The interplay between self-regulation in learning and cognitive load
Open accessAbstract
Research on self-regulated learning and on cognitive load has been two of the most prominent and influential research lines in educational research during the last decades. However, both lines developed quite independently from one another. This paper aims to bridge both concepts in order to better understand self-regulation as well as cognitive affordances of complex and dynamic learning processes. In fact, most learning environments require learners to self-regulate their learning process. They have to set their goals and plan, use strategies and monitor their learning progress and if necessary they have to regulate, i.e. to adapt their learning behavior. However, in all these phases of self-regulation, learners need to invest cognitive and metacognitive resources in addition to dealing with the original learning task. The affordances of self-regulation thus will cause cognitive load. This paper analyzes the affordances in the different phases of self-regulated learning in terms of intrinsic, extraneous and germane load. As a conclusion, the interplay between different affordances of self-regulation and learners’ resources and aptitudes is described in an integrated model of self-regulation and cognitive load.
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
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.
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?
If the control group does not perceive self-regulation to be necessary, then there is not a high level of extraneous load that needs reduction to begin with.
“If the control group does not perceive self-regulation to be necessary, then there is not a high level of extraneous load that needs reduction to begin with (Seufert, 2018).”
From Using ChatGPT is easy, using it effectively is tough? A mixed methods study on K-12 students’ perceptions, interaction patterns, and support for learning with generative AI chatbots (2025) · cites this paper as Seufert, 2018
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 108 · Cited by 227
Research works printed but not linked: 29
- Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, & M. L. Kamil (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Vol. 1, (pp. 353- 394). East Sussex: Psychology Press.
- Bannert, M., & Reimann, P. (2012). Supporting self-regulated hypermedia learning through prompts. Instructional Science: An International Journal of the Learning Sciences, 40, 193-211.
- Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe, & A. Shimamura (Eds.). Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 185-205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Boekaerts, M. (2011). Emotions, emotion regulation, and self-regulation of learning. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (p 408-425). New York, NY: Routledge.
- 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.
- Calvo, R. A., & D'Mello, S. (2012). Frontiers of affect-aware learning technologies. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 27(6), 86-89.
- Cress, U., & Knabel, O. B. (2003). Previews in hypertexts: Effects on navigation and knowledge acquisition. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 517-527.
- De Boer, H., Donker, A. S., & van der Werf, M. P. (2014). Effects of the attributes of educational interventions on students' academic performance: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 84, 509-545.
- DeStefano, D., & LeFevre, J. A. (2007). Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1616-1641.
- Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory: How many types of load does it really need? Educational Psychology Review, 23, 1-19.
- Kalyuga, S., & Singh, A. M. (2016). Rethinking the boundaries of cognitive load theory in complex learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 831-852.
- Lehmann, J., Goussios, C., & Seufert, T. (2016). Working memory capacity and disfluency effect: An aptitude-treatment-interaction study. Metacognition and Learning, 11(1), 89-105.
- Leutner, D. (2004). Instructional-design principles for adaptivity in open learning environments. In N. M. Seel, & S. Dijkstra (Eds.). Curriculum, plans and processes of instructional design: International perspectives (pp. 289-307). London: Routledge.
- Lin, L., Lee, C. H., Kalyuga, S., Wang, Y., Guan, S., & Wu, H. (2017). The effect of learner-generated drawing and imagination in comprehending a science text. The Journal of Experimental Education, 85, 142-154.
- Moos, D. (2013). Examining hypermedia Learning: The role of cognitive load and self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 22, 39-61.
- Moreno, R. E., & Park, B. (2010). Cognitive load theory: Historical development and relation to other theories. In J. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.). Cognitive load theory (pp. 9-28). Cambridge: University Press.
- Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Panadero, E., Klug, J., & Järvelä, S. (2016). Third wave of measurement in the self-regulated learning field: When measurement and intervention come hand in hand. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 60, 723-735.
- Plass, J. L., Kalyuga, S., & Leutner, D. (2010a). Individual differences and cognitive load theory. In J. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.). Cognitive load theory (pp. 65-90). Cambridge: University Press.
- Plass, J., Moreono, R., & Brünken, R. (2010b). Introduction. In J. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.). Cognitive load theory (p. 1-6). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Renkl, A. (2002). Worked-out examples: Instructional explanations support learning by self-explanations. Learning and Instruction, 12(5), 529-556.
- Salomon, G. (1984). Television is" easy" and print is" tough": The differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 647-658.
- Saw, A. (2011). Learner control, expertise, and self-regulation: Implications for web-based statistics tutorialsPhD Thesis. Claremont Graduate University.
- Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (2012). Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications. New York: Routledge.
- Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory, Vol. 1. New York: Springer.
- Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251-296.
- Um, E., Plass, J. L., Hayward, E. O., & Homer, B. D. (2012). Emotional design in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 485-498.
- Winne, P. H., & Nesbit, J. C. (2009). Supporting self-regulated learning with cognitive tools. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.). Handbook of metacognition in education (p. 259-277). New York, NY: Routledge.
- Zheng, L. (2016). The effectiveness of self-regulated learning scaffolds on academic performance in computer-based learning environments: A meta-analysis. Asia Pacific Education Review, 17, 187-202.
- Authors
- Seufert, T.
- Affiliations
- Universität Ulm (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Seufert, Tina
- ORCID
- Seufert, Tina
- Venue
- Educational Research Review
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-06
- Volume
- 24
- Pages
- 116-129
- ISSN
- 1747-938X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2795212323
- Cited by
- 227
- References
- 108
- Citations by year
- 2026: 45 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 29.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Educational Research Review (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
- Keywords
- student self-regulation, cognitive load, intrinsic cognitive load, extraneous load, germane load, cognitive affordances, goal setting, learning strategies, learning monitoring
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
