structure and validation of the Persian version of the Cognitive Load Questionnaire

Authors
saeideh zahed 1
fariborz dortaj 1
hasan asadzadeh 1
parvin kadivar 2
noorali farokhi 1
1 Allameh Tabatabaei University
2 Kharazmi University
Abstract
Cognitive Load Theory is one of the most powerful research frameworks in educational research. The main concern within this framework is to develop a proper instrument to measure cognitive load. Hence, the goal of this research was to investigate the reliability and validity of the Cognitive Load Questionnaire designed by Kelpsch, Schmitz and Seufert (2017). This questionnaire was administered to 206 seventh- and eighth-grade female students, in which they rated the amount of intrinsic, germane, and extraneous load of various learning tasks on a 7-point Likert scale. The reliability and validity of the questionnaire were examined and confirmed through Cronbach's alpha coefficient and t-test in which the quality of individuals' answers in different tasks were compared together. In addition, confirmatory factor analysis was performed using LISREL 8.80, to investigate factor structure of the questionnaire. The results showed that the questionnaire has desirable reliability and validity to measure different types of cognitive load. The results of confirmatory factor analysis also revealed a three-factor structural model whose fit indices suggested a desirable fit with the data, thus corroborating the three-factor structure of the cognitive load questionnaire. Therefore, this questionnaire can be a proper measure to assess different types of cognitive load in seventh and eighth grade students.
Keywords
Cognitive load theory
Measurement of types of cognitive load
Factor structure
Validity
Reliability
Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13(3), 219–235.
Ayres, P. (2006).Using subjectivemeasures to detect variations of intrinsic cognitive load within problems. Learning & Instruction, 16, 389–400.
Brünken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2004). Assessment of cognitive load in multimedia
learning with dual-task methodology: auditory load and modality effects. Instructional Science, 32, 115–132.
Brünken, R., Seufert, T., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (2010). Measuring cognitive load. In J. L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive load theory (pp. 181–202). Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cierniak, G., Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2009). Explaining the split-attention effect: is the reduction of extraneous cognitive load accompanied by an increase in germane
cognitive load? Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 315–324. DOI: 10.1016/j. chb.2008.12.020
Hart, S. G., & Staveland, L. E. (1988). “Development of NASA-TLX (task load index): results of empirical and theoretical research,” in Human Mental Workload, eds N. Meshkati and P. A. Hancock (Amsterdam: Elsevier), 139–183.
Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory: how many types of load does it really need? Educational Psychology Review, 23(1), 1–19. DOI: 10.1007/s10648-010-9150-7
Klepsch M, Schmitz, F. & Seufert, T. (2017). Development and Validation of Two Instruments Measuring Intrinsic, Extraneous, and Germane Cognitive Load. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01997
Klepsch, M. & Seufert, T. (2020). Understanding instructional design effects by differentiated measurement of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Instructional Science, 48, 45-77. DOI: 10.1007/s11251-020-09502-9.
Leppink, J., Paas, F. G. W. C., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., van Gog, T., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2013). Development of an instrument for measuring different types of cognitive load. Behavior research methods, 45(4), 1058–1072. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-013-0334-1
Leppink, J., Paas, F. G. W. C., van Gog, T., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2014). Effects of pairs of problems and examples on task performance and different types of cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 30, 32–42.
Moreno, R. (2010). Cognitive load theory: more food for thought. Instructional Science, 38, 135–141. DOI: 10.1007/s11251-009-9122-9
Paas, F. G. W. C. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problemsolving skill in statistics: a cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology. 84(4), 429–434. DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429
Paas, F. G. W. C. & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (1994). Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem-solving skills: a cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(1), 122–133. DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.86.1.122
Sweller, J. (2010a). Cognitive load theory: Recent theoretical advances. In J. L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.), Cognitive load theory (pp. 29–47). Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sweller, J. (2010b). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123–138.
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., and Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive Load Theory. New York, NY: Springer.
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296.
Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17, 147–177.