Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40264190›Full record

ArticleBMC psychology2025

Investigation of the impact of cognitive load on EFL learners' satisfaction with MOOCs: the mediating role of expectation confirmation and perceived usefulness.

Lingling Ma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Lingling MaSchool of Foreign Languages, Xuchang University, Xuchang, HeNan, 461000, China. xcumalingling@163.com.

Funding

Integration of Industry and Education, Collaborative Education 2024-ZZJH-376Research on the Methods and Paths to Enhance the Smart Teaching Ability of Foreign Language Teachers in Universities in the Digital Humanities Era XCU2023-ZHJX-05
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

MOOCs as a flexible form of online education, have gained increasing popularity among EFL learners. However, the impact of cognitive load on learners' satisfaction has not been thoroughly explored. This study, grounded in Cognitive Load Theory and Expectation Confirmation Theory, empirically investigates the effects of cognitive load, confirmation, and perceived usefulness on EFL learners' satisfaction with MOOCs. This study collected 293 valid questionnaire responses through an online survey, with data collection occurring from March 2024 to August 2024. The data were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). The results show that cognitive load significantly negatively affects EFL learners' confirmation (β = -0.391, p < 0.001), perceived usefulness (β = -0.808, p < 0.001), and satisfaction (β = -0.187, p < 0.001) with MOOCs. Confirmation positively influences learners' perceived usefulness (β = 0.763, p < 0.001) and satisfaction (β = 0.231, p < 0.001), perceived usefulness significantly positively influences learners' satisfaction (β = 0.571, p < 0.001). Additionally, confirmation (β = -0.090, p < 0.001) and perceived usefulness (β = -0.461, p < 0.001) partially mediate the relationship between cognitive load and satisfaction. The findings provide practical implications for MOOC platform designers in optimizing course content and reducing cognitive load to enhance learner satisfaction. Finally, the theoretical and practical significance of the study's results is discussed.

Indexed as

CognitionEducation, DistanceLearningPersonal SatisfactionAdultFemaleHumansMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultCognitive load theoryEFL learnersExpectation confirmation theorySatisfaction

Identifiers

PMID40264190
PMCPMC12016428

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.