Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40851629›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Rethinking pre-training: cognitive load implications for learners with varying prior knowledge.

Anna Gorbunova, Anastasiia Kapuza, Ouhao Chen, Jamie Costley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Anna GorbunovaHSE University, Moscow, Russia.
Anastasiia KapuzaHSE University, Moscow, Russia.
Ouhao ChenSchool of Education, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Jamie CostleyCollege of Education, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study examines how prior knowledge and pre-training relate to cognitive load during problem-solving. Grounded in cognitive load theory, it investigates whether pre-training facilitates learning by reducing cognitive load or imposes redundant information for learners with higher prior knowledge. In an experiment with 136 university students, pre-training was implemented through concept maps and a glossary introducing essential terms and procedures before problem-solving. Results revealed that learners with higher prior knowledge experienced lower intrinsic and extraneous load and higher germane load during problem-solving compared to learners with lower prior knowledge, suggesting enhanced schema refinement rather than redundancy. Pre-training consistently reduced extraneous load across all learners, including those with higher prior knowledge, challenging the expected expertise reversal effect. While learners with lower prior knowledge did not show significant reductions in intrinsic load, they benefited from decreased extraneous load during problem-solving. These findings highlight the value of pre-training as an instructional strategy and underscore the importance of aligning instructional design with learners' existing knowledge.

Indexed as

cognitive load theoryconcept mappingexpertise reversal effectinstructional designpre-trainingprior knowledgeredundancy effect

Identifiers

PMID40851629
PMCPMC12367772

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.