Previous studies have observed that cognitive overload has a negative impact on idea generation. However, the effect of cognitive load on idea generation has not been well studied. As the first step of addressing this issue, the present study is a pilot investigation of the factors that affect cognitive load in the conceptual design process. The factors include task characteristics and subject characteristics, such as the level of task difficulty, the level of expertise, cognitive style, and motivation. The relation between the factors and cognitive load was examined, and suggestions for future work were made. The results are expected to clarify the construct of cognitive load and provide suggestions on managing cognitive load during the conceptual design process.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Al-NaemeF. F. A. (1991). The influence of various learning styles on practical problem-solving in chemistry in Scottish secondary schools. (Ph.D. Thesis), University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
2.
AlamolhodaeiH. (1996). A study in higher education calculus and students’ learning styles. (Ph.D. Thesis), University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
3.
BildaZ.GeroJ. S. (2007). The impact of working memory limitations on the design process during conceptualization. Design Studies, 28(4), 343-367. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2007.02.005
4.
CasakinH. (2004). Visual analogy as a cognitive strategy in the design process: Expert versus novice performance. Journal of Design Research, 4(2). doi: 10.1504/JDR.2004.009846
5.
CennamoK. S. (1993). Learning from video: Factors influencing learners’ preconceptions and invested mental effort. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(3), 33-45. doi: 10.1007/bf02297356
6.
CrossN. (2004). Expertise in design: An overview. Design Studies, 25(5), 427-441. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2004.06.002
7.
De WaardD. (1996). The measurement of drivers’ mental workload. (Ph.D. Dissertation), University of Groningen, Haren, Netherlands.
8.
FinkA.GrabnerR. H.BenedekM.ReishoferG.HauswirthV.FallyM. (2009). The creative brain: Investigation of brain activity during creative problem solving by means of EEG and fMRI. Human Brain Mapping, 30(3), 734-748. doi: 10.1002/hbm.20538
9.
FrankolaK. (2001). Why online learners drop out. Workforce, 80(10), 53-60.
10.
GlynnS. M.BrickmanP.ArmstrongN.TaasoobshiraziG. (2011). Science motivation questionnaire II: Validation with science majors and nonscience majors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1159-1176. doi: 10.1002/tea.20442
11.
GuilfordJ. P. (1971). The Nature of Human Intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
12.
HuangS. C. (2011). Convergent vs. divergent assessment: Impact on college EFL students’ motivation and self-regulated learning strategies. Language Testing, 28(2), 251-271. doi: 10.1177/0265532210392199
13.
HudsonL. (1966). Contrary Imaginations. London: Methuen & Co Ltd.
14.
JinY.ChusilpP. (2006). Study of mental iteration in different design situations. Design Studies, 27(1), 25-55. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2005.06.003
15.
KavakliM.GeroJ. S. (2002). The structure of concurrent cognitive actions: A case study on novice and expert designers. Design Studies, 23(1), 25-40. doi: 10.1016/s0142-694x(01)00021-7
16.
KozhevnikovM. (2007). Cognitive styles in the context of modern psychology: Toward an integrated framework of cognitive style. Psychological Bulletin, 133(3), 464-481. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.133.3.464
17.
MariaB. (2002). Managing cognitive load - recent trends in cognitive load theory. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 139-146. doi: 10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00021-4
MessickS. (1976). Personality consistencies in cognition and creativity. In MessickS. (Ed.), Individuality in learning: Implications of cognitive styles and creativity for human development (pp. 4-23). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
20.
PaasF.TuovinenJ.van MerriënboerJ.DarabiA. A. (2005). A motivational perspective on the relation between mental effort and performance: Optimizing learner involvement in instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 25-34. doi: 10.1007/bf02504795
21.
PaasF.van MerriënboerJ. J. G. (1994). Instructional control of cognitive load in the training of complex cognitive tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 6(4), 351-371. doi: 10.1007/BF02213420
22.
PahlG.BeitzW.FeldhusenJ.GroteK.-H. (2007). Engineering Design: A systematic Approach (3rd ed.). New York: Springer.
RobertsM. J.NewtonE. J. (2001). Understanding strategy selection. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54(1), 137-154. doi: 10.1006/ijhc.2000.0434
25.
RodgersP. A.GreenG.McGownA. (2000). Using concept sketches to track design progress. Design Studies, 21(5), 451-464. doi: 10.1016/S0142-694X(00)00018-1
26.
RuigrokR. C. J.HoekstraJ. M. (2007). Human factors evaluations of Free Flight: Issues solved and issues remaining. Applied Ergonomics, 38(4), 437-455. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2007.01.006
SimonH. A. (1978). Information-processing theory of human problem solving. In EstesW. K. (Ed.), Handbook of Learning and Cognitive Processes (Vol. 5, Human Information Processing, pp. 271-295). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
29.
SunG.YaoS. (2012). Investigating the relation between cognitive load and creativity in the conceptual design process. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 56(1), 308-312. doi: 10.1177/1071181312561072
30.
SunG.YaoS.CarreteroJ. A. (2014). Comparing cognitive efficiency between experienced and inexperienced designers. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 8(4), 330-351. doi: 10.1177/1555343414540172
31.
SvenssonE.Angelborg-ThanderzM.SjobergL.OlssonS. (1997). Information complexity - Mental workload and performance in combat aircraft. Ergonomics, 40(3), 362-380. doi: 10.1080/001401397188206
32.
Ullman DavidG. (2009). The Mechanical Design Process (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
33.
Van GervenP. W. M.PaasF.van MerriënboerJ. J. G.HendriksM.SchmidtH. G. (2003). The efficiency of multimedia learning into old age. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(4), 489-505. doi: 10.1348/000709903322591208
34.
XieB.SalvendyG. (2000). Review and reappraisal of modelling and predicting mental workload in single- and multi-task environments. Work and Stress, 14(1), 74-99. doi: 10.1080/026783700417249
35.
ZhengR.CookA. (2012). Solving complex problems: A convergent approach to cognitive load measurement. British Journal ofEducational Technology, 43(2), 233-246. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01169.x
