Enhancing User Capabilities While Reducing

Cognitive Load in VR: A Comparative Analysis of

Desktop 3D Virtual Reality and 2D Environments
Anna Sudár (  anna.sudar@uni-corvinus.hu )
Corvinus University of Budapest
Ádám Balázs Csapó
Corvinus University of Budapest

Research Article

Keywords: virtual reality, cognitive load, 2D versus 3D desktop VR

Posted Date: November 23rd, 2023

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3640301/v1

License:   This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Read Full License

Additional Declarations: No competing interests reported.

 Enhancing User Capabilities While Reducing
Cognitive Load in VR: A Comparative Analysis of
Desktop 3D Virtual Reality and 2D Environments

Anna Sudár1,2,3* and Ádám B. Csapó1,2,3†

1* Corvinus Institute for Advanced Studies, Corvinus University of
Budapest, Fővám tér 8, Budapest, H-1093, Hungary.
2 Institute of Data Analytics and Information Systems, Corvinus

University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8, Budapest, H-1093, Hungary.

3 Eötvös Loránd Research Network, Piarista u. 4,, Budapest, H-1052,

Hungary.

*Corresponding author(s). E-mail(s): anna.sudar@uni-corvinus.hu;

Contributing authors: adambalazs.csapo@uni-corvinus.hu;
† The two authors contributed equally to this work.

Abstract
Numerous studies indicate that in many particular cases, spatial 3D digital envi-
ronments can offer more effective methods for information and knowledge sharing
than 2D graphical user interfaces. This effectiveness arises from the unique abil-
ity of 3D spaces to present users with different types of content, such as written
documents, web-based content, audio-visual materials, and even interactive 3D
models, all at once and in a spatially meaningful arrangement. For instance, in
a 3D virtual space, related documents can be placed closer to each other than
those focusing on different topics. Similarly, content meant to convey key points
can also be designed to appear relatively larger than less prominent documents.
Such spatial arrangements help convey semantic relationships implicitly, allowing
users to quickly understand the content and form more memorable impressions
with less effort. However, it is not fully understood when and how these poten-
tial benefits of 3D environments can be fully realized. In this paper, we focus on
this question, specifically in the context of desktop 3D environments, aiming to
understand the conditions under which they can lead to improved performance
and/or less cognitive load compared to 2D digital interfaces. In particular, we
present the results of two experiments in which we compared user performance,

1
 eye tracking data (including pupil dilation), and a set of qualitative measures dur-
ing a learning task carried out in a 2D environment and two different 3D virtual
reality scenarios. The notable differences between these 3D scenarios – as well
as disparities in the corresponding results – allowed us to draw two conclusions:
first, that 3D spatial environments can indeed lead to the reduction of cognitive
load compared to 2D interfaces, and second, such reductions in cognitive load are
more effective in 3D spaces that require less (virtual) spatial locomotion, even
at the expense of a greater number of camera rotations. Together, these results
suggest that the ability of VR to reduce users’ cognitive load may have more to
do with the spatial qualities of the content arrangement than with the spatial
situatedness of the users.

Keywords: virtual reality, cognitive load, 2D versus 3D desktop VR

1 Introduction
A large body of scientific research, along with the rapid evolution of practical
approaches has shown that virtual reality (VR) holds a unique transformative poten-
tial in the way people learn, whether as children and young adults in school or as
adults in a professional context [1–7]. First and foremost, the ability to visualize spa-
tial structures in three dimensions, regardless of scale, offers a key improvement over
traditional text-based descriptions or 2-dimensional drawings. Second, the fact that
VR allows such structures to be dynamically interacted with helps support construc-
tive learning approaches [8, 9], increasing users’ motivation to learn in general [10, 11].
A third, and perhaps less often cited advantage of VR, however, is the ability of users
to lay out 2D documents inside a 3D environment, allowing for more information to
be viewed at the same time in a spatial arrangement that strongly reflects associative
and semantic relationships between parts of the content [12–14].
At the same time, although some work has been carried out by researchers in the
past on VR ergonomics in specific use-case scenarios (see e.g. [15, 16], few generally
valid principles have been formulated with respect to the effects of VR design on user
capabilities. Note that this observation is related both to objective capabilities (ability
to learn) as well as subjective ones (e.g., the willingness to make the effort required
for learning). In this paper, we focus specifically on such questions, by assessing users’
effectiveness and cognitive load experienced within a learning scenario in 2 versions of
a desktop VR environment, as well as in a 2D web-based environment. We demonstrate
through these experiments that although the performance of the users is similar in the
3 cases, in one of the 3D cases, users are able to achieve similar results at a significantly
lower cognitive load compared to the other two scenarios. The differences between the
3D environments, then, allow us to formulate specific design recommendations for the
development of educational 3D virtual spaces.
The paper is structured as follows. In Section 2, we provide an overview of past
research results supporting the claim that, broadly speaking and in a variety of indi-
vidual cases, VR spaces can offer real benefits compared to 2D digital environments.
Next, in Section 3, we summarize the background behind cognitive load theory from

2
the perspective of this work. In Section 4, we present the experimental framework in
which we conducted the experiments reported in this paper, while the experiments
themselves are presented in the two subsequent sections. In particular, Section 5 sum-
marizes the results of a first experiment which has already been reported in detail in
[17]; at the same time, results of this experiment have also now been complemented
with more data obtained from users of the 2D interface, to ensure comparability of
the 3D versus 2D cases on a statistically more sound basis. In Section 6, in turn, we
present in detail the results of a second follow-up study in which a different 3D scenario
(but the same 2D scenario) was used. Differences in user performance and cognitive
load experienced between the two 3D scenarios and the 2D scenario are then reported
in Section 7 entitled Results. Finally, a discussion is provided on our interpretation of
the results in Section 8.

2 Benefits of Virtual Reality over Classical 2D

solutions
Virtual reality (VR) is a technological framework that aims to simulate immersive 3D
environments for users. It typically involves the use of specialized equipment, such as
headsets or goggles (head-mounted displays, HMDs), that present digital displays in
front of the user’s eyes. These displays are designed to create a sense of presence and
create fully immersive virtual worlds, as a counterpart to desktop 3D applications that
offer a lower degree of (physical) immersion.

2.1 The Case for Desktop 3D Virtual Realities as Opposed to

Immersive VR
Indeed, fully immersive VR has a lot of advantages and is also preferable to desktop 3D
environments in certain fields, such as healthcare and medical education, where high
visual and environmental fidelity is of the essence. In other fields, such as education,
the widespread use of immersive VR may be less prevalent, as even low-end devices
can be inhibitively costly, while the daily experience of users is still often characterized
by issues such as motion sickness. In a majority of countries, access to laptops is more
prevalent and a more sustainable option. As a result, desktop virtual realities are
becoming more and more widespread, and several studies have confirmed that in such
cases a sense of presence can also be experienced, even if not to the same extent as in
fully immersive VRs (see e.g. [18, 19]).

2.2 Advantages of Desktop 3D VR over 2D User Interfaces

Numerous scientific studies have explored the benefits and comparative effectiveness
of desktop virtual realities over classical computing interfaces in terms of reduction
of mental strain [20, 21], enhanced memory retrieval [22–29], improvement of digital
guidance in workflows [30, 31] and improved possibilities for content management
[32–34].
In the past decade, many researchers have also addressed the question of how
VR can be used to the greatest effect in education [9, 35–38]. Many solutions have

3
been developed for different levels of education, including primary education [39, 40],
secondary education [41–43], higher education [1, 44, 45], and private education centers
[46].
In addition to taking sustainability aspects into account, the focus of this research
is on the connection of virtual reality to cognitive load, and on the question of how
specific design choices can lead to differences in cognitive load experienced by users.

3 Cognitive Load Theory

A highly relevant theory in educational psychology, Cognitive Load Theory (CLT),
seeks to describe and demonstrate how the human cognitive system processes informa-
tion and what this means for instructional design. The goal of cognitive load theory in
this context is to clarify how increased information processing demands during learn-
ing tasks can impact students’ capacity for taking in and storing new information in
long-term memory [47–50]. To be able to learn something, humans need to process
new information and this requires us to use our working memory, which is well-known
for being limited in its capacity and in for its general ability to process no more than a
few information elements at a given time [51–53]. In cases when learners exceed these
limitations, cognitive overload occurs [54]. Generally, this occurs as a result of inad-
equate teaching strategies used to instruct students, or in the presence of additional
external distractions [47]. In order to be able to design and create appropriate educa-
tional environments and learning frameworks, it is therefore necessary to understand
the types and effects of cognitive load.

3.1 Categories and Effects of Cognitive Load

Sweller and his colleagues [49] identified 10 cognitive load-related effects, which are
each relevant to a different extent within different fields, such as digital workspace
design, education, user interfaces and communication.
• The goal-free effect is a phenomenon where solving problems with no explicit goals
produces superior learning results compared to goal-driven activities. The lack of
goal orientedness promotes greater flexibility and curiosity, which improves com-
prehension of the structure of the domain. Note that goal-free activities can still
include achieving precise objectives, but without blocking the learner’s attention
from other aspects.
• The worked example (problem completion effect is a phenomenon whereby students
who are given working examples to study perform better on future tests than those
who are required to solve the same problems independently.
• The split-attention effect occurs when the learners have to split their attention
(spatially or temporally) between at least two related information sources which
cannot individually be understood without mental integration. Generally speaking,
more effective learning can be observed in the case of instructional strategies where
the materials are in an integrated format as opposed to a split-attention format.
• The modality effect is closely related to the split-attention effect and relies on the
structure of working memory, which processes visual and auditory information on

4
 different channels. Based on this structure, it could be advantageous and can reduce
the extraneous cognitive load if, for example, the textual information that accom-
panies images and animations is presented in an auditory form, in this case the
information that is presented separately can also be interpreted separately, without
integration.
• The redundancy effect occurs when the same information is displayed from multiple
sources in different forms (text, image, graph-based, etc.). Unlike the split attention
effect, the information sources presented here can each be understood without any
mental integration; nevertheless, cognitive load can still be increased due to the
presentation of redundant information (although some reversals to this rule are
possible, see e.g. the expertise reversal effect and the guidance fading effect).
• The expertise reversal effect is connected to the expertise level of the user with
respect to a topic. When novice learners see information that has redundancies
across different modalities, such duplication of information may help them deepen
their understanding about the topic (as a partial reversal of the redundancy effect).
In the case of experts, however, such redundancy requires additional cognitive
resources, the use of which would otherwise be unnecessary.
• The guidance fading effect can be conceived of as a best practice in which the
amount of supplementary information provided to users in a task (e.g., explana-
tions, worked-out examples, etc.) gradually lessens as the expertise level of the users
increases. When this is violated, i.e., when novice-level users are presented with lit-
tle information, or when expert-level users are presented with too much information,
the cognitive load experienced by the users can be expected to increase.
• The imagination effect refers to the reduction of cognitive load through imagination,
or mental practice. This effect is generally stronger for experienced learners who
already have a good level of prior knowledge.
• The self-explanation effect refers to the benefits of adopting a meta-level perspective,
with learners engaging in mental dialog about a working example related to a given
topic. Similar to the imagination effect, the self-explanation effect is also generally
stronger in the case of experienced learners.
• The element interactivity effect refers to the compounding nature of cognitive load,
such that the impact of additional cognitive load can vary widely depending on the
level of cognitive load that is already intrinsically present within the given task. For
example, when the task intrinsically has a low cognitive load, addition cognitive
load may compound more slowly.
From the perspective of this research, the worked example effect or problem com-
pletion effect, as well as the split-attention, redundancy and modality effects are
particularly relevant, given that these are most influenced through the design of 2D /
3D digital environments, along with the selection of appropriate digital content.

3.2 Measuring Cognitive Load

As late as in the 1980s, cognitive load was treated as an assumed concept and was
not directly measured. However, in the past 40 years, several breakthroughs have been
achieved in directly measuring both cognitive load and its effects.

5
3.2.1 Indirect measures of cognitive load
Sweller and his colleagues [55] built computational models to measure quantitative
distinctions between candidate models that can be assumed to serve as proxies for
the cognitive load. Such kinds of indirect measures include the analysis of knowledge
acquisition or learning performance, and can often be useful. Nevertheless, these mea-
sures cannot be used for continuous measurement throughout the process of learning
[50, 56–58].

3.2.2 Direct measures of cognitive load

Even the more direct measures of cognitive load can be divided into further cate-
gories, i.e. those of subjective and objective measures. While subjective measures rely
on self-reported task difficulty and experienced cognitive load on specialized question-
naire forms, objective measures rely on either physiological data or other normatively
quantifiable performance metrics.
Examples of subjective measures include Paas’s subjective rating scale [59] and
the NASA TLX [60], which are both widely used methods. One benefit of employing
these approaches is the ability to utilize subjective rating scales across a more diverse,
often ecologically more valid range of scenarios (even when physiological measurement
data is difficult to obtain) and to obtain useful information about the experience of
the users. Conversely, such methods can sometimes be limited in their validity and
reliability due to the subjective nature of self-reported cognitive load and the low
resolution of the data that can be obtained through self-reporting [56, 61–63].
As a result, objective measures are often viewed as the gold standard for mea-
suring cognitive load. In this case, physiological measurement data can be recorded
continuously and at a high resolution, throughout the task, whereas non-physiological
metrics are still available and can be used as a more reliable alternative compared to
self-reported subjective measures. Examples of objective measures include:
• secondary task performance [64–66]
• functional magnetic resonance imaging [67, 68]
• electrodermal activity [69, 70]
• electroencephalography [71, 72]
• heart-rate measurement [73, 74]
• eye-tracking and pupillometry analysis [75–80]

3.2.3 Cognitive Pupillometry

Within the category of objective measures, we rely specifically on pupil dilation in
this study, which has long been identified as an independent index of effort [78].
Research connected to pupillometry goes back almost 60 years. Kahneman and
Beatty first identified pupil dilation as a direct correlate to the number of digits
that needed to be memorized in digit memorization tasks, thereby showing that an
increased burden non memory leads to an enlargement of pupil size [81]. Kahneman’s
[82] explanation of the pupillary response as a measure of “attentional capacity load”
remains relevant to this day, as numerous subsequent investigations have demonstrated

6
a clear association between pupil dilation and the demands imposed by executive load
or working memory load [83–85].
To better understand why pupil dilation increases with increasing task demands, it
is important to consider the underlying biological and cognitive processes. The pupil
exhibits size variations in reaction to three specific types of stimuli: it narrows when
exposed to bright light (pupil light response) and when focusing on nearby objects
(pupil near response ); and conversely, it expands when there is heightened cognitive
activity, such as increased arousal or mental effort (psychosensory pupil response)
triggered either by an external stimulus or spontaneously [86].
The process of pupil dilation is governed by the iris dilator muscle. This particular
muscle is regulated by the sympathetic nervous system, which is a component of the
autonomic nervous system responsible for functions such as arousal, wakefulness, and
the fight-or-flight response. The connection between pupil dilation and the sympa-
thetic nervous system clarifies why the pupil tends to be larger when an individual is
experiencing heightened arousal [87, 88]. The size of the human pupil typically ranges
from approximately 2 to 8 mm in diameter [87, 89].
In recent times, measuring pupil dilation has become comparatively straight-
forward. The availability of affordable eye trackers has made it feasible to obtain
sufficient temporal resolution and accuracy for detecting even minor alterations in
pupil diameter.

3.3 Cognitive Load in Virtual Spaces

As discussed earlier, there is a limit to the amount of information the brain can
process. Cognitive load theory suggests that if this limit is exceeded, performance will
be reduced and the mental strain will increase [47–50].
Aside from the many benefits of virtual reality, its use oftentimes requires active
engagement and presents users with an active and rich immersive experience, therefore
potentially leading to increased demands on cognitive processing. However, it can be
assumed that with careful design, such factors can be controlled even in virtual reality
spaces.
In recent years, many researchers have made efforts to measure the cognitive load
associated with learning, task-solving, and problem-solving in virtual and augmented
reality. Several measurements have shown that it is possible to reduce cognitive load
[54, 90–92], while others works have instead measured an increase in cognitive load in
such spaces [93]. Still other works have found no significant difference in cognitive load
when users were asked to carry out identical tasks in real life and in virtual reality
(e.g., [94]). It is worth noting that there are cases in which the answer to this question
is extremely important, for example, when it is essential to test how a real environment
or event will affect people’s subjective experience and objective performance prior to
building the environment or organizing the event [91, 94]. Such measurements are also
highly relevant to the world of education, within which online learning and remote
training have gained increasing traction in the past years.

7
4 Framework for the Experiments Conducted
In order to assess differences in the effectiveness of user workflows, as well as the cog-
nitive load they entail in 2D digital interfaces and different kinds of 3D environments,
we chose to develop a specific workflow and a set of experimental guidelines that could
be repeated in different environments.

4.1 Details of the workflow to be carried out

The workflow to be carried out by test subjects consisted of reading and / or viewing
learning materials pertaining to 4 different subtopics within the field of astron-
omy (“Universe”, “Planets”, “Satellites” and “Space Research”), and answering a
questionnaire with respect to each of the subtopics.
Each of the subtopics were introduced to the subjects through 3 different
documents – including PhD files, images, or YouTube videos.
The questionnaires corresponding to each of the subtopics consisted of true-or-false
questions, multiple choice questions and questions requiring short answers of one or
two words. Three examples of typical questions are:
• True or false?—Black holes can be observed based on the gravitational effects they
have on surrounding gases, dust and stars;
• What are the rings of Saturn made of (select all that apply)?—ice, rocks, space
debris, gases, asteroids, and/or moons.
• Why were Hubble’s mirrors polished at night?

4.2 2D setup
In the 2D case, we used a classical Google Sites page (https://sites.google.com/view/
2deyetracking-egyoldalas/f%C5%91oldal, accessed on 14 November, 2023), loaded into
a Chrome Browser, which included all of the learning materials serially embedded into
it, interleaved with the questionnaires (also in the form of embedded Google Forms
within the Google Sites page). Here, the documents pertaining to each of the four
topics and the associated questionnaire were embedded strictly in order; hence, users
could study 3 documents—PDF files, images or YouTube videos—and then fill out
the associated questionnaire for each of the topics, before proceeding to the next topic
(Figure 1).

4.3 3D setup
In the 3D case, the same documents and questionnaires were laid out in different
3D spaces within the MaxWhere platform (https://maxwhere.com) – a desktop 3D
platform that allows for 3D spaces to be created with freely arranged display panels
(so-called “smartboards” in MaxWhere jargon). Importantly, such smartboards can
contain any kind of document that a desktop browser could normally display (e.g.,
webpages, PDF files, images, audio-video files).
Whereas in the 2D case, the learning materials were serially embeeded into a Google
form and users had to scroll up and down to view different documents and to access

8
Fig. 1 Layout and design of the 2D webpage using which the 2D scenario experiments were con-
ducted.

the questionnaires, in 3D, free navigation was allowed and expected. Two examples of
how documents were laid out in 3D can be seen on Figures 2 and 3.
It is important to note that the exact same documents and questionnaires which
appeared embedded into the Google Sites page in the 2D case were presented to users
in the 3D case, with no additional content in either case. The only difference was
that the content appeared serially, from top to bottom in the 2D case, whereas it was
presented in a spatial layout in the 3D case. The relationship between the 2D and 3D
cases is shown in Figure 4).

4.4 Measurement data collected

The results of the questionnaires were compared in terms of percentage of questions
answered correctly and the time taken to answer all of the questionnaires. Note that
in the 3D case, time spent with navigation was discounted from the latter metric, so
that the actual time spent on the perusal of the content and the filling out of the
questionnaires could be compared directly.
In the meantime, eye gaze and pupil dilation data was recorded to assess
test subjects’ focus of attention and cognitive load experienced. The latter
measurements were obtained using the EyeTribe eye tracker and accompa-
nying software (https://theeyetribe.com/dev.theeyetribe.com/dev.theeyetribe.com/
general/index.html, accessed on 14 November, 2023).
In addition, the frequency of certain interaction patterns was recorded, including
when:
• Users viewed content on a group of smartboards simultaneously from some distance
(“holistic overview mode”)

9
Fig. 2 Spatial arrangement of 2D content in a 3D virtual space.

Fig. 3 Spatial arrangement of 2D content in a second 3D virtual space.

• Users alternated focus between different smartboards while remaining in a sta-

tionary position but frequently changing their camera orientation (“alternating
mode”);
Finally, in a post-experiment questionnaire, subjects were asked for demographic
data, questions about their digital leisure habits, and questions about subjective
assessments about and sense of immersion in the virtual space (in the 3D case). Sub-
jects were also asked to rate the difficulty of the 4 different subtopics. For those who
completed the tests on the two-dimensional interface, the final questionnaire did not
include questions on the 3D space.

4.5 Procedure
Prior to the experiments, written consent was obtained from all participants to use
the collected data as follows. All data collected was anonymized and used solely for

10
Fig. 4 This figure shows by example that the same documents and questionnaires were used in both
the 3D case (left-hand side) and in the 2D case (right-hand side). No materials/questionnaires were
added to or removed from the experiment in either case. Here, we can see that the PDF document
on the topic of the “Universe” appears on the tilted panel at the back in the 3D case as well as on
the upper half of this specific view of the 2D case. Whereas in the 2D case, the questionnaire appears
directly below the learning material, in the 3D space, it can be found on the left-hand side of the
screenshot.

the purpose of the statistical analyses reported in this paper. All of the experiments
were conducted in accordance with the ethical principles laid out in the Declaration
of Helsinki.
At the start of the session, test subjects carrying out the required task in 3D
indicated whether they were familiar with the MaxWhere software and, if so, approx-
imately how much time they had spent using the software. Participants who were
not familiar with the software spent approximately 30 minutes learning about it and
acquiring basic user skills. Basic knowledge includes confident navigation in the soft-
ware, activating and deactivating the display panels and interacting with the content
that is displayed on them. Mastery of confident use of the software was assessed by
the test administrators.
Following this, the participants were seated in a quiet room in front of a laptop
computer. The room was dimly lit without any direct light source so as not to introduce
unwanted artifacts into the eye tracking data. For each test subject, the eye-tracker
was calibrated prior to the experiment.
Following the calibration, the test administrator explained the task to be carried
out. The order in which the questionnaires were filled out, with the selection of the
first and the last questionnaire, was left up to the participants (in the 2D case, this was
less of an issue, although no strict order was enforced in the 2D case either, regardless
of the fact that the documents on the subtopics and the corresponding questionnaires
followed each other in a serial order).

5 Preliminary measurement results

In a first experiment, we compared measurement data obtained from the 2D scenario
and one particular 3D space, as reported in [17].
The space in which the experiment was carried out was a spaceship-themed
environment, as shown on Figure 5.

11
Fig. 5 Layout and design of the 3D space in which the first experiment was conducted, as reported
in [17]

5.1 Test subjects

In the case of the spaceship-themed VR space, a total of 14 test subjects participated
in the experiment, but video data were corrupted for one person. The results from a
further four subjects had to be discarded due to there being breaks in pupil dilation
measurements midway during the experiment. The remaining nine subjects (three
women, six men) were aged between 17–55 years, with a mean age of 32.5 years (SD:
14.15).
A total of seven test subjects (four women, three men) participated in the 2D
measurement, and were aged between 25–33 years, with a mean age of 27.83 (SD:
2.93).
The mean age for all participants was 30.84 (11.39) years. All participants were neu-
rotypical Hungarian native speakers who participated in the experiment on a voluntary
basis. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to the experiment,
which was carried out based on and in accordance with the institutional endorse-
ment of the authors’ affiliation. All of the data collected during the experiment was
anonymized and used exclusively as input to the statistical analyses detailed in later
parts of this paper.

5.2 Preliminary results

When comparing results from the 2D scenario and this 3D scenario, the data showed
that the correctness of answers provided by subjects in the 2D and 3D case was very
similar, with no statistically significant differences. At the same time, within the topic
of Satellites, subjects completed the questionnaire significantly faster in 3D than in 2D
(while there was no significant difference in completion times within the other topics).
These results failed to confirm, in a general sense, the hypothesis that subjects would

12
perform better in 3D than in 2D (save for the completion time in the case of the
Satellites topic)—although they certainly did not perform worse.
The fact that the 3D environment included a high volume of visual clutter led us
to the conclusion that reducing this clutter — perhaps by using a more minimalistic
3D space with less need for navigation (other than rotation of view) — could lead to
higher yields in performance in the 3D case.
Regarding subjective evaluations of difficulty and pupil diameter measurements,
it was observed that there was no correlation between the two. This was a surprising
result. Leaving aside the possiblity that the tasks were actually more difficult when
the subjects perceived them to be easier, this counter-intuitive finding may have also
been due to the amount of visual clutter, and thus, a degree of excitement experienced
by the test subjects.

5.3 Motivations behind follow-up study

Based on these points, and our previous experience in designing 3D spaces with custom
layouts (see also [12]), we set ourselves the goal of performing the same experiment
using a different VR space and a larger number of test subjects. Our goal was to use
a second virtual space in the follow-up study that would more adequately address the
following principles:
• The need for navigation and the amount of visual clutter should be limited in order
to lower cognitive load
• In the case of virtual spaces containing many spatial elements and accessories, the
pupil may be particularly wide as a result of heightened arousal
• The size of the documents should indicate their importance
• The arrangement of documents into clusters should allow the user to conclude that
the content placed there form a content unit
• By creating the same layout for every subtopic, such that the content types are
the same in corresponding locations in each case (with only the particular topic
differing), users should be able to understand semantic relationships more quickly
and at a lower cognitive load
• The digital content inside the virtual space should be displayed vertically or on only
minimally tilted panels, as users have been shown to prefer horizontal surfaces for
documents to a lesser extent [12].
Thus, for our follow-up study reported in later parts of this paper, we opted for a
virtual space in which there were no unnecessary disruptors, which was much smaller,
in which less navigation was needed, and the displays holding the content were also
more purposefully organized.

6 Follow-up Experiment in a Second VR

Environment
Our second experiment was carried out using the same 2D scenario (albeit with more
test subjects) and in a second 3D VR space which contained a circular arrangement
of content clusters (Figure 6).

13
Fig. 6 Exterior of the 3D space in which the 3D case of the second experiment was conducted.

In the 3D virtual space, the contents were placed on a total of 21 display panels.
The questionnaires were placed in the middle of each cluster, above them was the
title slide, and to the right, left and bottom were the documents that contained the
answers to the questions contained in the questionnaires.

6.1 Subjects
A total of 40 test subjects participated in the research, with an average age of 26.57
(SD: 6.96), 20 women and 20 men.
All of the participants were Hungarian native speakers and individuals with neu-
rotypical development, who participated in the experiment on a voluntary basis.
Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to the experiment, which
was carried out based on and in accordance with the institutional endorsement of the
authors’ affiliation. All of the data collected during the experiment was anonymized
and used exclusively as input to the statistical analyses detailed in later parts of this
paper.
In the research, the participants were divided into two groups. 20 people (14 women,
6 men), average age of 27.35 (SD: 6.72) participated in the measurement in 3D virtual
space. 5 out of the 20 subjects wore glasses during the experiment. 20 people (14 men,
6 women) participated in the 2D measurement, average age of 25.8 (7.29), 2 out of
them wore glasses during the measurement.

14
6.2 Methods
The methods employed in the second experiment were the same as in the first exper-
iment, as described earlier in Section 4 on the framework used for our experiments.
In particular, the subjects participating in the 2D and 3D also measurement had to
provide feedback on which subtopic they found to be the most difficult in retrospect, as
well as some demographic data (gender, age, highest education). In addition to the data
listed above, the participants in the 3D measurement had to fill out a series of questions
related to their navigation experiences, as well as an IPQ questionnaire consisting of
14 questions, in which they had to evaluate their General Presence, Spatial Presence,
Involvement, and Experienced Realism experiences on a 7-point Likert scale.

6.3 Key Hypotheses

Prior to conducting our experiment, we formulated the following key hypotheses:
1. Subjective assessments of lower cognitive load, along with lower pupil dilation would
characterize the 3D case as opposed to the 2D case;
2. Questionnaires would generally be filled out faster and with more correct answers
in 3D compared to 2D.
3. Compared to the previous measurement between the two 3D groups, the 2nd group
performed with lower pupil dilatation than the previous 3D group;
4. Subjective assessments, by the test subjects, of the difficulty of questionnaires would
correlate with pupil dilation and correctness of answers;
5. Lower cognitive load correlates with a faster completion time.

7 Results
7.1 Score-based performance in 2D and 3D
The result of the Mann-Whitney test revealed no statistical difference in the final
scores of the four tasks between the 3D (M=22.387, SD=2.167) and 2D (M=22.125,
SD=1.879) groups.

7.2 Completion times in 2D and 3D

The Independent samples t-test showed no statistical difference in the completion
times of the four tasks between the 3D (M=36.7, SD=6.959) and 2D (M=37.8,
SD=9.059) groups.

7.3 Pupil dilation between 2D and 3D

The group descriptives and differences between the two groups are displayed in Table 1
and in Figure 7. An Independent samples t-test revealed that the group who performed
the measurement in 2D had significantly larger pupil dilation (M=22.204, SD=3.971)
than the 3D group (M=19.464, SD=2.902), (t(34.792)=-2.492, p < 0.018), (Cohen’s
d=0.788).

15
 Table 1 Descriptives of the pupil dilation data of the 2D and 3D groups.

Group N Mean SD SE Coefficient of variation

Pupil Dilatation 3D 20 19.464 2.902 0.649 0.149
2D 20 22.204 3.971 0.888 0.179

Fig. 7 Pupil diameter sizes grouped by tasks.

Table 2 Descriptives of the pupil dilation data of the previous 3D and current 3D
(referred to as “3D sublimus” group in the table) groups.

Group N Mean SD SE Coefficient of variation

PupilTasks 3D sublimus 20 19.464 2.902 0.649 0.149
3D spaceship 9 26.203 4.371 1.457 0.167

The results showed that the group who filled out the questionnaire in the 3D space
(N=20) had smaller pupil dilation with the mean rank of this group being 11.30, while
the group who used the Spaceship 3D space for the same task (N=9) had a mean
rank of 22.23. A Mann-Whitney test revealed that this difference was statistically
significant, U=16, p < 0.001, r=0.65 (Table 2 and Figure 8).
The Spearman coefficient has not shown a correlation between the difficulty of the
questionnaires and pupil dilation, and no correlation has been shown between pupil
dilation and completion time either.

16
Fig. 8 Comparison of the pupil diameter size between the previous 3D research results and the
current ones (referred to as the “3D sublimus” case).

8 Discussion
In this research, 40 people were examined, divided into 2 groups (3D experimental,
2D control). One group of 20 people had to fill out four main questionnaires on a
classic 2D dimensional online learning interface, the answers to the questions were
found in the related documents. The other group of 20 people had to perform the
same tasks in a 3D virtual space, with the difference that the related content did not
follow one another linearly, as on the 2D website, but rather spread out around the
questionnaires spatially. Among the cognitive load effects mentioned in the theoretical
introduction, the split-attention and the modality effect are extremely common in
the case of online teaching materials, since teachers regularly transmit information in
the form of documents that are related in content but separate from each other. The
aim of the research was to create a virtual environment that can reduce the cognitive
load for the students, as well as soften the impact of these two effects. The results of
pupillometry measurements showed a significant difference between the two groups.
Therefore, it can be said that using the results of prior research, it was possible to
create a virtual space that, during task solving (which affects executive functions such
as switching and updating, as well as planning and strategy), reduced the cognitive
load on the people performing tasks in the 3D desktop virtual environment.
In the case of the created space, although the information came from several modal-
ities and several documents, the possibilities of VR still allowed their interpretation
and overview as one element, one unit or block. During the measurements, it was

17
shown that the subjects used an intermediate view between the enlarged view of indi-
vidual documents and the navigation, when the blocks, or certain elements within a
block, appeared together in front of the user. Thus, users’ behavior seemed to point
to the fact that there was a need for an overview type mode of interaction that can
be observed in real life too. Since the created virtual space lacked any specific any
specific kinds of decorative elements, it was assumed that users could focus on the
content and the solution of the task. Even so, there was no significant difference in
completion time and overall score between the two groups.
Although the group working in 3D produced comparable results at a lower cognitive
load, further studies are needed to establish what results this would show in the case
of more of subjects. In addition, the mixing of modalities can be observed, in the case
of videos in the virtual space. While the questionnaire window is active in front of
users, they are able to respond in real-time to the questions based on what was said
in the previously started video, by just hearing the information. This can also be done
easily on 2D interfaces, but in 3D such interactions seem especially natural, as users
are given the subjective impression that they just need to “turn their heads” to focus
on a different display panel.
Due to the differences between the two 3D spaces (the second one being a less
decorative space with less visual disruptors), as well as the significant differences in
pupil dilation measurements, we conclude that the disruptors accentuated the cog-
nitive load-increasing effect of the split attention effect. Further measurements are
necessary in order to determine whether this negative influence of disruptors carries
over to scenarios where long-term memorization is required and e.g. the principles of
the memory palace technique could come into play. In order to investigate this, we
plan to use not only eye-tracking but also to carry out EEG measurements.
These results allow us to conclude that desktop VR environments can serve as a
good alternative to 2D interfaces in distance learning, and it is worth considering their
introduction into the wider public education system.

9 Conclusion
The presented study involving 40 participants, divided into 3D experimental and 2D
control groups, aimed to investigate the impact of virtual environments on cognitive
load during task solving. The 3D group, engaging in tasks within a spatially distributed
virtual space, exhibited a significant reduction in cognitive load compared to the 2D
group, as indicated by pupillometry measurements. The designed 3D environment,
which presented information through various modalities and documents, allowed for
an integrated interpretation, thereby enhancing task-solving efficiency. Subjects often
adopted an alternating view between documents, balancing document details and spa-
tial navigation and thus demonstrating the usefulness of viewpoints supporting the
ability to consider multiple documents at the same time, in much the same way as in
the real physical world. While the 3D group consistently demonstrated better results,
further studies with a larger subject pool are necessary for comprehensive validation.
Comparing a complex 3D environment with a simplified version in this study
also highlighted the adverse impacts of disruptors on cognitive load, particularly in

18
increasing the split-attention effect. Future research, including eye-tracking and EEG
measurements, is planned to explore the potential long-term benefits of disruptors and
their impact on memorization. These findings suggest that well-designed desktop VR
environments can offer a promising alternative for distance work and learning, with the
potential for enhanced cognitive outcomes. Results encourage the consideration and
implementation of desktop VR in broader professional and educational communities,
emphasizing its potential as a future direction for improved task-solving experiences.
Acknowledgments. The research presented in this paper was supported by the
Hungarian Research Network (HUN-REN), and was carried out within the HUN-REN
Cognitive Mapping of Decision Support Systems research group.

Declarations
• Funding: This research received no external funding.
• Conflict of interest/Competing interests (check journal-specific guidelines for which
heading to use): Not applicable.
• Ethics approval: The study was conducted in accordance with the Declara-
tion of Helsinki, and ethical approval was granted by the Doctoral School of
Multidisciplinary Engineering Sciences of Széchenyi István University.
• Consent to participate: Each participant read and accepted the declaration of
consent before the measurements.
• Consent for publication: Each participant read and accepted the declaration of con-
sent before the measurements and accepted that the data provided can be used and
published in scientific form
• Availability of data and materials: The datasets generated through these experi-
ments and analyzed in the study are available upon request via the following link:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NHJLFX0CGaGIR5J7brNDQCjD5h1HAi9S/
view?usp=sharing
• Code availability: Not applicable.
• Authors’ contributions: Conceptualization, A.S. and Á.B.C.; Methodology, A.S.;
Software, Á.B.C.; Validation, A.S. and Á.B.C.; Writing—original draft preparation,
A.S. and Á.B.C.; Writing—review and editing, A.S. and Á.B.C. All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

References
[1] Radianti, J., Majchrzak, T.A., Fromm, J., Wohlgenannt, I.: A systematic review
of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements,
lessons learned, and research agenda. Computers and Education 147, 103778
(2020) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778

[2] Checa, D., Bustillo, A.: A review of immersive virtual reality serious games to
enhance learning and training. Multimedia Tools and Applications 79, 5501–5527
(2020) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-019-08348-9

19
 [3] Tham, J., Duin, A.H., Gee, L., Ernst, N., Abdelqader, B., McGrath, M.: Under-
standing virtual reality: Presence, embodiment, and professional practice. IEEE
Transactions on Professional Communication 61(2), 178–195 (2018) https://doi.
org/10.1109/TPC.2018.2804238

[4] Javaid, M., Haleem, A.: Virtual reality applications toward medical field. Clinical
Epidemiology and Global Health 8(2), 600–605 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.cegh.2019.12.010

[5] Loureiro, S.M.C., Guerreiro, J., Eloy, S., Langaro, D., Panchapakesan, P.: Under-
standing the use of virtual reality in marketing: A text mining-based review.
Journal of Business Research 100, 514–530 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jbusres.2018.10.055

[6] Coban, M., Bolat, Y.I., Goksu, I.: The potential of immersive virtual reality
to enhance learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review 36, 100452
(2022) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100452

[7] Makransky, G., Petersen, G.B.: The cognitive affective model of immersive learn-
ing (camil): A theoretical research-based model of learning in immersive virtual
reality. Educational Psychology Review, 1–22 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10648-020-09586-2

[8] Huang, C.L., Luo, Y.F., Yang, S.C., Lu, C.M., Chen, A.-S.: Influence of students’
learning style, sense of presence, and cognitive load on learning outcomes in an
immersive virtual reality learning environment. Journal of Educational Comput-
ing Research 58(3), 596–615 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331198674

[9] Hamilton, D., McKechnie, J., Edgerton, E., Wilson, C.: Immersive virtual reality
as a pedagogical tool in education: a systematic literature review of quantitative
learning outcomes and experimental design. Journal of Computers in Education
8(1), 1–32 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00169-2

[10] Wenk, N., Penalver-Andres, J., Buetler, K., Nef, T., Müri, R.M., Marchal-Crespo,
L.: Effect of immersive visualization technologies on cognitive load, motivation,
usability, and embodiment. Virtual Reality 27(1), 307–331 (2023) https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10055-021-00565-8

[11] Makransky, G., Borre-Gude, S., Mayer, R.E.: Motivational and cognitive benefits
of training in immersive virtual reality based on multiple assessments. Journal of
Computer Assisted Learning 35(6), 691–707 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.
12375

[12] Sudár, A., Csapó, Á.B.: Elicitation of content layout preferences in virtual 3d
spaces based on a free layout creation task. Electronics 12(9), 2078 (2023) https:
//doi.org/10.3390/electronics12092078

20
[13] Daeijavad, P., Maurer, F.: Layouts of 3d data visualizations small multiples
around users in immersive environments. In: 2022 IEEE International Sympo-
sium on Mixed and Augmented Reality Adjunct (ISMAR-Adjunct), pp. 258–261
(2022). https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR-Adjunct57072.2022.00057 . IEEE

[14] Luo, W., Lehmann, A., Widengren, H., Dachselt, R.: Where should we put it? lay-
out and placement strategies of documents in augmented reality for collaborative
sensemaking. In: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems, pp. 1–16 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3501946

[15] Dozio, N., Marcolin, F., Scurati, G.W., Ulrich, L., Nonis, F., Vezzetti, E., Mar-
socci, G., La Rosa, A., Ferrise, F.: A design methodology for affective virtual
reality. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 162, 102791 (2022)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2022.102791

[16] Glaser, N., Schmidt, M.: Systematic literature review of virtual reality interven-
tion design patterns for individuals with autism spectrum disorders. International
Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 38(8), 753–788 (2022) https://doi.org/
10.1080/10447318.2021.1970433

[17] Sudár, A., Csapó, Á.B.: Descriptive markers for the cognitive profiling of
desktop 3d spaces. Electronics 12(2), 448 (2023) https://doi.org/10.3390/
electronics12020448

[18] Berki, B.: Experiencing the sense of presence within an educational desktop vir-
tual reality. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica 17(2), 255–265 (2020) https://doi.org/
10.12700/APH.17.2.2020.2.14

[19] Pallavicini, F., Pepe, A., Minissi, M.E.: Gaming in virtual reality: What changes
in terms of usability, emotional response and sense of presence compared to non-
immersive video games? Simulation & Gaming 50(2), 136–159 (2019) https://
doi.org/10.1177/1046878119831420

[20] Horváth, I., Sudár, A.: Factors contributing to the enhanced performance of the
maxwhere 3d vr platform in the distribution of digital information. Acta Poly-
technica Hungarica 15(3), 149–173 (2018) https://doi.org/10.12700/APH.15.3.
2018.3.9

[21] Horváth, I.: Maxwhere 3d capabilities contributing to the enhanced efficiency of

the trello 2d management software. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica 16(6), 55–71
(2019) https://doi.org/10.12700/APH.16.6.2019.6.5

[22] Berki, B.: 2d advertising in 3d virtual spaces. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica 15(3),
175–190 (2018) https://doi.org/10.12700/APH.15.3.2018.3.10

[23] Horváth, I.: Behaviors and capabilities of generation ce students in 3d vr. In: 2019

21
 10th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Infocommunications (CogIn-
foCom), pp. 491–494 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/CogInfoCom47531.2019.
9089988 . IEEE

[24] Legge, E.L., Madan, C.R., Ng, E.T., Caplan, J.B.: Building a memory palace
in minutes: Equivalent memory performance using virtual versus conventional
environments with the method of loci. Acta psychologica 141(3), 380–390 (2012)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.09.002

[25] Fassbender, E., Heiden, W.: The virtual memory palace. Journal of Computa-
tional Information Systems 2(1), 457–464 (2006)

[26] Csapó, Á.B., Horvath, I., Galambos, P., Baranyi, P.: Vr as a medium of communi-
cation: from memory palaces to comprehensive memory management. In: 2018 9th
IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Infocommunications (CogInfoCom),
pp. 000389–000394 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/CogInfoCom.2018.8639896 .
IEEE

[27] Ragan, E.D., Sowndararajan, A., Kopper, R., Bowman, D.A.: The effects of
higher levels of immersion on procedure memorization performance and implica-
tions for educational virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual
Environments 19(6), 527–543 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1162/pres a 00016

[28] Srivastava, P., Rimzhim, A., Vijay, P., Singh, S., Chandra, S.: Desktop vr is better
than non-ambulatory hmd vr for spatial learning. Frontiers in Robotics and AI
6, 50 (2019) https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2019.00050

[29] Lee, E.A.-L., Wong, K.W.: Learning with desktop virtual reality: Low spatial
ability learners are more positively affected. Computers and Education 79, 49–58
(2014) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.07.010

[30] Sudár, A., Csapó, Á.: Interaction patterns of spatial navigation and smart-
board use in vr workspaces. In: Accentuated Innovations in Cognitive Info-
Communication, pp. 149–166. Springer, ??? (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-3-031-10956-0 7

[31] Sudár, A., Csapó, A.: An mcmc-based method for clustering display panels with
the goal of generating navigation paths in 3d. In: Proceedings of the 2021 12th
IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Infocommunications (CogInfoCom),
Online, pp. 23–25 (2021)

[32] Setti, T., Csapo, A.B.: A canonical set of operations for editing dashboard layouts
in virtual reality. Frontiers in Computer Science 3, 659600 (2021) https://doi.
org/10.3389/fcomp.2021.659600

[33] Setti, T., Csapó, Á.B.: Quantifying the effectiveness of project-based editing
operations in virtual reality. In: 2022 1st IEEE International Conference on

22
 Cognitive Aspects of Virtual Reality (CVR), pp. 000049–000054 (2022). https:
//doi.org/10.1109/CVR55417.2022.9967642 . IEEE

[34] Setti, T., Csapó, Á.B.: Outlines of a graph-tensor based adaptive associative
search model for internet of digital reality applications. In: 2022 IEEE 1st Interna-
tional Conference on Internet of Digital Reality (IoD), pp. 000049–000054 (2022).
https://doi.org/10.1109/IoD55468.2022.9987234 . IEEE

[35] Rojas-Sánchez, M.A., Palos-Sánchez, P.R., Folgado-Fernández, J.A.: Systematic

literature review and bibliometric analysis on virtual reality and education. Edu-
cation and Information Technologies 28(1), 155–192 (2023) https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10639-022-11167-5

[36] Kavanagh, S., Luxton-Reilly, A., Wuensche, B., Plimmer, B.: A systematic review
of virtual reality in education. Themes in Science and Technology Education
10(2), 85–119 (2017)

[37] Freina, L., Ott, M.: A literature review on immersive virtual reality in educa-
tion: state of the art and perspectives. In: The International Scientific Conference
Elearning and Software for Education, vol. 1, pp. 10–1007 (2015)

[38] Wu, B., Yu, X., Gu, X.: Effectiveness of immersive virtual reality using head-
mounted displays on learning performance: A meta-analysis. British Journal of
Educational Technology 51(6), 1991–2005 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.
13023

[39] Sipilä, J.: Benefits and challenges of adopting virtual reality in primary education.
Oulu University Library, 21 (2020)

[40] Sulisworo, D., Erviana, V.Y., Robiin, B., Sepriansyah, Y., Soleh, A., et al.: The
feasibility of enhancing environmental awareness using virtual reality 3d in the
primary education. Education Research International 2022 (2022) https://doi.
org/10.1155/2022/4811544

[41] Nersesian, E., Spryszynski, A., Lee, M.J.: Integration of virtual reality in sec-
ondary stem education. In: 2019 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference
(ISEC), pp. 83–90 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/ISECon.2019.8882070 . IEEE

[42] Bogusevschi, D., Muntean, C., Muntean, G.-M.: Teaching and learning physics
using 3d virtual learning environment: A case study of combined virtual reality
and virtual laboratory in secondary school. Journal of Computers in Mathematics
and Science Teaching 39(1), 5–18 (2020)

[43] Christopoulos, A., Mystakidis, S., Cachafeiro, E., Laakso, M.-J.: Escaping the
cell: virtual reality escape rooms in biology education. Behaviour & Information
Technology, 1–18 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2079560

23
[44] Merchant, Z., Goetz, E.T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., Davis, T.J.:
Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes
in k-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis. Computers and education 70,
29–40 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033

[45] Marks, B., Thomas, J.: Adoption of virtual reality technology in higher education:
An evaluation of five teaching semesters in a purpose-designed laboratory. Edu-
cation and information technologies 27(1), 1287–1305 (2022) https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10639-021-10653-6

[46] Lin, T.-J., Lan, Y.-J.: Language learning in virtual reality environments: Past,
present, and future. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 18(4), 486–497
(2015)

[47] Sweller, J., Merriënboer, J.J., Paas, F.: Cognitive architecture and instructional
design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review 31, 261–292 (2019) https:
//doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5

[48] Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J.J., Paas, F.G.: Cognitive architecture and instruc-
tional design. Educational psychology review, 251–296 (1998) https://doi.org/10.
1023/A:1022193728205

[49] Sweller, J.: Chapter two - cognitive load theory. Psychology of Learning
and Motivation, vol. 55, pp. 37–76. Academic Press (2011). https://doi.org/
10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00002-8 . https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/B9780123876911000028

[50] Plass, J.L., Moreno, R., Brünken, R.: Cognitive load theory (2010) https://doi.
org/10.1017/CBO9780511844744

[51] Cowan, N.: Working Memory Capacity. Psychology press, ??? (2012). https://
doi.org/10.4324/9780203342398

[52] Turner, M.L., Engle, R.W.: Is working memory capacity task dependent? Jour-
nal of memory and language 28(2), 127–154 (1989) https://doi.org/10.1016/
0749-596X(89)90040-5

[53] Unsworth, N., Engle, R.W.: The nature of individual differences in working
memory capacity: active maintenance in primary memory and controlled search
from secondary memory. Psychological review 114(1), 104–132 (2007) https:
//doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.1.104

[54] Thees, M., Kapp, S., Strzys, M.P., Beil, F., Lukowicz, P., Kuhn, J.: Effects of
augmented reality on learning and cognitive load in university physics laboratory
courses. Computers in Human Behavior 108, 106316 (2020) https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.chb.2020.106316

24
[55] Sweller, J.: Measuring cognitive load. Perspectives on medical education 7, 1–2
(2018) https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-017-0395-4

[56] Brunken, R., Plass, J.L., Leutner, D.: Direct measurement of cognitive load in
multimedia learning. Educational psychologist 38(1), 53–61 (2003) https://doi.
org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801 7

[57] Brünken, R.E., Plass, J.L., Moreno, R.E.: Current issues and open questions in
cognitive load research. (2010) https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511844744.014

[58] Paas, F., Renkl, A., Sweller, J.: Cognitive load theory and instructional design:
Recent developments. Educational psychologist 38(1), 1–4 (2003) https://doi.
org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801 1

[59] Paas, F.G.: Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in
statistics: a cognitive-load approach. Journal of educational psychology 84(4),
429 (1992) https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429

[60] Hart, S.G., Staveland, L.E.: Development of nasa-tlx (task load index): Results
of empirical and theoretical research. In: Hancock, P.A., Meshkati, N. (eds.)
Human Mental Workload. Advances in Psychology, vol. 52, pp. 139–183. North-
Holland, ??? (1988). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9 . https://
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166411508623869

[61] Anmarkrud, Ø., Andresen, A., Bråten, I.: Cognitive load and working memory in
multimedia learning: Conceptual and measurement issues. Educational Psychol-
ogist 54(2), 61–83 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.15544848

[62] Van Gog, T., Kirschner, F., Kester, L., Paas, F.: Timing and frequency of mental
effort measurement: Evidence in favour of repeated measures. Applied cognitive
psychology 26(6), 833–839 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2883

[63] Cierniak, G., Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P.: Explaining the split-attention effect: Is the
reduction of extraneous cognitive load accompanied by an increase in germane
cognitive load? Computers in Human Behavior 25(2), 315–324 (2009) https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.020

[64] Brünken, R., Plass, J.L., Leutner, D.: Assessment of cognitive load in mul-
timedia learning with dual-task methodology: Auditory load and modality
effects. Instructional Science, 115–132 (2004) https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.
0000021812.96911.c5

[65] DeLeeuw, K.E., Mayer, R.E.: A comparison of three measures of cognitive load:
Evidence for separable measures of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load.
Journal of educational psychology 100(1), 223 (2008) https://doi.org/10.1037/
0022-0663.100.1.223

25
[66] Park, B., Knörzer, L., Plass, J.L., Brünken, R.: Emotional design and positive
emotions in multimedia learning: An eyetracking study on the use of anthropo-
morphisms. Computers and Education 86, 30–42 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.compedu.2015.02.016

[67] Van Dillen, L.F., Heslenfeld, D.J., Koole, S.L.: Tuning down the emotional brain:
an fmri study of the effects of cognitive load on the processing of affective images.
Neuroimage 45(4), 1212–1219 (2009) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.
01.016

[68] Whelan, R.R.: Neuroimaging of cognitive load in instructional multimedia. Edu-

cational Research Review 2(1), 1–12 (2007) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.
2006.11.001

[69] Buchwald, M., Kupiński, S., Bykowski, A., Marcinkowska, J., Ratajczyk, D.,
Jukiewicz, M.: Electrodermal activity as a measure of cognitive load: A
methodological approach. In: 2019 Signal Processing: Algorithms, Architectures,
Arrangements, and Applications (SPA), pp. 175–179 (2019). https://doi.org/10.
23919/SPA.2019.8936745 . IEEE

[70] Li, P., Li, Y., Yao, Y., Wu, C., Nie, B., Li, S.E.: Sensitivity of electrodermal
activity features for driver arousal measurement in cognitive load: the application
in automated driving systems. IEEE transactions on intelligent transportation
systems 23(9), 14954–14967 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2021.3135266

[71] Anderson, E.W., Potter, K.C., Matzen, L.E., Shepherd, J.F., Preston, G.A., Silva,
C.T.: A user study of visualization effectiveness using eeg and cognitive load. In:
Computer Graphics Forum, vol. 30, pp. 791–800 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1467-8659.2011.01928.x . Wiley Online Library

[72] Friedman, N., Fekete, T., Gal, K., Shriki, O.: Eeg-based prediction of cognitive
load in intelligence tests. Frontiers in human neuroscience 13, 191 (2019) https:
//doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2019.00191

[73] Solhjoo, S., Haigney, M.C., McBee, E., Merrienboer, J.J., Schuwirth, L., Artino,
A.R., Battista, A., Ratcliffe, T.A., Lee, H.D., Durning, S.J.: Heart rate and heart
rate variability correlate with clinical reasoning performance and self-reported
measures of cognitive load. Scientific reports 9(1), 1–9 (2019) https://doi.org/10.
1038/s41598-019-50280-3

[74] Vanneste, P., Raes, A., Morton, J., Bombeke, K., Van Acker, B.B., Larmuseau,
C., Depaepe, F., Noortgate, W.: Towards measuring cognitive load through mul-
timodal physiological data. Cognition, Technology & Work 23, 567–585 (2021)
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-020-00641-0

[75] Joseph, A.W., Murugesh, R.: Potential eye tracking metrics and indicators to
measure cognitive load in human-computer interaction research. J. Sci. Res 64(1),

26
 168–175 (2020) https://doi.org/10.37398/JSR.2020.640137

[76] Zagermann, J., Pfeil, U., Reiterer, H.: Measuring cognitive load using eye tracking
technology in visual computing. In: Proceedings of the Sixth Workshop on Beyond
Time and Errors on Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization. BELIV ’16, pp.
78–85. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2016). https:
//doi.org/10.1145/2993901.2993908 . https://doi.org/10.1145/2993901.2993908

[77] Gavas, R., Chatterjee, D., Sinha, A.: Estimation of cognitive load based on the
pupil size dilation. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and
Cybernetics (SMC), pp. 1499–1504 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/SMC.2017.
8122826 . IEEE

[78] Wel, P., Van Steenbergen, H.: Pupil dilation as an index of effort in cognitive
control tasks: A review. Psychonomic bulletin & review 25, 2005–2015 (2018)
https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-018-1432-y

[79] Sibley, C., Coyne, J., Baldwin, C.: Pupil dilation as an index of learning. In:
Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting,
vol. 55, pp. 237–241 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181311551049 . SAGE
Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA

[80] Perkhofer, L., Lehner, O.: Using gaze behavior to measure cognitive load. In:
Information Systems and Neuroscience: NeuroIS Retreat 2018, pp. 73–83 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01087-4 9 . Springer

[81] Kahneman, D., Beatty, J.: Pupil diameter and load on memory. Science
154(3756), 1583–1585 (1966) https://doi.org/10.1126/science.154.3756.1583

[82] Kahneman, D.: Attention and Effort. Prentice-Hall, ??? (1973)

[83] Van Gerven, P.W., Paas, F., Van Merriënboer, J.J., Schmidt, H.G.: Memory load
and the cognitive pupillary response in aging. Psychophysiology 41(2), 167–174
(2004) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2003.00148.x

[84] Võ, M.L.-H., Jacobs, A.M., Kuchinke, L., Hofmann, M., Conrad, M., Schacht, A.,
Hutzler, F.: The coupling of emotion and cognition in the eye: Introducing the
pupil old/new effect. Psychophysiology 45(1), 130–140 (2008) https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00606.x

[85] Laeng, B., Sirois, S., Gredebäck, G.: Pupillometry: A window to the preconscious?
Perspectives on psychological science 7(1), 18–27 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1177/
1745691611427305

[86] Mathôt, S.: Pupillometry: Psychology, physiology, and function. Journal of

Cognition 1(1) (2018) https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.18

27
[87] Wang, C.-A., Munoz, D.P.: A circuit for pupil orienting responses: implications for
cognitive modulation of pupil size. Current opinion in neurobiology 33, 134–140
(2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2015.03.018

[88] Samuels, E.R., Szabadi, E.: Functional neuroanatomy of the noradrenergic locus
coeruleus: its roles in the regulation of arousal and autonomic function part i:
principles of functional organisation. Current neuropharmacology 6(3), 235–253
(2008)

[89] McDougal, D.H., Gamlin, P.D.R.: 1.26 - pupillary control pathways. In:
Masland, R.H., Albright, T.D., Albright, T.D., Masland, R.H., Dallos, P., Oer-
tel, D., Firestein, S., Beauchamp, G.K., Catherine Bushnell, M., Basbaum,
A.I., Kaas, J.H., Gardner, E.P. (eds.) The Senses: A Comprehensive Refer-
ence, pp. 521–536. Academic Press, New York (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/
B978-012370880-9.00282-6 . https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
B9780123708809002826

[90] Küçük, S., Kapakin, S., Göktaş, Y.: Learning anatomy via mobile augmented
reality: Effects on achievement and cognitive load. Anatomical sciences education
9(5), 411–421 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1603

[91] Frederiksen, J.G., Sørensen, S.M.D., Konge, L., Svendsen, M.B.S., Nobel-
Jørgensen, M., Bjerrum, F., Andersen, S.A.W.: Cognitive load and performance
in immersive virtual reality versus conventional virtual reality simulation train-
ing of laparoscopic surgery: a randomized trial. Surgical endoscopy 34, 1244–1252
(2020) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06887-8

[92] Lai, A.-F., Chen, C.-H., Lee, G.-Y.: An augmented reality-based learning
approach to enhancing students’ science reading performances from the perspec-
tive of the cognitive load theory. British Journal of Educational Technology 50(1),
232–247 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12716

[93] Andersen, S.A.W., Mikkelsen, P.T., Konge, L., Cayé-Thomasen, P., Sørensen,
M.S.: The effect of implementing cognitive load theory-based design principles
in virtual reality simulation training of surgical skills: a randomized con-
trolled trial. Advances in Simulation 1(1), 1–8 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1186/
s41077-016-0022-1

[94] Armougum, A., Orriols, E., Gaston-Bellegarde, A., Joie-La Marle, C., Piolino, P.:
Virtual reality: A new method to investigate cognitive load during navigation.
Journal of Environmental Psychology 65, 101338 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jenvp.2019.101338

28