Cited by 725Visual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsEducational Strategies and Epistemologies

Cognitive Load Theory: How Many Types of Load Does It Really Need?

Kalyuga, Slava·2011·Educational Psychology Review

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10648-010-9150-7

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kalyuga, S.
Affiliations
UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Kalyuga, Slava
Venue
Educational Psychology Review
Published
2011-01-14
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
1-19
ISSN
  • 1040-726X (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-336X
OpenAlex
W1988051129
Cited by
725
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 96 · 2025: 98 · 2024: 60 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 51 · 2019: 72 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 10
FWCI
21.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Educational Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Keywords
cognitive load theory, germane load, intrinsic cognitive load, extraneous load, working memory, redundancy, instructional design

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review