MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154997129 · doi:10.1111/medu.12773

Measuring cognitive load: performance, mental effort and simulation task complexity

2015· article· en· W2154997129 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandThe Wilson CentreUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada
KeywordsKnot tyingCognitive loadTyingCognitionTask (project management)PsychologyCognitive psychologyMental healthComputer scienceMedicinePsychiatrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Interest in applying cognitive load theory in health care simulation is growing. This line of inquiry requires measures that are sensitive to changes in cognitive load arising from different instructional designs. Recently, mental effort ratings and secondary task performance have shown promise as measures of cognitive load in health care simulation. OBJECTIVES: We investigate the sensitivity of these measures to predicted differences in intrinsic load arising from variations in task complexity and learner expertise during simulation-based surgical skills training. METHODS: We randomly assigned 28 novice medical students to simulation training on a simple or complex surgical knot-tying task. Participants completed 13 practice trials, interspersed with computer-based video instruction. On trials 1, 5, 9 and 13, knot-tying performance was assessed using time and movement efficiency measures, and cognitive load was assessed using subjective rating of mental effort (SRME) and simple reaction time (SRT) on a vibrotactile stimulus-monitoring secondary task. RESULTS: Significant improvements in knot-tying performance (F(1.04,24.95) = 41.1, p < 0.001 for movements; F(1.04,25.90) = 49.9, p < 0.001 for time) and reduced cognitive load (F(2.3,58.5) = 57.7, p < 0.001 for SRME; F(1.8,47.3) = 10.5, p < 0.001 for SRT) were observed in both groups during training. The simple-task group demonstrated superior knot tying (F(1,24) = 5.2, p = 0.031 for movements; F(1,24) = 6.5, p = 0.017 for time) and a faster decline in SRME over the first five trials (F(1,26) = 6.45, p = 0.017) compared with their peers. Although SRT followed a similar pattern, group differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Both secondary task performance and mental effort ratings are sensitive to changes in intrinsic load among novices engaged in simulation-based learning. These measures can be used to track cognitive load during skills training. Mental effort ratings are also sensitive to small differences in intrinsic load arising from variations in the physical complexity of a simulation task. The complementary nature of these subjective and objective measures suggests their combined use is advantageous in simulation instructional design research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.896

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.107
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it