Measurement
Paas and Van Merriƫnboer developed a construct (known as relative condition efficiency) which helps researchers measure perceived mental effort, an index of cognitive load. This construct provides a relatively simple means of comparing instructional conditions. It combines mental effort ratings with performance scores. Group mean z-scores are graphed and may be compared with a one-way Analysis of variance (ANOVA).
Paas and Van Merriƫnboer used relative condition efficiency to compare three instructional conditions (worked examples, completion problems, and discovery practice). They found learners who studied worked examples were the most efficient, followed by those who used the problem completion strategy. Since this early study many other researchers have used this and other constructs to measure cognitive load as it relates to learning and instruction.
The ergonomic approach seeks a quantitative neurophysiological expression of cognitive load which can be measured using common instruments, for example using the heart rate-blood pressure product (RPP) as a measure of both cognitive and physical occupational workload. They believe that it may be possible to use RPP measures to set limits on workloads and for establishing work allowance.
Some researchers have compared different measures of cognitive load. For example, Deleeuw and Mayer (2008) compared three commonly used measures of cognitive load and found that they responded differently to extraneous, intrinsic, and germane load.
Read more about this topic: Cognitive Load
Famous quotes containing the word measurement:
“Thats the great danger of sectarian opinions, they always accept the formulas of past events as useful for the measurement of future events and they never are, if you have high standards of accuracy.”
—John Dos Passos (18961970)