ABSTRACT

Cognitive cognitive load theory (CLT) has been conceived for improving instructional design practices. Although researched for many years, one open problem is a clear definition of its cognitive load types and their aggregation towards an index of overall cognitive load. In Ergonomics, the situation is different with plenty of research devoted to the development of robust constructs of mental workload (MWL). By drawing a parallel between CLT and MWL, as well as by integrating relevant theories and measurement techniques from these two fields, this paper is aimed at investigating the reliability, validity and sensitivity of three existing self-reporting mental workload measures when applied to long learning sessions, namely, the NASA Task Load index, the Workload Profile and the Rating Scale Mental Effort, in a typical university classroom. These measures were aimed at serving for the evaluation of two instructional conditions. Evidence suggests these selected measures are reliable and their moderate validity is in line with results obtained within Ergonomics. Additionally, an analysis of their sensitivity by employing the descriptive Harrell-Davis estimator suggests that the Workload Profile is more sensitive than the Nasa Task Load Index and the Rating Scale Mental Effort for long learning sessions.

摘要

认知认知负荷理论 (CLT) 被构想用于改进教学设计实践。尽管研究了多年，但一个开放的问题是对其认知负荷类型的明确定义以及它们对整体认知负荷指数的聚合。在人体工程学中，情况有所不同，大量研究致力于开发强大的心理工作量 (MWL) 结构。通过将 CLT 和 MWL 进行比较，并整合这两个领域的相关理论和测量技术，本文旨在研究三种现有的自我报告心理工作量测量方法在应用于长期学习时的可靠性、有效性和敏感性。在典型的大学课堂上进行的课程，即 NASA 任务负荷指数、工作量概况和心理努力评定量表。这些措施旨在评估两种教学条件。证据表明，这些选定的测量方法是可靠的，它们的适度有效性与在人体工程学中获得的结果一致。此外，通过使用描述性 Harrell-Davis 估计器对其敏感性的分析表明，对于长时间的学习课程，工作量配置文件比美国国家航空航天局的任务负载指数和心理努力量表更敏感。