work examined whether germane load should be considered an independent source of cognitive load or germane resources in working memory. To do so, the relationship between the types of cognitive load, performance and working memory was examined. Experiment 1 revealed germane load was not a significant predictor for performance outcomes, nor was there an additive relationship between germane load and intrinsic load while intrinsic load had a significant negative association with the outcomes. It was thus hypothesised that the mental activity germane to learning may be related to the cognitive resources in working memory instead of conceptualising it as an independent cognitive load. A follow-up study (Experiment 2) was performed which investigated the relationship between intrinsic load and working memory resources. Results show learners with more working memory resources could handle high intrinsic load, while still having resources available for learning, suggesting the effortful mental activity may be determined by the germane resources in working memory rather than germane load. The work provides preliminary evidence for a framework in cognitive load theory showing learners’ effortful mental activity in learning is related to germane resources, not defined by germane cognitive load.","PeriodicalId":47483,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cognitive Psychology","volume":"35 1","pages":"295 - 314"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cognitive Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2022.2159416","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT The debate on germane load versus germane resources has drawn attention from researchers and practitioners. This work examined whether germane load should be considered an independent source of cognitive load or germane resources in working memory. To do so, the relationship between the types of cognitive load, performance and working memory was examined. Experiment 1 revealed germane load was not a significant predictor for performance outcomes, nor was there an additive relationship between germane load and intrinsic load while intrinsic load had a significant negative association with the outcomes. It was thus hypothesised that the mental activity germane to learning may be related to the cognitive resources in working memory instead of conceptualising it as an independent cognitive load. A follow-up study (Experiment 2) was performed which investigated the relationship between intrinsic load and working memory resources. Results show learners with more working memory resources could handle high intrinsic load, while still having resources available for learning, suggesting the effortful mental activity may be determined by the germane resources in working memory rather than germane load. The work provides preliminary evidence for a framework in cognitive load theory showing learners’ effortful mental activity in learning is related to germane resources, not defined by germane cognitive load.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重新审视相关认知负荷与相关资源的争论
相关负荷与相关资源的争论引起了研究者和实践者的关注。本研究考察了相关负荷是作为认知负荷的独立来源还是工作记忆中的相关负荷资源。为此,研究人员检查了认知负荷类型、表现和工作记忆之间的关系。实验1显示,密切负荷与内在负荷之间不存在加性关系,而内在负荷与成绩呈显著负相关。因此,我们假设与学习相关的心理活动可能与工作记忆中的认知资源有关,而不是将其概念化为独立的认知负荷。后续研究(实验2)探讨了内在负荷与工作记忆资源的关系。结果表明,拥有更多工作记忆资源的学习者可以处理高内在负荷,同时仍有可用的学习资源,这表明努力的心理活动可能是由工作记忆中的相关资源而不是相关负荷决定的。本研究为认知负荷理论框架提供了初步证据,表明学习者在学习中的努力心理活动与相关资源有关,而不是由相关认知负荷定义的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cognitive Psychology
Journal of Cognitive Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
54
期刊最新文献
Eye-movement methodology reveals a shift in attention from threat to neutral stimuli with self-reported symptoms of social anxiety across children, adolescents and adults Individual differences and counterfactual thinking Distinct patterns of emotional processing in ADHD and anxiety. Evidence from an eye-movement Go/No-Go task Why I am not a Turing machine Self and mother referential processing in phonological false memory
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1