The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Goal Configurations and Processing Strategies as Moderators Between Instructional Design and Cognitive Load: Evidence From Hypertext-Based Instruction
Open accessAbstract
In this article, we propose some augmentations of cognitive load theory (CLT) inspired by evidence from hypertext-based instruction. In particular, we focus on the role of goal configurations and processing strategies as moderators between instructional design and cognitive load. First, we describe pivotal assumptions of CLT and conceptual shortcomings related to these assumptions. Second, we review evidence from our own hypertext-based research that gives reasons for integrating configurations of teacher goals, learner goals, as well as processing strategies into CLT. These augmentations of CLT are necessary to account for the rather weak relation between instructional design and pattern of cognitive load that shows up in the context of self-controlled learning. CLT, augmented with the notion of learner control, can now better serve as a theoretical foundation for the design of hypertext-based instruction.
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“A further problem is that germane processes can be considered to be extraneous depending on the learning goal (see also, Schnotz and Ku ¨rschner 2007).”
From Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: some food for thought (2010) · cites this paper as Gerjets and Scheiter 2003
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
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1974) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60452-1 · Cited by 9,860
Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design
Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1023/a:1022193728205 · Cited by 6,023
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 · cited 4×
“elements into a single element” ( Sweller, 1994, p. 299 ).”
BackgroundInfluentialCognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0804_2 · Cited by 2,894
Hypertext: An Introduction and Survey
Conklin (1987) · Computer · doi:10.1109/mc.1987.1663693 · Cited by 2,726
The Atomic Components of Thought
Anderson, J. R., & Lebiere, C. J. (2014) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315805696 · Cited by 2,181
Self‐Explanations: How Students Study and Use Examples in Learning to Solve Problems
Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1302_1 · Cited by 1,714
The Atomic Components of Thought
Taatgen, N. (1999) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(98)01250-9 · Cited by 1,482
Learning from Examples: Instructional Principles from the Worked Examples Research
Atkinson, R. K., Derry, S. J., Renkl, A., & Wortham, D. W. (2000) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543070002181 · Cited by 1,109
How seductive details do their damage: A theory of cognitive interest in science learning.
Harp, S. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1998) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.90.3.414 · Cited by 855 · cited 2×
“…in instructional environments (cf. Hirashima, Hachiya, Kashihara, & Toyoda, 1997) or goals that are related to prospective tasks (Heise, Gerjets, & Westermann, 1997) as well as to personal interests (cf. research on seductive details, Garner, Gillingham, & White, 1989; Harp & Mayer, 1998).”
Background
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cognitive Load Theory and Complex Learning: Recent Developments and Future Directions
van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2005) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0 · Cited by 2,206
Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: some food for thought
de Jong, T. (2010) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-009-9110-0 · Cited by 1,180
“Gerjets and Scheiter (2003) report on a study in which a strong reduction of study time did not impair learning, whereas cognitive load theory would predict a drop in performance.”
BackgroundDirect Measurement of Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning
Brunken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2003) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3801_7 · Cited by 896
Delgado, P., Vargas, C., Ackerman, R., & Salmerón, L. (2018) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2018.09.003 · Cited by 664
Renkl, A., & Atkinson, R. K. (2003) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3801_3 · Cited by 540
Metadata
- Authors
- Gerjets, P., & Scheiter, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Tübingen (DE)
- Venue
- Educational Psychologist
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2003-01-01
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 33-41
- ISSN
- 0046-1520 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-6985
- OpenAlex
- W2136090849
- Semantic Scholar
- 0089694818a9ae706da8d7689286251692b371fb
- Cited by
- 176
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 10.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Educational Psychologist (publishedVersion)
- HAL (publishedVersion, 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 › Online and Blended Learning
- Keywords
- cognitive load theory, processing strategies, instructional design, learner control, teacher goals, learner goals, moderators
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
