ReviewBrain sciences2026
Beyond Cognitive Load Theory: Why Learning Needs More than Memory Management.
Review in Brain sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A full review of online education resources available on antifungal stewardship.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Article
- Applying Cognitive Load Theory to Improve Instructional Efficiency and Learner Experience in Current Good Manufacturing Practices Training for Pharmacists.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The Influence of Different Cognitive Skills on Learning Agility Among Gen Z in Established and Start-Up Companies.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Teacher Well-Being and Burnout Resilience: Dimensional Independence, Pandemic Burden, and Profile Analysis in Primary Education.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Cognitive Enhancement Through Music Education: Affective Pathways to Executive Function Improvement in Musicians.Brain sciences · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe role of cognitive load theory (CLT) in understanding effective pedagogy has received increased attention in the fields of education and psychology in recent years. A considerable amount of literature has been published on the CLT construct as foundational guidance for instructional design by focusing on managing cognitive load in working memory to enhance learning outcomes. However, recent neuroscientific findings and practical critiques suggest that CLT's emphasis on content-focused instruction and cognitive efficiency may overlook the complexity of human learning.
methodsThis conceptual paper synthesises evidence from cognitive science, developmental psychology, neuroscience, health sciences and educational research to examine the scope conditions and limitations of CLT when applied as a general framework for K-12 learning. One of the major theoretical issues identified is the lack of consideration for the broad set of interpersonal and self-management skills, creating potential limitations for real-world educational contexts, where social-emotional and self-regulatory abilities are as crucial as cognitive competencies.
resultsAs a result of the critique, this paper introduces the Neurodevelopmental Informed Holistic Learning and Development Framework as a neuroscience-informed construct that integrates cognitive, emotional, and interpersonal dimensions essential for effective learning.
conclusionsIn recognising the limitations of CLT, the paper offers practitioners contemporary, neurodevelopmentally informed insights that extend beyond cognitive efficiency alone and better reflect the multidimensional nature of real-world 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.