Original article | Open Access
International Journal of Progressive Education 2024, Vol. 20(6) 33-50
Turkish Adaptation Study of the Cognitive Load Scale: Reliability and Validity of the Cognitive Load Scale in Turkish Culture
pp. 33 - 50 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2024.1078.3
Publish Date: December 01, 2024 | Number of Views: 49 | Number of Download: 56
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to perform Turkish adaptation of the "Cognitive Load Scale (CLS)" developed by Hwang, Yang, and Wang (2013) and to test its validity and reliability in Turkish culture. The Cognitive Load Scale was developed to determine the cognitive load experienced by learners during any learning and instructional activities. The scale consists of mental load and mental effort sub-factors that aim to determine the cognitive load experienced by learners during educational activities. The original scale consists of eight items and two sub-factors, with five items in the mental load sub-factor and three items in the mental effort sub-factor. Turkish adaptation of the scale was conducted on a sample of 376 pre-service teachers enrolled in two different education faculties. The Turkish scale, the validity and reliability of which was conducted with 376 pre-service teachers, was found to have a four-item and two-factor structure; the factor structures were valid; and internal consistency coefficients were found 0.80 for the total scale, .89 for the first sub-factor, and .78 for the second sub-factor. Besides, the confirmatory factor analysis revealed the following fit index values: (χ2=2,2, sd=1, p>.01), RMSEA=.056 and χ2/df=2,2 and RMR= .014, GFI= 0.997, AGFI= 0.971, NFI= 0. 99, CFI=0.99, IFI= 0.99, indicating the recommended criteria. It can be said that the adapted scale can be used in academic studies related to cognitive load.
Keywords: Cognitive Load; Intrinsic Cognitive Load; Extraneous Cognitive Load; Effective Cognitive Load; Mental Load; Mental Effort
APA 7th edition
Demir, O., & Tuncel, Z.A. (2024). Turkish Adaptation Study of the Cognitive Load Scale: Reliability and Validity of the Cognitive Load Scale in Turkish Culture. International Journal of Progressive Education, 20(6), 33-50. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2024.1078.3
Harvard
Demir, O. and Tuncel, Z. (2024). Turkish Adaptation Study of the Cognitive Load Scale: Reliability and Validity of the Cognitive Load Scale in Turkish Culture. International Journal of Progressive Education, 20(6), pp. 33-50.
Chicago 16th edition
Demir, Ozden and Zeynep Ayvaz Tuncel (2024). "Turkish Adaptation Study of the Cognitive Load Scale: Reliability and Validity of the Cognitive Load Scale in Turkish Culture". International Journal of Progressive Education 20 (6):33-50. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2024.1078.3
Anderson, J. C. & Gerbing, D. W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness of fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49(2), 155-173.
Anmarkrud, Ø., Andresen, A. & Bråten, I. (2019). Cognitive load and working memory in multimedia learning: Conceptual and measurement issues. Educational Psychologist, 54(2), 61-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1554484
Buyukozturk, S. (2002). Factor analysis: Basic concepts and its use in scale development. Educational Administration in Theory and Practice, 32(32), 470-483.
Byrne, B. M. (1994). Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Sage Publications, California.
Chen, O., Paas, F. & Sweller, J. (2021). Spacing and interleaving effects require distinct theoretical bases: A systematic review testing the cognitive load and discriminative-contrast hypotheses. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 1499-1522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09613-w .
Cierniak, G., Scheiter, K. & Gerjets, P. (2009). Explaining the split-attention effect: Is the reduction of extraneous cognitive load accompanied by an increase in germane cognitive load? Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 315-324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.020
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S., G. & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis in the behavioral sciences (Third Edition). Mahwah, NJ.
Corral, S. & Calvete, E. (2000). Machiavellianism: dimensionality of the Mach IV and its relation to self-monitoring in a Spanish sample. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 3(1), 3-13. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1138741600005497
Cotigă, M. I. (2012). Development and validation of a Romanian version of the expanded version of Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS-X). Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 33, 248 – 252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.01.121
Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87-114. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X01003922
Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G. & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Multivariate SPSS and LISREL applications for social sciences. Pegem Academy Publishing, Ankara.
Deniz. Z. (2007). Psychometric measurement tool adaptation. Journal of Ankara University Faculty of Educational Sciences, 40(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000000180
DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development theory and applications. SAGE Publications International Educational and Professional Publisher, Chapter 5 pp: 60-96.
Dorman, J. P. & Knightley, W. M. (2006). Development and validation of an instrument to assess secondary school students’ perceptions of academic tasks. Educational Studies, 32(1), 47-58. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055690500415951
Dönmez, O., Akbulut, Y., Telli, E., Kaptan, M., Özdemir, İ. H. & Erdem, M. (2022). In search of a measure to address different sources of cognitive load in computer-based learning environments. Education and Information Technologies, 27(7), 10013-10034. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11035-2.
Erkuş, A. (2010). The conflict of operations with the meanings of the Turkish equivalents of psychometric terms. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology 1(2), 72-77.
Eysink, T. H. S., De Jong T., Berthold, K., Kollöffel, B., Opfermann, M. & Wouters, P. (2009). Learner performance in multimedia learning arrangements: An analysis across instructional approaches. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 1107–1149. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209340235
Feldon, D. F., Callan, G., Juth, S. & Jeong, S. (2019). Cognitive load as motivational cost. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 319-337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09464-6
Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistic using SPSS for Windows. SAGE Publications, London.
Heubeck, B. G. & Neill, J. T. (2000). Confirmatory factor analysis and reliability of the mental health inventory for Australian adolescents. Psychological Reports, 87(2), 431-440. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.2000.87.2.431
Hilbert, T. S. & Renkl, A. (2009). Learning how to use a computer-based concept-mapping tool: Self-explaining examples helps. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 267–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.006
Hoe, S. L. (2008). Issues and procedures in adopting structural equation modeling technique. Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods, 3(1), 76-83.
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
Hwang, G. J., Yang, L. H. & Wang, S. Y. (2013). A concept map-embedded educational computer game for improving students' learning performance in natural science courses. Computers & Education, 69, 121-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.008
Inglés, C. J., Hidalgo, M. D.& Méndez, F. X. (2005). Interpersonal difficulties in adolescence: a new self-report measure. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21(1), 11-22. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.21.1.11
Johnson, B., Stevens, J. J.& Zvoch, K. (2007). Teachers' perceptions of school climate: A validity study of scores from the revised school level environment questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67(5), 833-844. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164406299102
Kelloway, E. K. (1998). Using LISREL for structural equation modeling: A researcher's guide. SAGE Publications, London.
Leppink, J., Paas, F., Van der Vleuten, C. P, Van Gog, T. &Van Merriënboer, J. J. (2013). Development of an instrument for measuring different types of cognitive load. Behavior Research Methods, 45, 1058-1072. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0334-1
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R. & Mc Donald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391-410. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.391
Paas, F. G. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology 84(4), 429-434. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429
Paas F., Van Merriënboer J. & Adam, J. (1994). Measurement of cognitive load in instructional research. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79, 419–430. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1994.79.1.419
Paas, F. & Van Merriënboer, J. J. (2020). Cognitive-load theory: Methods to manage working memory load in the learning of complex tasks. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(4), 394-398. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214209221
Paas, F. G. W. C., Renkll, A. & Sweller, J. (2004). Cognitive load theory: Instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32(1-2), 1-8. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41953634
Salden, R. J., Paas, F., Broers, N. J. & Van Merrienboer, J. J. (2004). Mental effort and performance as determinants for the dynamic selection of learning tasks in air traffic control training. Instructional Science, 32, 153-172. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021814.03996.ff
Schermelleh-Engel, K. & Helfried, M. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness of fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8 (2), 23-74.
Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A.& King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: a review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(6), 323-38. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338
Schumacker, R. E. & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling. Psychology Press.
Smolleck, L. D., Zembal-Saul, C. & Yoder, E. P. (2006). The development and validation of an instrument to measure preservice teachers' self-efficacy in regard to the teaching of science as inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(2), 137-163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-006-9015-6
Sümer, N. (2000). Structural equation models: basic concepts and examples. Turkish Psychology Writings, 3(6), 49-74.
Sweller, J. & Sweller, S. (2006). Natural information processing systems. Evolutionary Psychology, 4(1), 434–458. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470490600400135
Sweller, J., Ayres., P. & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Springer, New York.
Sweller, J., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–297. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022193728205
Sweller, J., Van Merriënboer, J. J. & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5
Şimşek, Ö. F. (2007). Introduction to structural equation modeling, basic principles and LISREL applications. Equinox, Ankara
Tabachnick, B. G. & Fideli, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (Fourth Edition). Ally and Bacon, Boston.
Van Merrienboer, J. J. G. & Ayres, P. (2005). Research on cognitive load theory and its design implications for e-learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 5-13. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/BF02504793.pdf
Yang, C., Jen, C. H., Chang, C. Y. & Yeh, T. K. (2018). Comparison of animation and static-picture based instruction: Effects on performance and cognitive load for learning genetics. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 21(4), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.201810_21(4).0001 https://www.jstor.org/stable/26511533
