Cognitive load, affect, and regulatory strategies: a more integrated model

Brockbank, Rebecca B.; Feldon, David F.; Litson, Kaylee · 2026 · DOAJ

DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1774619

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study addresses the gap in Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) regarding the integration of affective and motivational factors. While CLT traditionally focuses on cognitive architecture and working memory limits, it has historically treated cognition and affect as separate processes. The authors investigate whether maladaptive affect imposes extraneous cognitive load and whether adaptive regulatory strategies, such as cognitive reappraisal, can mitigate this load. The research aims to establish a more integrated model where cognition, affect, motivation, and self-regulation are viewed as mutually constitutive processes. The researchers employed a convergent parallel mixed-methods design within a descriptive longitudinal study spanning eight weeks. The sample consisted of 144 undergraduate students enrolled in an introductory statistics course, a context known for high cognitive demand and varied emotional responses. Quantitative data were collected weekly using surveys measuring cognitive load (intrinsic and extraneous), emotion regulation strategies (cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression), and motivational costs. These data were analyzed using multivariate latent state random intercept cross-lagged panel models (RI-CLPM) to examine bidirectional relationships and within-person variance over time. Qualitative data were gathered through semi-structured interviews with a subset of 21 participants, analyzed using grounded theory to identify themes related to mental effort, emotion regulation, and motivation. The findings provide preliminary empirical support for an affective extension of CLT. Quantitative results indicated that maladaptive affect, specifically emotional and motivational costs, significantly predicted increases in extraneous cognitive load (ECL) and intrinsic cognitive load (ICL) at various time points. Conversely, adaptive regulation strategies showed mixed but promising effects; cognitive reappraisal was associated with lower ICL in later weeks, while expressive suppression negatively predicted ICL early in the course. Qualitative analysis revealed that learners employed diverse regulatory strategies, including breaking tasks into sub-goals and utilizing social support, to manage load. Notably, cognitive reappraisal emerged as a powerful strategy when load and emotional costs were highest, suggesting it helps learners reframe demanding tasks to reduce perceived burden. The study concludes that emotion regulation is not merely an add-on to cognitive load management but a fundamental mechanism for navigating demanding learning tasks. The authors propose "affective cognitive load" (ACL) as a theoretically motivated subtype of extraneous cognitive load. This framework suggests that negative affective states consume working memory resources, thereby increasing load and impairing schema construction. By integrating affect and regulation into CLT, the study offers a more holistic understanding of learning, implying that instructional design should consider emotional and motivational costs alongside cognitive demands to optimize learning outcomes.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-25; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• mental demand