Instructional benefits of spoken words: A review of cognitive load factors
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Instructions that contain redundant information more often inhibit than enhance learning.
“A review on the cognitive load effects of visual and verbal instructions concluded that instructions that contain redundant information (for instance verbally stating what has already become visually obvious) more often inhibit than enhance learning [60].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [60]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 94 · Cited by 93
- Authors
- Kalyuga, S.
- Affiliations
- UNSW Sydney (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Kalyuga, Slava
- ORCID
- Kalyuga, Slava
- Venue
- Educational Research Review
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-06
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 145-159
- ISSN
- 1747-938X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2043332155
- Semantic Scholar
- 8b4af4b7ec1b714b2919f81bb0693504d58a39aa
- Cited by
- 93
- References
- 94
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5
- FWCI
- 4.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Educational Research Review (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- spoken word, cognitive load, multimedia learning, written text, images, instructional design, cognitive architecture
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
