The art of thinking · 5 · Cognitive load and learning

Split-attention effect

Also known as: Split attention

German: Split-Attention-Effekt

In cognitive load theory, the split-attention effect is the finding that learning suffers when learners must mentally integrate two or more sources of information that are separated in space or time and cannot be understood on their own, compared with a format in which the sources are physically integrated.

Cognitive psychology
Learning

In one sentence

The split-attention effect: learning suffers when separated sources, unintelligible alone, must be integrated mentally (Chandler and Sweller, 1991).

Example

A hydraulic diagram numbers its valves, and the valve names are in a legend on the next page. Readers flip back and forth; with the names placed at the valves, they understand the circuit faster.

What the research shows

Paul Chandler and John Sweller (1991; 1992) compared conventional formats, in which a diagram and its explanatory text were presented separately, with integrated formats in which the text was placed in the diagram. Learners with integrated materials needed less time and performed better, in domains such as electrical engineering and numerical control programming. The effect occurs only when the sources are not intelligible in isolation and must be related to be understood; when one source is self-explanatory, the other is redundant, and removing it helps more (the redundancy effect). Paul Ginns (2006) found in a meta-analysis that spatially and temporally integrated formats improve learning, with larger effects for complex material.

Evidence status

The split-attention effect is among the best-replicated effects of cognitive load theory and corresponds to the spatial and temporal contiguity principles in multimedia learning research. Its size depends on element interactivity and on the learner's expertise: for experienced learners, integrated explanations they do not need can become redundant. Most studies are short instructional experiments; studies on documentation used at work are fewer.

How it applies

Legends far from figures, part numbers in a separate table and explanations on a different page from the step all split attention. The glossary “Applied cognitive psychology for information use” covers the design side under the spatial contiguity principle and the redundancy principle. Integration supports understanding; it does not change which information is required.

External references

How to read this pool

Entries, context cards and transitional topics

The art of thinking explains ways of thinking — where a method comes from, what it asks of you and how it was adapted later. You meet four kinds of content here, each with its own job:

Glossary entry: Defines one concept or method of thinking: its origin, an example and how it relates to neighboring ideas. “X vs. Y” sections set two methods side by side.
Context card of the art of thinking: A short, self-contained answer to one question about a way of thinking — its lineage, its steps, its limits. These cards are listed on The art of thinking only.
Transitional topicBridges both pools: A context card that bridges both pools: it shows how a way of thinking was adapted into documentation, analysis or quality practice. It sits with the reference context cards and is marked as transitional wherever it appears.
Reference entry or context card: Belongs to the Glossary & Norms Space on regulation, norms and engineering. Entries here link to one only where a method is also an established tool of documentation or quality work, such as the five whys or a user’s mental model.

All context cards of the art of thinking