본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

인지 부하 측정을 위한 구인의 탐색 및 타당화

An Exploratory Validation for the Constructs of Cognitive Load

임지현|류지헌
한국교육정보미디어학회 (Korea Association for Educational Information and Media)|2009.06|교육정보미디어연구 (Journal of Korean Association for Educational Information and Media)|제15권 제2호|pp. 1-27

0

조회

0

다운로드

52

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

확인적 요인분석탐색적 요인분석exploratory factor analysismental effort인지적 노력cognitive effortcognitive load theoryconfirmative factor analysis인지부하이론정신적 노력
주제분류교육학

초록

이 연구의 목적은 인지부하 측정을 위한 구인을 도출하는 것이다. 이를 위하여 문헌분석을 통하여 5개의 요인을 도출하였으며, 이를 바탕으로 인지부하 측정설문을 개발하였다. 이 연구에 참여한 연구대상은 대학생 217명이었으며 컴퓨터 기반의 학습활동을 실시한 다음에 인지부하 설문에 응답하도록 하였다. 우선 탐색적 요인분석(KMO=.89, Bartlett 검정=2393.58, p<.01)을 실시하였으며 요인추출 방법은 최대우도법(maximum likelihood method)을 적용하여 모형의 적합도를 평가했다. 또한 요인의 회전을 위해서는 사교회전 방법을 적용하였다. 최종적으로 5요인모형이 적합한 것으로 평가되었으며, 설명된 총분산은 61.45%이었다. 최종적으로 도출된 5요인은 자기 평가(self evaluation), 신체적 노력(physical effort), 정신적 노력(mental effort), 자료 설계(material design), 과제 난이도(task difficulty)였으며, 총 20문항으로 구성되었다. 탐색적 요인분석의 결과에 대한 타당화를 위하여 확인적 요인분석이 실시되었다. 확인적 요인분석의 결과에 따르면 카이검증(χ2=330.68, p<.05)과 GFI(=.87)는 수용기준에 미치지 못했으나, CMIN/DF=2.07, IFI=.93, CFI=.93, TLI=.91, RMSEA=.07인 것으로 나타나 적합한 것으로 평가되었다. 또한 각 구인별 측정문항의 개념타당도, 개념신뢰도, 분산추출지수, 문항의 내적 일관성에 대한 검토가 진행되었다. 전체적으로 개념타당도, 개념신뢰도, 문항의 내적 일관성에서는 수용수준에 이른 것으로 평가되었다. 그러나 분산추출지수는 최저기준에 이르지 못했기 때문에 수렴타당도를 형성하지 못한 것으로 나타났다. 이 연구를 통하여 다음과 같은 논의를 제시하였다. 첫째, 인지부하를 위한 고차요인 모형의 형성 가능성에 대한 연구가 필요하다. 둘째, 학습자의 지식수준에 따라서 내재적 인지부하가 변화될 수 있기 때문에 이러한 변화가능성을 반영한 요인모형을 연구할 필요가 있다. 셋째, 학습자의 동기수준이나 정서상태에 따라서 인지할당의 효율성이 달라질 수 있다. 넷째, 학습자의 작업기억 용량에 따라서 인지부하의 효율성이 달라질 수 있기 때문에 작업기억과 인지부하와의 역동적 속성을 반영해야 한다. 다섯째, 인지부하에 대한 연구에서 생리신호와 같은 행동적 특성을 반영한 심층적 연구가 필요하다.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to identify the measurement constructs of cognitive load theory and validate the factor model derived from the exploratory study. In an effort to meet the purposes literature review was conducted to establish initial factors, and it turned out 5 factors(self-evaluation, physical efforts, mental efforts, material design, and task difficulty). The total numbers of questionnaire items were twenty, which each category contained four items. With the given initial factor model, an exploratory factor analysis was conducted. The extraction method was maximum likelihood method, and oblique technique was applied for the factor rotation. The total explained variance were estimated as 61.45%, and five factor model was selected. Also an confirmative factor analysis was conducted to validate the five factor model. The overall goodness-of-model fit was evaluated as acceptable: CMIN/DF, IFI, CFI, TLI, and RMSEA met with the minimum requirements. Once the model estimation was acceptable, construct validation, composite reliability, variance extraction, and Cronbach's α were evaluated. All the questionnaires were evaluated to meet the requirement for construct validation, composite reliability, and Cronbach's α. However, variance extractions of each latent variables did not meet the minimum requirement except for mental effort. This result indicated that the five factor model extracted from this study established constructs, which were acceptable for construct validation, but the factor model could not establish a sound convergent validation to measure the cognitive load. First, this study suggested that constructs of cognitive load may form a higher-oder structure rather than a single factor model. Second, there could be a moderate effect by learner's knowledge level. Third, motivation aspect should be added to measure cognitive load because affective factor may have an impact on learner's cognitive load. Fourth, the learner's working memory capacity (WMC) may affect the cognitive load because the efficiency of cognitive process will be relied on the WMC. Last, behavioral feature such as physiological factor should be included for the further study. In this study, physical effort was extracted one of the constructs of cognitive load.

참고문헌 (58)

  1. 김계수, "Amos 7.0 구조방정식모형 분석" (2007), 한나래
  2. 김원표, "Amos를 이용한 구조방정식 모델분석" (2006), 사회와 통계
  3. 목정윤, "웹 기반 학습자료의 글자체와 강조 방법이 가독성, 선호도 및 학업성취도에 미치는 영향", 석사, pp.2004
  4. 왕경수, "인지 부하와 교수 설계", 초등교육연구, 22(1), pp.491~522 (2009), 한국초등교육학회
  5. Adcock,A.B, "The interaction of learner expertise and instructional role of a pedagogical agent on learner perception of agent, perceived cognitive load and task performance", 박사, pp.2004
  6. Awh, E, "Interaction between attention and working memory", Neuroscience, 139(1), pp.201~208 (2006)
  7. Ayres,P, "Using subjective measures to detect variations of intrinsic cognitive load within problems", Learning and Instruction, 16(5), pp.389~400 (2006)
  8. Bherer, L, "Training effects on dual-task performance: Are there age-related differences in plasticity of attentional control?", Psychology and Aging, 20(4), pp.695~709 (2005)
  9. Braarud,P.O, "Subjective task complexity and subjective workload: Criterion validity for complex team tasks", International Jounal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 5(3), pp.261~273 (2001)
  10. Brünken, R, "Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning", Educational Psychologist, 38(1), pp.53~61 (2003)
  11. Brünken, R, "Assessment of cognitive load in multimedia learning with dual-task methodology: Auditory load and modality effects", Instructional Science, 32(1-2), pp.115~132 (2004)
  12. Brünken, R, "Assessment of cognitive load in multimedia learning using dual-task methodology", Experimental Psychology, 49(2), pp.109~119 (2002)
  13. Burkes,K.M.E, "Applying cognitive load theory to the design of online learning", 박사, pp.2007
  14. Capa, R. L, "The interactive effect of achievement motivation and task difficulty on mental effort", International Journal of Psychophysiology, 70(2), pp.144~150 (2008)
  15. Christensen, W, "Motivational influences on cognitive load: The effects of cognitive load on motivation in multimedia learning environments" (2008), VDM Verlag Dr. Müller
  16. Christensen,W.R, "The effects of cognitive load conditions upon performance, anxiety, and self-efficacy in computer-based learning environments", 박사, pp.2005
  17. Clark, C. R, "E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (2nd ed.)" (2008), Pfeiffe
  18. Cook, A. E, "Measurement of cognitive load during multimedia learning activities In Cognitive effects of multimedia learning", pp.34~50 (2009), Information Science Reference
  19. Doolittle, P. E, "Multimedia learning and working memory capacity In Cognitive effects of multimedia learning", pp.17~33 (2009), Information Science Reference
  20. Fisher, S. L, "Differential effects of learner effort and goal orientation on two learning outcomes", Personal Psychology, 51(2), pp.397~420 (1998)
  21. Gerjets, P, "Designing instructional examples to reduce intrinsic cognitive load: Molar versus modular presentation of solution procedures", Instructional Science, 32(1-2), pp.33~58 (2004)
  22. Gerjets, P, "Can learning from molar and modular worked-out examples be enhanced by providing instructional explanations and prompting self-explanations?", Learning and Instruction, 16(2), pp.104~121 (2006)
  23. Hart, S. G., "Development of NASA-TLX(Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research In Human mental workload", pp.139~183 (1988), Elsevier
  24. Hair, J. F, "Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.)" (1998), Macmillan Publishing Company
  25. Handcock, P. A, "A Dynamic model of stress and sustained attention", Human Factors, 31(5), pp.519~537 (1989)
  26. Hancock-Niemic,M.A, "Example-based learning: Exploring the use of matrices and problem variability", 박사, pp.2008
  27. Ikehara, C. S, "Assessing cognitive load with physiological sensors", 38th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (2005)
  28. Karatekin, C, "Attention allocation in the dual-task paradigm as measured through behavioral and psychophysiological responses", Psychophysiology, 41(2), pp.175~185 (2004)
  29. Kim,K.H, "The effects of an interactive navigational map and spatial ability on Web-based learning", 박사, pp.2004
  30. Kirschner,P.A, "Cognitive load theory: implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning", Learning and Instruction, 12(1), pp.1~10 (2002)
  31. Lee,H.J, "The Effects of intrinsic and extraneous load on learning with computer-based simulations", 박사, pp.2004
  32. Low, R, "Motivation and multimedia learning In Cognitive effects of multimedia learning" (2009), Information Science Reference.
  33. Miller,C.D, "Demystifying aesthetics: An examination of the relationships and effects of emotional design on learner cognitive load and task performance", 박사, pp.2007
  34. Miyake, A, "Models of working memory. Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control" (1999), Cambridge University Press.
  35. Moreno, R, "Personalized messages that promote science learning in virtual environments", Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), pp.165~173 (2004)
  36. Moreno,R, "When worked examples don’'t work: Is cognitive load theory at an impasse?", Learning and Instruction, 16(2), pp.170~181 (2006)
  37. Olive,T, "Working memory in writing: Empirical evidence from the dual-task technique", European Psychologist, 9(1), pp.32~42 (2004)
  38. Paas,F, "Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics:A cognitive-load approach.Journal of Educational", Psychology, 84(4), pp.429~434 (1992)
  39. Paas, F, "Optimising worked example instruction: Different ways to increase germane cognitive load", Learning and Instruction, 16(2), pp.87~91 (2006)
  40. Paas, F, "Instructional control of cognitive load in the training of complex cognitive tasks", Educational Psychology Review, 6(4), pp.51~71 (1994)
  41. Paas, F, "Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments", Educational Psychologist, 38(1), pp.1~4 (2003)
  42. Paas, F, "Cognitive load theory: Instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture", Instructional Science, 32(1-2), pp.1~8 (2004)
  43. Paas, F, "Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory", Educational Psychologist, 38(1), pp.63~71 (2003)
  44. Paas, F, "A Motivational perspective on the relation between mental effort and performance: Optimizing learner involvement in instruction", Educational Technology Research & Development, 53(3), pp.25~34 (2005)
  45. Rubio, S, "Evaluation of subjective mental workload: A Comparison of SWAT, NASA-TLX, and workload profile methods", Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53(1), pp.61~86 (2004)
  46. Salomon,G, "Television is “easy” and print is “tough”: The differential investment of mental effort in learning as function of perceptions and attributes", Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), pp.647~658 (1984)
  47. Schnotz, W, "A reconsideration of cognitive load theory", Educational Psychology Review, 19(4), pp.469~508 (2007)
  48. Schultheis, H, "Assessing cognitive load in adaptive hypermedia systems: Physiological and behavioral methods", LNCS, 225~234 (2004), LNCS 3137, 225-234.
  49. Sweller J, "Cognitive architecture and instructional design", Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), pp.251~296 (1998)
  50. Tsang, P. S, "Diagnosticity and multidimensional subjective workload ratings", Ergonomics, 39(3), pp.358~381 (1996)
  51. Tribble,M.K, "Humor and mental effort in learning", 박사, pp.2001
  52. van Merriënboer, J. J. G, "Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions", Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), pp.147~177 (2005)
  53. Vidulich, M. A., "Techniques of subjective workload assessment: A comparison of SWAT and the NASA-Bipolar methods", Ergonomics, 29(11), pp.1385~1398 (1986)
  54. Verhoven, L, "Cognitive load in interactive knowledge construction. Learning and Instruction", British Journal of Educational Technology.
  55. Whelan,R.R, "The multimedia mind: Measuring cognitive load in multimedia learning", 박사, pp.2006
  56. Wilkinson,D.L, "Effects of prior knowledge and spatial ability on learning outcomes and cognitive load associated with rich and lean multimedia presentation", 박사, pp.2004
  57. Windell, D, "Measuring cognitive load in multimedia instruction: A Comparison of two instruments", American Educational Research Association (2007)
  58. Xie, B, "Prediction of mental workload in single and multiple tasks environments", International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4(3), pp.213~242 (2000)

관련 논문AI추천

컴퓨터 기반 협력학습에서의 협력부하 측정을 위한 구인의 탐색 및 타당화 연구김혜원, 정효정한국교육공학회 · 교육공학연구2012 · 제28권 제3호과제수행에 대한 사전지식 및 인지부하요인의 경로분석류지헌교과교육연구소 · 교과교육학연구2009 · 제13권 제4호멀티미디어 학습자료 설계를 위한 인지부하 설문의 민감도 분석 및 학습 성취에 대한 예언변수 분석류지헌한국교육정보미디어학회 · 교육정보미디어연구2011 · 제17권 제3호학습자의 전문성 수준과 과제난이도가 인지부하요인 및 과제수행에 미치는 영향류지헌한국교육정보미디어학회 · 교육정보미디어연구2009 · 제15권 제4호학습자의 자기효능감과 동기가 인지부하에 미치는 영향김민정, 윤중오, 이은철한국교육방법학회 · 교육방법연구2012 · 제24권 제2호그림정보의 처리에서 인지부하의 측정시점과 인지효율성 수준에 따른 인지부하의 차이류지헌한국교육공학회 · 교육공학연구2012 · 제28권 제4호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (6건)

교수 가이던스 관점에서 디지털교과서 활용유형이 수학과 학습효과에 미치는 영향송해덕, 박주호pp. 29-46사이버가정학습체제 학습관리시스템의 상호작용 지원 기능 분석안병규, 엄우용pp. 47-66웹기반 프로젝트 학습에서 학습자 간 상호작용과 학습실재감이 학습성과에 미치는 영향박효진, 정지윤, 강명희, 박미순pp. 67-85학습관리시스템(LMS) 강의실 메뉴 기능이 학습동기 및 상호작용에 미치는 영향 -원격대학 LMS 강의실을 중심으로-심미자, 김종민pp. 87-108온라인 사례기반학습에서 사례의 구성방식과 추론활동 지원도구의 제공에 따른 효과 분석류완영, 임영택pp. 109-131
원문 보기