Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 46 no. 6 (2025)

Examining the Effects of Social Studies Instructional Material Format on Cognitive Load Among College Students

Mary Javier | Conniebel Nistal

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

This study explored how different formats of social studies instructional materials - textual, visual, and interactive affect college students’ cognitive load and engagement. It aimed to support teachers in creating learning environments that promote not only memorization but also meaningful understanding of historical and civic concepts. Using a quantitative comparative approach, 90 students were divided into three groups, each exposed to one type of instructional material. Data were collected through a carefully developed and validated instrument and analyzed using descriptive statistics and one-way ANOVA. The findings showed that visual materials attracted the highest levels of engagement but also resulted in increased cognitive load, suggesting that while these materials encourage deeper thinking, they also overwhelmed learners if not carefully designed. Interactive materials also improved engagement and cognitive processing, whereas textual materials led to the least engagement and cognitive demand. Statistically significant differences were found between textual and both visual and interactive formats. Overall, the study highlights the need for well-balanced instructional design that fosters student engagement without causing cognitive overload. It recommends combining different material formats to enhance learning effectiveness in social studies education.



References:

  1. Achor, S. Z., Zaria, L. I., & Achor, E. E. (2022). Perceived cognitive load and students’ performance in social studies. Journal of Research in Instructional, 2(2), 129–140. https://doi.org/10.30862/jri.v2i2.74
  2. Aguilar, S. J. (2020). Guidelines and tools for promoting digital equity. Information and Learning Sciences, 121(5/6), 285–299. https://doi.org/10.1108/ils-04-2020-0084
  3. Akhan, N. E., Demirezen, S., & Çiçek, S. (2023). We are Late Enough: Take Action in Social Studies Classes. Sage Open, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231193824
  4. Anissi, R. A., & Darmansyah. (2024). Interactive multimedia based on a problem-based learning model in integrated Social Science learning for class eight Junior High School. JTP - Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan, 26(1), 96–107. https://doi.org/10.21009/jtp.v26i1.43871
  5. Ayvaz-Tuncel, Z., & Demir, O. (2024). The mediating role of cognitive load in the relationship between metacognitive skills perceptions and problem-solving skills in pre-service teachers. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences, 6(4), 577–599. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijonses.685
  6. Bali, C., Várkonyi, G., Szabó, M., & Zsidó, A. N. (2025). The impact of visual cues on reducing cognitive load in interactive storybooks for children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 260, 106320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2025.106320
  7. Barbieri, C. A., & Rodrigues, J. (2025). Leveraging cognitive load theory to support students with mathematics difficulty. Educational Psychologist, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2025.2486138
  8. Barrow, E. C. (2022). It Can Be Done: Engaging and Powerful Social Studies Education Using Technology. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 96(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2022.2158157
  9. Castelló, A., Chavez, D., & Cladellas, R. (2020). Association between slide format and Major’s contents: effects on perceived attention and significant learning. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 79(33–34), 24969–24992. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-09170-4
  10. Castro-Alonso, J. C., de Koning, B. B., Fiorella, L., & Paas, F. (2021). Five strategies for optimizing instructional materials: Instructor- and learner-managed cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1379–1407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09606-9
  11. Chen, O., Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2023). A cognitive load theory approach to defining and measuring task complexity through element interactivity. Educational Psychology Review, 35(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09782-w
  12. Chiu, T. K. F. (2021). Digital support for student engagement in blended learning based on self-determination theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 124, 106909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106909
  13. Das, A., Wu, Z., Skrjanec, I., & Feit, A. M. (2024). Shifting Focus with HCEye: Exploring the Dynamics of Visual Highlighting and Cognitive Load on User Attention and Saliency Prediction. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 8(ETRA), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3655610
  14. Duran, R., Zavgorodniaia, A., & Sorva, J. (2022). Cognitive Load Theory in Computing Education Research: A Review. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 22(4), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1145/3483843
  15. Edinyang, S. D., Ejoh, A. O., & Adams, A. P. (2020). The role of instructional resources amongst Social Studies teachers in Nigeria: The quest for effectiveness in classroom pedagogy. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 10(2), 164. https://doi.org/10.36941/jesr-2020-0036
  16. Fiorella, L. (2021). Multimedia Learning with Instructional Video. The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, 487–497. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108894333.050
  17. Festiyed, Daulay, H., & Ridhatullah, M. (2023). Influence of Interactive Multimedia Teaching Materials on Cognitive Learning Outcomes of Students in Science Lessons: A Meta-Analysis. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(8), 387–396. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i8.2693
  18. Fitra, H., Dwinata, A., Hardati, P., & Irmawati, L. (2022). The Implementation of interactive multimedia on critical thinking skills in Social Studies learning for elementary school students. IJPSE : Indonesian Journal of Primary Science Education, 3(1), 8–14. https://doi.org/10.33752/ijpse.v3i1.3319
  19. Ghimby, D., & Fajarini, A. (2022). Development of interactive multimedia-based learning media for social studies subjects at smp  Negeri 2 Gending Probolinggo. solidarity: Journal of Social Studies, 2(1), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.35719/solidarity.v2i1.88
  20. Greenberg, K., & Zheng, R. (2022). Revisiting the debate on germane cognitive load versus germane resources. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 35(3), 295–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2022.2159416
  21. Hazan-Liran, B., & Miller, P. (2024). The influence of manipulating and accentuating task-irrelevant information on learning efficiency: Insights for cognitive load theory. Journal of Cognition, 7(1), 36. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.361
  22. Iddrisu Bariham, Evelyn Kuusozume Yirbekyaa, & Anthony Bordoh. (2022). Teachers Perspective on Redesigning Social Studies Curriculum for Student-Centered and Constructivist Learning: Empirical Study of Secondary Schools, Northern Region. Social Education Research, 307–321. https://doi.org/10.37256/ser.3220221676
  23. Ilarmin, I., Amus, S., Misnah, M., Juraid, J., Ratu, B., & Elfira, N. (2024). Media Visual untuk Meningkatkan Prestasi Belajar pada Pembelajaran IPS di Kelas VI SDN Bahoea Reko-Reko. Jurnal Ilmiah Dikdaya, 14(1), 77. https://doi.org/10.33087/dikdaya.v14i1.606
  24. Jaleniauskiene, E., & Kasperiuniene, J. (2022). Infographics in higher education: A scoping review. E-Learning and Digital Media, 20(2), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/20427530221107774
  25. Jibililu, O. S. (2024). Evaluating the impact of instructional materials on Social Studies learning outcomes in senior high schools of the Bono East Region of Ghana. Social Education Research, 380–397. https://doi.org/10.37256/ser.5220244881
  26. Joynt, C. (2024). Interactive videos: Its effect on cognitive load and students’ preferences across modes. 10th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd’24). https://doi.org/10.4995/head24.2024.17212
  27. Kaboli, M., Kadivar, P., Abdollahi, M. H., & Arabzadeh,  mehdi. (2020). Designing, Developing, and Evaluation of a Germane load-based cognitive rehabilitation program for students with specific learning disabilities. Journal of Archives in Military Medicine, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.5812/jamm.111339
  28. Kalyuga, S. (n.d.). Managing Cognitive Load in Interactive Multimedia. Managing Cognitive Load in Adaptive Multimedia Learning. https://doi.org/10.4018/9781605660486.ch007
  29. Kalyuga, S. (n.d.). Optimizing Cognitive Load in Instructional Simulations and Games. Managing Cognitive Load in Adaptive Multimedia Learning. https://doi.org/10.4018/9781605660486.ch009
  30. Kaziya, K. (2025). Analysing the Role of Language in Mathematics Instruction: Challenges of Teaching Mathematics in a Multilingual Context in Kalomo District. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6468683/v1
  31. Khotimah, M., & Fajarini, A. (2022). Development of fun thinkers book learning media in social studies class vii mts ashri subjects. solidarity: Journal of Social Studies, 2(2), 85–97. https://doi.org/10.35719/solidarity.v2i2.83
  32. Kim, M., Duncan, C., Yip, S., & Sankey, D. (2024). Beyond the theoretical and pedagogical constraints of cognitive load theory, and towards a new cognitive philosophy in education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2024.2441389
  33. Klepsch, M., & Seufert, T. (2020). Understanding instructional design effects by differentiated measurement of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Instructional Science, 48(1), 45–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09502-9
  34. Krieglstein, F., Beege, M., Rey, G. D., Ginns, P., Krell, M., & Schneider, S. (2022). A Systematic meta-analysis of the reliability and validity of subjective cognitive load questionnaires in experimental multimedia learning research. Educational Psychology Review, 34(4), 2485–2541. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09683-4
  35. Lampropoulos, G., Keramopoulos, E., Diamantaras, K., & Evangelidis, G. (2022). Augmented Reality and Gamification in Education: A Systematic Literature Review of Research, Applications, and Empirical Studies. Applied Sciences, 12(13), 6809. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12136809
  36. Lesmana Sari, E., Ramdhan, B., & Windyariani, S. (2020). Beban Kognitif  Siswa Pada Materi Pencemaran Lingkungan Berbantuan Prezi Application. BIODIK, 6(3), 233–241. https://doi.org/10.22437/bio.v6i3.9840
  37. Lopez, S. (2024). Impact of cognitive load theory on the effectiveness of microlearning modules. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 5(2), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2024.5.2.79
  38. M. Amin, F., & Sundari, H. (2020). EFL students’ preferences on digital platforms during emergency remote teaching: Video Conference, LMS, or Messenger Application? Studies in English Language and Education, 7(2), 362–378. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v7i2.16929
  39. Mališů, P., & Šaloun, P. (2020). Multimedia and interactivity in educational materials. Technium Social Sciences Journal, 13, 47–50. https://doi.org/10.47577/tssj.v13i1.1818
  40. Mayer, R. E. (2021). Multimedia Learning with Computer Games. The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, 472–486. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108894333.049
  41. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2010). Techniques That Reduce Extraneous Cognitive Load and Manage Intrinsic Cognitive Load during Multimedia Learning. Cognitive Load Theory, 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511844744.009
  42. Mishra, V. K. (2021). An overview on cognitive load theory and concepts of human-computer interaction. Asian Journal of Multidimensional Research, 10(12), 591–597. https://doi.org/10.5958/2278-4853.2021.01170.8
  43. Mustakim, M., Ajwar, M., Kertih, I. W., & Lasmawan, I. W. (2024). The Use of Technology in Curriculum Development and Social Studies Learning Design in Elementary Schools: A Critical Analysis and Literature Review. Jurnal Humanitas: Katalisator Perubahan Dan Inovator Pendidikan, 10(3), 489–504. https://doi.org/10.29408/jhm.v10i3.26986
  44. Ober, T. M., Lu, Y., Blacklock, C. B., Liu, C., & Cheng, Y. (2023). Development and Validation of a Cognitive Load Measure for General Educational Settings. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 41(6), 689–708. https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829231169171
  45. ORAN, M., & KARALI, M. A. (2021). Social Studies Teacher Candidates’ Views About Information Technologies and Material Used in Social Studies Lesson. International Education Studies, 14(8), 51. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v14n8p51
  46. Pangilinan, J. R. (2020). Effectiveness of Audiovisual-based Pedagogy in Social Studies Instruction. Journal of Education and Society, 4(1), 1–9. Retrieved from http://www.journals.lnu.edu.ph/index.php/jes/article/view/11
  47. Prehanto, A., Aprily, N. M., Merliana, A., & Nurhazah, M. (2021). Interactive-Animative Learning Videos as an Instructional Medium for Social Studies Learning  for Elementary School During the Covid 19 Pandemic. Indonesian Journal of Primary Education, 5(1), 32–38. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijpe.v5i1.33696
  48. Project, J. L., Lugovaya, V. F., & Mostovaya, V. A. (2025). The impact of text format on the quality of students’ reading performance. Perspectives of Science and Education, 72(6), 437–457. https://doi.org/10.32744/pse.2024.6.27
  49. Pulatovna, N. G., & Pavlovna, D. E. (2022). The role of visual teaching aids in the formation of educational activities of younger students. European International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Management Studies, 02(11), 116–121. https://doi.org/10.55640/eijmrms-02-11-28
  50. Putra, A., Sidiq, F., & Mahlianurrahman, M. (2023). Development of Flipbook-Based Teaching Materials for Learning in Elementary School’s. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(9), 7651–7657. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i9.5141
  51. Qasserras, L. (2024). The role of visual learning aids across diverse learning styles in high school education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics Studies, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.46827/ejals.v7i2.550
  52. Ouwehand, K., Lespiau, F., Tricot, A., & Paas, F. (2025). Cognitive Load Theory: Emerging Trends and Innovations. Education Sciences, 15(4), 458. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15040458
  53. Ross, E. W. (2020). History and Social Studies Curriculum. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.1062
  54. Santisteban, M., Davila, J. M., Sarmiento, A. M., Fortes, J. C., & Grande, J. A. (2020). Edition in electronic support of didactic material for interactive self-learning. inted2020 Proceedings, 1, 548–551. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2020.0222
  55. Seufert, T. (2019). Training for Coherence Formation When Learning From Text and Picture and the Interplay With Learners’ Prior Knowledge. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00193
  56. Schmitt, H. A., Witmer, S. E., & Rowe, S. S. (2022). Text Readability, Comprehension Instruction, and Student Engagement: Examining Associated Relationships during Text-Based Social Studies Instruction. Literacy Research and Instruction, 61(1), 62–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2021.2008561
  57. Şentürk, M. (2021). Educational comics and educational cartoons as teaching material in the social studies course. African Educational Research Journal, 9(2), 515–525. https://doi.org/10.30918/aerj.92.21.073
  58. Shi, Y., Zhang, J., Yang, H., & Yang, H. H. (2020). Effects of Interactive Whiteboard-based Instruction on Students’ Cognitive Learning Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(2), 283–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1769683
  59. Shittu Lukman Olayinka, & Telfim Nandoo Nandap. (2023). Resources for Social Studies: Info-Graphics Illustrations and Jigsaw Effects on Students’ Achievement. Konfrontasi: Jurnal Kultural, Ekonomi Dan Perubahan Sosial, 10(2), 78–90. https://doi.org/10.33258/konfrontasi2.v10i2.274
  60. Siregar, R. S. (2025). Students’ Cognitive Difficulties in Mastering the Nahwu Rules: A Descriptive Study at SMP IT Al Farabi Bilingual Scool. Jurnal Cendekia Islam Indonesia, 1(2), 10–20. https://doi.org/10.62945/jcii.v1i2.216
  61. Skulmowski, A. (2023). Learners Emphasize Their Intrinsic Load if Asked About It First: Communicative Aspects of Cognitive Load Measurement. Mind, Brain, and Education, 17(3), 165–169. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12369
  62. Skulmowski, A., & Rey, G. D. (2020). Subjective cognitive load surveys lead to divergent results for interactive learning media. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2(2), 149–157. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.184
  63. Skulmowski, A., & Xu, K. M. (2021). Understanding Cognitive Load in Digital and Online Learning: a New Perspective on Extraneous Cognitive Load. Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 171–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09624-
  64. Sugiyo Pranoto, Y. K. (2021). Achievement goals and extraneous load predict germane load: the mediating effects of achievement emotions. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 18. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2021.18.2.
  65. Sultanova, G. (2025). Introducing non-cognitive load to the educational discourse. Frontiers in Psychology, 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1411102
  66. Surbakti, R., Umboh, S. E., Pong, M., & Dara, S. (2024). Cognitive load theory: Implications for instructional design in digital classrooms. International Journal of Educational Narratives, 2(6), 483–493. https://doi.org/10.70177/ijen.v2i6.1659
  67. Sweller, J. (2019). Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09701-3
  68. Sweller, J. (2021). The Role of Evolutionary Psychology in Our Understanding of Human Cognition: Consequences for Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Procedures. Educational Psychology Review, 34(4), 2229–2241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09647-
  69. Sweller, J. (2023). The development of cognitive load theory: Replication crises and incorporation of other theories can lead to theory expansion. Educational Psychology Review, 35(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09817-2
  70. Sweller, J. (2024). Cognitive load theory and individual differences. Learning and Individual Differences, 110, 102423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2024.102423
  71. T Flores, G. (2021). The use of Contextualized Instructional Materials (CIMs) in Teaching Social Studies among primary grade learners. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 10(9), 1396–1400. https://doi.org/10.21275/sr21923150208
  72. Taylor, T. A. H., Kamel-ElSayed, S., Grogan, J. F., Hajj Hussein, I., Lerchenfeldt, S., & Mohiyeddini, C. (2022). Teaching in uncertain times: Expanding the scope of extraneous cognitive load in the cognitive Load Theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.665835
  73. Troussas, C., Krouska, A., & Sgouropoulou, C. (2022). Enriching Mobile Learning Software with Interactive Activities and Motivational Feedback for Advancing Users’ High-Level Cognitive Skills. Computers, 11(2), 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers11020018
  74. Turkay, S. (2022). Comparison of dynamic visuals to other presentation formats when learning social science topics in an online setting. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22–36. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7639
  75. Wang, R. (2021). Application of Bandura’s Social Learning Theory in the moral education of secondary vocational college students. Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 5(8), 161–167. https://doi.org/10.26689/jcer.v5i8.2455
  76. Wang, T., & Lajoie, S. P. (2023). How does cognitive load interact with self-regulated Learning? A dynamic and integrative model. Educational Psychology Review, 35(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09794-6
  77. Yadav, A., & Berthelsen, U. D. (2021). Computational Thinking in Education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003102991
  78. Yadav, B. K. (2023). Use of Instructional Materials for Teaching Social Studies. Orchid Academia Siraha, 2(1), 107–114. https://doi.org/10.3126/oas.v2i1.65612
  79. Yadav, B. K. (2024). Condition of Teaching Social Studies in Secondary Level. Orchid Academia Siraha, 3(1), 131–138. https://doi.org/10.3126/oas.v3i1.78140
  80. Zarkasyi, M. H., Abidin, Z., & Praherdhiono, H. (2024). Students’ Cognitive Load in Learning Based on Primary School Merdeka Curriculum. Journal of Educational Technology Studies and Applied Research, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.70125/jetsar.v1i2y2024a18
  81. Zarkasyi, M. H., Abidin, Z., & Praherdhiono, H. (2024). Students Cognitive Load in Learning Based onPrimary School Merdeka Curriculum. Journal of Educational Technology Studies and Applied Research, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.70125/jetsar.v1i2y2024a18
  82. Zhang, S., de Koning, B. B., & Paas, F. (2024). Does presentation size of instructional materials influence the split‐attention effect? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 38(4). Portico. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.4223
  83. Zhang, J., Gong, S., & Liu, Y. (2024). Research on the Design of Digital Museum Information Presentation Based on Cognitive Load Theory. 2024 International Conference on Cloud Computing and Big Data, 116–123. https://doi.org/10.1145/3695080.3695100
  84. Zhou, P., Li, Y., Zhang, Y., Yu, Y., & Tang, Y. (2023). The Effects of Scaffolding on Learning Outcomes in K-12 Programming Education: A Meta-Analysis. 2023 Twelfth International Conference of Educational Innovation through Technology (EITT), 46–50. https://doi.org/10.1109/eitt61659.2023.00016

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic