To determine whether and how learning is biased by competing task-irrelevant information that creates extraneous cognitive load, we assessed the efficiency of university students with a learning paradigm in two experiments. The paradigm asked participants to learn associations between eight words and eight digits. We manipulated congruity of the digits’ ink colour with the words’ semantics. In Experiment 1 word stimuli were colour words (e.g., blue, yellow) and in Experiment 2 colour-related word concepts (e.g., sky, banana). Marked benefits and costs on learning due to variation in extraneous cognitive load originating from processing task-irrelevant information were evident. Implications for cognitive load theory and schooling are discussed.
BaddeleyA. (1986). Working memory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
2.
BaddeleyA. (2012). Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 1–29.
3.
BraverT. S., GrayJ. R., & BurgessG. C. (2007). Explaining the many varieties of working memory variation: Dual mechanisms of cognitive control. In ConwayA., JarroldC., KaneM., MiyakeA., & TowseJ. (Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp. 76–106). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4.
CerellaJ., OnyperS. V., & HoyerW. J. (2006). The associative-memory basis of cognitive skill learning: Adult age differences. Psychology and Aging, 21, 483–498.
5.
CohenJ. D., DunbarK., & McClellandJ. L. (1990). On the control of automatic processes: A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. Psychological Review, 97, 332–361.
6.
CowanN. (2001). Metatheory of storage capacity limits. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 154–176.
7.
Dalrymple-AlfordE. C. (1972). Associative facilitation and interference in the Stroop color-word task. Perception & Psychophysics, 11, 274–276.
8.
D'EreditaM. A., & HoyerW. J. (2009). Transfer of instances in cognitive skill learning: Adult age differences. Experimental aging research, 36(1), 23–39.
GlaserM. O., & GlaserW. R. (1982). Time course analysis of the Stroop phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 875–894.
11.
HarpS. F., & MayerR. E. (1998). How seductive details do their damage: A theory of cognitive interest in science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 414–434.
12.
HomackS., & RiccioC. A. (2004). A meta-analysis of the sensitivity and specificity of the Stroop Color and Word Test with children. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 19, 725–743.
13.
KaplanE., FeinD., MorrisR., & DelisD. C. (1991). WAIS-R as a neuropsychological instrument. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
14.
KaufmannL., & NuerkH. C. (2006). Interference effects in a numerical Stroop paradigm in 9- to 12-year-old children with ADHD-C. Child Neuropsychology, 12, 223–243.
15.
KimbleM. O., FruehB. C., & MarksL. (2009). Does the modified Stroop effect exist in PTSD? Evidence from dissertation abstracts and the peer reviewed literature. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 23, 650–655.
16.
KonkleT., & OlivaA. (2012). A familiar-size Stroop effect: Real-world size is an automatic property of object representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 561–569.
17.
MacLeodC. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological bulletin, 109, 163–203.
18.
McCabeD. P., RoedigerH. L.III, McDanielM. A., BalotaD. A., & HambrickD. Z. (2010). The relationship between working memory capacity and executive functioning: Evidence for a common executive attention construct. Neuropsychology, 24, 222–243.
19.
van MerriënboerJ. J. G., & AyresA. (2005). Research on cognitive load theory and its design implications for E-learning. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 53, 5–13.
20.
van MerriënboerJ. J. G., & SwellerJ. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17, 147–177.
21.
MillerG. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.
22.
PosnerM. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 3–25.
23.
PosnerM. I., & SnyderC. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In SolsoR. L. (Ed.), Information processing and cognition (pp. 55–85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
24.
RastP., & ZimprichD. (2009). Individual differences and reliability of paired associates learning in younger and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 24(4), 1001–1006.
25.
ReyG. D. (2012). A review of research and a meta-analysis of the seductive detail effect. Educational Research Review, 7, 216–237.
26.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643–662.
27.
SwellerJ. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257–285.
28.
SwellerJ. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4, 295–312.
29.
SwellerJ. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 123–138.
