The DOI matches its Crossref record; 183 of the 183 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cognitive load in multimedia learning environments: A systematic review
Abstract
Abstract The purpose of this study was to review articles involving cognitive load and multimedia learning between 2015 and 2019 in a systematic way. 94 articles were reviewed in terms of the types of cognitive load, multimedia learning principles, cognitive load measurements, the investigated dependent and independent variables, cognitive processes, the types of multimedia learning environments and the demographic characteristics of the studies. The results revealed that reviewed studies indicated the type of cognitive load seem to have investigated the extraneous cognitive load more frequently. The most studied multimedia learning principles in reviewed articles were modality principle, seductive details effect and signaling/cueing principle respectively. Most reviewed cognitive load studies on multimedia learning were conducted by researchers in Europe, especially in Germany, followed by Asia, America, Australia, and Africa. Research results showed that most cognitive load studies in multimedia learning environments conducted thus far have utilized STEM subjects. Higher education students were the primary participant group in the cognitive load in multimedia learning research as well. There was a tendency to use subjective methods more often than objective methods to measure cognitive load in investigations. In addition to cognitive load, learning, prior knowledge, and motivation were measured most frequently in these studies. In the reviewed studies, multimedia design, material type, presentation format, and individual differences were the most selected focus of research. Research results were interpreted and a number of gaps in cognitive load research relating to multimedia learning were identified.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & the PRISMA Group* (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 · Cited by 37,554
Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research
(1988) · Advances in Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0166-4115(08)62386-9 · Cited by 15,003
Baddeley, A. (1992) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1736359 · Cited by 5,258
Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design
Sweller, J. (1994) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5 · Cited by 3,801
Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design: Recent Developments
Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3801_1 · Cited by 3,041
Cognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0804_2 · Cited by 2,894
Cognitive Load Measurement as a Means to Advance Cognitive Load Theory
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. M. (2003) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3801_8 · Cited by 2,527
Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design: 20 Years Later
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5 · Cited by 2,337
The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning
(2006) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.43-5643 · Cited by 2,313
Cited by
Islam, A. K. M. N., Laato, S., Talukder, S., & Sutinen, E. (2020) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120201 · Cited by 538
Does ChatGPT enhance student learning? A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies
Deng, R., Jiang, M., Yu, X., Lu, Y., & Liu, S. (2025) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105224 · Cited by 531
Stadler, M., Bannert, M., & Sailer, M. (2024) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2024.108386 · Cited by 262
Castro-Alonso, J. C., de Koning, B. B., Fiorella, L., & Paas, F. (2021) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-021-09606-9 · Cited by 278
Krieglstein, F., Beege, M., Rey, G. D., Ginns, P., Krell, M., & Schneider, S. (2022) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-022-09683-4 · Cited by 118
Metadata
- Authors
- Mutlu-Bayraktar, D., Cosgun, V., & Altan, T.
- Venue
- Computers & Education
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-11
- Volume
- 141
- Pages
- 103618
- ISSN
- 0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2956049201
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 183
- FWCI
- 4.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cognitive load in multimedia learning environments: A systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103618
- The paper
- Mutlu-Bayraktar, D., Cosgun, V., & Altan, T. (2019). Cognitive load in multimedia learning environments: A systematic review. Computers & Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103618
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.