Cognitive load
Cognitive load refers to the amount of information that the active part of human memory can handle at a given moment. While the brain has a remarkable capacity for processing data, it is inherently limited in the number of tasks it can manage simultaneously. This concept is particularly relevant in educational contexts, where understanding the limitations of cognitive load can significantly impact learning outcomes. Pioneered by educational psychologist John Sweller in the 1980s, cognitive load theory illustrates how excessive cognitive demands can hinder learning, especially when students are overwhelmed by problem-solving tasks without clear instructional guidance.
Sweller’s research identified several effects related to cognitive load, such as the goal-free effect, which suggests that students may learn better when not constrained by specific objectives. Other effects, like the split-attention effect and modality effect, highlight how the arrangement and presentation of information can affect cognitive processing. For instance, integrating visual and auditory information can enhance retention, but overly complex explanations can overwhelm cognitive capacity. The implications of cognitive load extend beyond education, affecting various professions that require quick information processing, such as healthcare, aviation, and emergency services. Understanding and managing cognitive load is crucial for improving learning and performance in both educational and everyday contexts.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Cognitive load
Cognitive load refers to the amount of information the active part of human memory can process at one time. The brain can store and process a vast amount of data, but it is limited in the number of things it can think about simultaneously. In educational settings, knowing this limit exists and understanding how it impacts learning is important. The effects of cognitive load can have implications in many everyday situations, too.
Background
Scientific recognition of the effects of cognitive load on learning came about in the early 1980s. Polish-born Australian educational psychologist John Sweller was conducting an experiment with college students at the University of New South Wales. The experiment required students to perform a series of calculations that would increase the value of one number to reach another number. The students were given both the starting number and the goal number. They were told they could reach the goal number only by multiplying by three or subtracting twenty-nine.
Sweller and his team observed that most of the students had little difficulty reaching the correct answers for the problems. However, not even the most successful students discerned that there was a pattern to the answers: in each case, the solution to the problem was to first multiply and then subtract until the goal number was reached. In some cases, these steps were performed once; for other problems, numerous repetitions of the pattern were required. Still, the test students never noticed that there was a distinct pattern to solving every problem.
The idea that the students could solve the problems but not learn the rule intrigued Sweller. He began additional experiments to understand what allowed the students to calculate the right answer without learning anything in the process. This work would take him several years.
Sweller's research built on the work of earlier researchers from Carnegie-Mellon University. In 1972, Herbert A. Simon and Allen Newell published the results of their studies into how people solve problems through a process they called means-ends analysis. Sweller conducted additional experiments that showed that the multiple operations that a person must use in such problem solving so filled the active part of the brain that the student test subjects were unable to notice the pattern. In other words, the students were so busy solving the problem that they could not learn anything from what they were doing. Sweller referred to this concept as the brain's cognitive load and went on to develop several theories about how learning techniques that rely heavily on these types of problem solving exercises interfere with long-term learning.
Overview
Sweller's theories included the goal-free effect, the split-attention effect, the modality effect, and the transient information effect. Sweller said his research showed that having students solve problems did not help with education but hindered it—especially when limits were placed on how the problems were solved. He proposed that students might learn more if they were not given a specific goal, such as they were in his initial test. He called this the goal-free effect and suggested that students instead be told to find as many answers as possible using the parameters set by the problem.
The split-attention effect, according to Sweller, impacts learning when people have to look at multiple sources to gather all the information needed to solve a problem. For example, if a chart was used but the explanation for what the chart represents was below the chart, a person needs to use cognitive ability to blend the information before moving into problem solving. If labels appeared on the chart next to each image so that both the image and the explanation could be absorbed simultaneously, less cognitive ability was used, and more was available for applying that information and learning from it.
The modality effect, according to Sweller, stated that the more senses are engaged when information is presented, the better the learning. Looking at an image while hearing an audio explanation widens the scope of memory available to capture new material. This increases the brain's capacity for learning and remembering.
In the 1990s, additional research determined that improvements to learning that could be found through the modality effect had some limitations. Specifically, if the information presented through auditory means (such as a teacher's explanation of a diagram) was long and complex, it taxed the cognitive system rather than helped it. This is called the transient information effect; the long explanation became transient, or short-lived, in the memory process because the information presented exceeded the brain's cognitive load capability.
Another factor in cognitive load is repeated information. While it is often assumed that repetition is helpful in learning, this does not apply when several sources repeat the same information simultaneously (e.g., adding extremely detailed labels to a diagram that accompanies a text description that conveys the same information). Such repetition might be necessary in some circumstances, but researchers found the redundancy provides more that the learner must process without adding any value.
Researchers have found a number of ways to counter these effects by using different strategies for educational exercises. For example, telling students to imagine the topics they are learning about rather than to simply study them has been shown to improve retention and the ability to apply learned material. Collaborative learning has also proven helpful, allowing students to learn from one another rather than try to master material independently.
In addition to the obvious applications for structured education, the effects of cognitive load have implications in everyday life and in many professional situations. Medical professionals, for example, need to process large amounts of information about a patient and compare it with facts stored in memory. Sometimes, such as with emergency room physicians and paramedics, this needs to be done while issuing instructions to others and physically working on the patient. This could easily exceed the brain's cognitive load capacity. Other professionals who can face the effects of cognitive load on a daily basis include firefighters, heavy machinery operators, pilots, air traffic controllers, and military personnel.
Cognitive load is responsible for the difficulties people may experience when multitasking. It is the reason why talking on a cell phone while driving can be dangerous, especially during an emotional conversation. Cognitive load issues can be minimized by reducing the area of focus (e.g., reducing multitasking), working on mastery of one area before building on it (e.g., thoroughly learning how to compute an angle before computing multiple angles), and incorporating both auditory and visual learning experiences.
Bibliography
"Cognitive Load Theory." Mind Tools, www.mindtools.com/pages/article/cognitive-load-theory.htm. Accessed 13 Jan. 2017.
"Cognitive Load Theory." ScienceDirect, www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/cognitive-load-theory. Accessed 5 Nov. 2024.
Kirschner, Paul, et al. "Cognitive Load Theory." Education.com, 23 Dec. 2009, www.education.com/reference/article/cognitive-load-theory/. Accessed 13 Jan. 2017.
Matheson, Ian, and Nancy Hutchinson. "Working Memory and Cognitive Load." LD@School, www.ldatschool.ca/executive-function/working-memory-and-cognitive-load/. Accessed 13 Jan. 2017.
Mayer, Richard E., and Roxana Morena. "Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning." Educational Psychologist, vol. 38, no. 1, 2003, pp. 43–52, www.uky.edu/~gmswan3/544/9‗ways‗to‗reduce‗CL.pdf. Accessed 13 Jan. 2017.
O'Shea, James. "Cognitive Load and the Emergency Physician." emDocs, 12 Apr. 2016, www.emdocs.net/cognitiveload/. Accessed 13 Jan. 2017.
Sweller, John. "Story of a Research Program." Education Review, 10 Feb. 2016, edrev.asu.edu/index.php/ER/article/download/2025/545. Accessed 13 Jan. 2017.
Weast, Rebecca, and Nicole G. Neiman. "The Effect of Cognitive Load and Meaning on Selective Attention." Mind Modeling, mindmodeling.org/cogsci2010/papers/0395/paper0395.pdf. Accessed 13 Jan. 2017.
Whitenton, Kathryn. "Minimize Cognitive Load to Maximize Usability." Nielsen Norman Group, 22 Dec. 2013, www.nngroup.com/articles/minimize-cognitive-load/. Accessed 13 Jan. 2017.