ArticlePloS one2025
Cognitive load and visual attention assessment using physiological eye tracking measures in multimedia learning.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Non-Invasive Physiological Metrics for Cognitive Load Assessment in Training and Operational Contexts: Signal Processing, Evidence, and Feasibility.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- HRV-Based Multimodal Physiological Signal Monitoring Using Wearable Biosensors in Human-Computer Interaction: Cognitive Load in Real-Time Strategy Games.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Effective multimedia content design can boost performance, capture visual attention, and optimize cognitive load. The current study employs eye-tracking technology to establish metrics to measure cognitive load, analyze visual attention allocation, and evaluate learners' performance in English language learning. The study focuses on creating and comparing two different multimedia presentations. The differentiation between them lies in their adherence to or deviation from Mayer's educational multimedia design principles: coherence, signaling, and spatial contiguity. participants were randomly assigned to two groups. The first group viewed with principles version, while the second group viewed without principles version, during which their eye movement data were collected. Subsequently, both groups participated in a recall test and completed the NASA-TLX questionnaire. The research establishes connections between specific eye-tracking parameters, subjective cognitive load scores, and recall test results through regression models and analyzes fixation distributions. The study also delves into microsaccades rate and changes in pupil size, each analyzed within times of interest. The study's findings indicate that the examined metrics can significantly help distinguish between the two conditions: principles and no principles. These metrics are pertinent for assessing individuals' cognitive load and visual attention and serve as beneficial indicators for gauging the efficacy of the designed multimedia content.
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.