ArticlePloS one2024
Neurodiversity and cognitive load in online learning: A focus group study.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of multiple educational technologies on well-being: the mediating role of digital cognitive load.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Diversity in Education Study (DivES): Investigating a neurodiversity module in higher education.PloS one · 2025Article
- Telepsychiatry, access, and equity: accelerating mental health care for rural and low-income youth.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Learner experiences of a carer-focused massive open online course on psychosis: A qualitative study.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is widely accepted that cognitive load plays a crucial role in online learning. However, despite neurodevelopmental conditions being the largest category of qualifying disabilities in education, and the rise of online learning, there is little understanding of the factors impacting cognitive load in online learning for neurodivergent students and how these factors differ from those affecting neurotypical students. This study used qualitative comparison groups with neurotypical and neurodivergent students to examine their experiences of cognitive load in online learning. A sample of 26 university students (14 neurotypical and 12 neurodivergent) participated in focus group discussions. While neurodivergent students reported many similar experiences of cognitive load in online learning compared to their neurotypical peers-such as confusion in navigating the content and technical issues-some difficulties were more present for neurodivergent students-such as transcripts including mistakes and inaccessible content presentation-creating additional barriers in effectively engaging with the educational content. The results suggest that neurotypical and neurodivergent students experience similar challenges, albeit to differing degrees of intensity, and that more research is needed to explore the relationship between neurodiversity and cognitive load in online learning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.