ArticlePsychological research2025
Differences between children and young adults in the effects of difficulty and value of learning items on cognitive offloading strategies.
Article in Psychological research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The development of an optimal learning strategy for high-similarity categories: the effect of example sequence on children's category learning.Psychological research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cognitive offloading refers to the use of external tools to assist in memory processes.This study investigates the effects of item difficulty and value on cognitive offloading during a word-pair learning task, comparing children and young adults in a context where both cues coexist. In Experiment 1, we examined the impact of difficulty and value cues on cognitive offloading using a 2 (difficulty: easy vs. difficult) × 2 (value: high vs. low) × 2 (age group: children vs. young adults) mixed design.The results indicated that young adults accounted for both difficulty and value cues in their cognitive offloading strategies, in contrast to children, who relied only on difficulty cues. In Experiment 2, we retained the experimental design of Experiment 1, with one notable change: difficulty and value cues were simultaneously displayed on the same interface. This change aimed to reduce working memory load, thereby helping children better perceive the value cues. Our results showed that when value and difficulty cues were presented on the same interface, children took both cues into account in their cognitive offloading decisions. In contrast, young adults were more influenced by the value of the learning items when adopting cognitive offloading strategies. We conducted an exploratory analysis to examine the impact of serial position on offloading decisions. The results showed that children were more likely to use cognitive offloading strategies for items from the early and middle positions than for those from the later positions. In contrast, young adults (as observed in Experiment 2) tended to use cognitive offloading strategies for items from the middle positions. Our findings suggest that age affects the utilization of cues in the strategies of cognitive offloading. We interpreted the observed differences in cognitive offloading strategies through the lens of developmental changes in metacognitive abilities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40072662What 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.