Caution – Oversize load: How to avoid cognitive overload
We have all experienced it: The dreaded “information overload.” That point where our mind just can’t take in any more information and what we have already taken in does not seem to make sense. There are many reasons this can occur. Sometimes, the learner may lack enough time to adequately pace the learning process. Other times, the organization and presentation of the material – the instructional design – may not have accounted for the limits of a learner’s cognitive load.
Regardless of what media or method being used, instructional designers need to take into account the cognitive load the lesson will place on the learner.
The Nature, Composition, and Application of Cognitive Load
Cognitive load theory (CLT) expands on the principle of “7 plus/minus 2”, in terms of the number of items of information that learners can process at one time. (Miller, 1956). In his paper, Miller outlined what he found to be the limits of working memory (WM), both in terms of the number of items it can hold (7 +/- 2) and how long the items can be held in WM (just a few seconds) unless the information is refreshed through repetition or moved into long-term memory (LTM). (Clark, Nguyen, Sweller, 2006, pg. 29). The load placed on WM is a function of both the nature of the learning tasks (intrinsic cognitive load) and the manner in which the tasks are presented (extraneous cognitive load).
Clark, Nguyen, Sweller (2006, pg. 7) argue that CLT applies to “all types of content, all delivery media, and all learners.” Further, they argue that because of CLT’s universality, it addresses the use of the instructional designer’s fundamental tools: text, visuals, and audio. CLT is equally applicable to everything along the spectrum of technical skills to soft skills and the full range of delivery platforms, from print to e-learning.
Managing Cognitive Load by Design
Of particular concern to the instructional designer is that extraneous part of the load because it can be affected by instructional interventions. (van Merriënboer & Sweller, 2005, pg. 150). One important way to help manage the student’s extraneous cognitive load is by making appropriate use of the communication tools (text, sound, graphics). (Clark, Nguyen, Sweller, 2006, pg. 43). Below are three specific recommendations for building more efficient learning experiences through better use of these tools.
- Combine audio and visual narration. Because visual and auditory working memory areas are partially independent, an auditory explanation of a principle presented in a diagram imposes less load than a written explanation of that diagram. (van Merriënboer & Sweller, 2005, pg. 150).
- Minimize redundancy of material. If there is more than one source of the information to be presented, and all of those sources are equally capable of explaining the material, then choose just one source to present. The use of multiple sources requires extra processing, which increases the load. (van Merriënboer & Sweller, 2005, pg. 151); (Clark, Nguyen, Sweller, 2006, pg. 107).
- Focus attention. For visual information, use arrows and lines to draw the learner’s attention to the critical point; for textual information, use bold or italics to cue the user to critical terms; for auditory information, use vocal emphasis and inflection to highlight the salient point. (Clark, Nguyen, Sweller, 2006, pgs. 78-82).
References
van Merriënboer, J. J., , G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147-177. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0
Clark, R.C., Nguyen, F. & Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in Learning: Evidence-based guidelines to manage cognitive load. San Francisco: Pfieffer
Miller, G. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. The Psychological Review 63, 81-97. Retrieved from http://www.musanim.com/miller1956/