Cited by 473Visual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsEvaluation of Teaching Practices

Instructional Efficiency: Revisiting the Original Construct in Educational Research

Open access
van Gog, Tamara, Paas, Fred·2008·Educational Psychologist

Abstract

This article revisits Paas and Van Merriënboer's (1993) Paas, F. and Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. 1993. The efficiency of instructional conditions: An approach to combine mental effort and performance measures. Human Factors., 35: 737–743. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar] measure of instructional efficiency, which can be applied by educational researchers to compare the effects of different instructional conditions on learning. This measure relied on performance and mental effort on the test, and as such gave an indication of the quality of learning outcomes. The acquisition of more (less) efficient cognitive schemata is indicated by combinations of high (low) performance and low (high) mental effort. This instructional efficiency measure has become widely adopted, but in an adapted form that incorporates mental effort invested in the learning phase instead of the test phase. This article demonstrates that the adaptation has important consequences for the construct of instructional efficiency and for the type of conclusions that can be drawn. Examples are given to illustrate the various implications of different combinations of mental effort and performance measures in the light of more contemporary developments in educational research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00461520701756248

Cites

79 of 79 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?

  • van Gog and Paas (2008) state that the outcomes of the effort and difficulty questions in the efficiency formula are completely opposite.

    “van Gog and Paas (2008, p. 23) even state that '' … the outcomes of the effort and difficulty questions in the efficiency formula are completely opposite''.”
  • The majority of studies have used a cognitive load rating associated with the learning phase; very few have used a cognitive load rating associated with the testing phase.

    “A recent overview by van Gog and Paas (2008) shows indeed that the majority of studies have used a cognitive load rating associated with the learning phase; very few studies have used a cognitive load rating associated with the testing phase.”
  • The conclusion by van Gog and Paas (2008) that the original measure is more suitable for increasing germane load and the learning-phase measure for reducing extraneous load is not justified.

    “Van Gog and Paas conclude that the original measure (using cognitive load during the test phase) is more suitable when instructional measures aim to increase germane load, and the measure using cognitive load in the learning phase is more suited for situations in which the intention is to reduce extraneous load. This does not seem to be justified.”
  • The measurement of cognitive load during learning is often an overall score and only gives an indication of its effectiveness or ineffectiveness for learning after combining it with the performance score on an individual posttest.

    “Because the measurement of cognitive load during learning is often an overall score and only gives an indication of its effectiveness or ineffectiveness for learning after combining it with the performance score on an individual posttest (Van Gog and Paas 2008), conclusions on the different kinds of imposed cognitive load (i.e., intrinsic, germane, and extraneous) and the associated effectiveness”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Gog, T., & Paas, F.
Affiliations
Open University of the Netherlands (NL)
Venue
Educational Psychologist
Published
2008-01-28
Volume
43
Issue
1
Pages
16-26
ISSN
  • 0046-1520 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-6985
OpenAlex
W1985197632
Cited by
473
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 26
FWCI
34.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Educational Psychologist (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) (submittedVersion)
  • DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
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 › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
Keywords
teaching efficiency, cognitive effort, learning performance, cognitive schemas, construct validity, instructional conditions, learning outcomes

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