Abstract
Designing cognitively accessible mathematics instruction requires ensuring that learners can equitably process, understand, and apply complex mathematical ideas. This study examines students’ cognitive load when solving geometric integral problems by analyzing intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load within the framework of Cognitive Load Theory. Using a descriptive qualitative approach, data were collected from 144 university students in mathematics-related programs at a public university in Indonesia through think-aloud protocols, written solutions, and classroom observations. The data were analyzed using NVivo-assisted thematic coding and supported by radar visualizations to strengthen analytical trustworthiness. The findings indicate that intrinsic load constituted the dominant cognitive burden, primarily arising from symbolic-visual confusion and visual-spatial difficulties when students attempted to coordinate algebraic expressions with geometric representations. Extraneous load further increased cognitive demands due to ambiguous verbal instructions, misinterpretation of symbolic cues, and excessive technical language; however, visual scaffolding and self-generated sketches were found to reduce unnecessary processing. Germane load emerged among a smaller group of students who demonstrated conceptual transfer, reflective verification, and schema integration, indicating the development of mathematical reasoning as students connected geometric structures with their corresponding integral representations. Overall, the study highlights the central role of instructional design in regulating cognitive load to support meaningful conceptual understanding and reasoning in solving visually complex mathematical problems.
- Adams, J. W., Barmby, P., & Mesoudi, A. (2017). The nature and development of mathematics: Cross disciplinary perspectives on cognition, learning and culture (Routledge). Taylor & Francis.
- Akin, I., & Murrell-Jones, M. (2018). Closing the gap in academic writing using the cognitive load theory. Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal, 9(1), 2841–2846. https://doi.org/10.20533/licej.2040.2589. 2018.0373
- Albus, P., & Seufert, T. (2023). The modality effect reverses in a virtual reality learning environment and influences cognitive load. Instructional Science, 51(4), 545-570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-022-09611-7
- Al-Hinai, M., Shahat, M. A., Omara, E., Emam, M. M., Ismail, S. S., Alhabsi, N., Alhosni, K., Al-Amri, M., Al-Yahmedi, A., Fawzy, Y. M., & Al-Balushi, S. M. (2026). Exploring a STEM-integrated instructional approach and its preliminary contextual assessments of problem-solving and motivation in Oman. European Journal of STEM Education, 11(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/17783
- Ames, H., Glenton, C., & Lewin, S. (2019). Purposive sampling in a qualitative evidence synthesis: A worked example from a synthesis on parental perceptions of vaccination communication. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0665-4
- Bokosmaty, S., Mavilidi, M. F., & Paas, F. (2017). Making versus observing manipulations of geometric properties of triangles to learn geometry using dynamic geometry software. Computers and Education, 113, 313-326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.008
- Bolkan, S. (2016). The importance of instructor clarity and its effect on student learning: Facilitating elaboration by reducing cognitive load. Communication Reports, 29(3), 152-162. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934215. 2015.1067708
- Börner, K., Maltese, A., Balliet, R. N., & Heimlich, J. (2016). Investigating aspects of data visualization literacy using 20 information visualizations and 273 science museum visitors. Information Visualization, 15(3), 198-213. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473871615594652
- Bossé, M. J., Bayaga, A., Fountain, C., Young, E. S., & Demarte, A. (2019). Mathematics learning through the lens of language acquisition. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 12(1), 103-113. https://doi.org/10.26822/iejee.2019155342
- Cai, H., & Gu, X. (2019). Supporting collaborative learning using a diagram-based visible thinking tool based on cognitive load theory. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2329-2345. https://doi.org/10.1111/ bjet.12818
- Çakiroğlu, Ü., & Bilgi, Ş. (2024). Exploring intrinsic cognitive load in the programming process: A two dimensional approach based on element interactivity. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(5), 2045-2063. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2137527
- Cañadas, M. C., Molina, M., & del Río, A. (2018). Meanings given to algebraic symbolism in problem-posing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 98(1), 19-37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9797-9
- Castro-Alonso, J. C., de Koning, B. B., Fiorella, L., & Paas, F. (2021). Five strategies for optimizing instructional materials: Instructor- and learner-managed cognitive load. In Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1379-1407. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09606-9
- Çeken, B., & Taşkın, N. (2022). Multimedia learning principles in different learning environments: a systematic review. In Smart Learning Environments, 9(1). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00200-2
- Ceuppens, S., Deprez, J., Dehaene, W., & De Cock, M. (2018). Design and validation of a test for representational fluency of 9th grade students in physics and mathematics: The case of linear functions. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.020105
- Chang, B. L., Cromley, J. G., & Tran, N. (2016). Coordinating multiple representations in a reform calculus textbook. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(8), 1475-1497. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10763-015-9652-3
- Cirino, P. T., Fuchs, L. S., Elias, J. T., Powell, S. R., & Schumacher, R. F. (2015). Cognitive and mathematical profiles for different forms of learning difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(2), 156-175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413494239
- Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design (2nd ed.). Sage.
- Désiron, J. C., Schmitz, M. L., & Petko, D. (2025). Teachers as creators of digital multimedia learning materials: Are they aligned with multimedia learning principles. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 30(2), 637-653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-024-09770-1
- Dunn, T. L., & Risko, E. F. (2016). Toward a metacognitive account of cognitive offloading. Cognitive Science, 40(5), 1080-1127.https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12273
- Evagorou, M., Erduran, S., & Mäntylä, T. (2015). The role of visual representations in scientific practices: From conceptual understanding and knowledge generation to ‘seeing’ how science works. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-015-0024-x
- Gregg, L., & Steinberg, E. R. (2017). Cognitive processes in writing (Cognitive Science, Vol. 14). Routledge.
- Guzmán, J., & Zambrano R, J. (2024). Effects of split-attention and task complexity on individual and collaborative learning. Education Sciences, 14(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14091035
- Haji, F. A., Rojas, D., Childs, R., de Ribaupierre, S., & Dubrowski, A. (2015). Measuring cognitive load: Performance, mental effort and simulation task complexity. Medical Education, 49(8), 815-827. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12773
- Hammoudi, M. M., & Grira, S. (2023). Improving students’ motivation in calculus courses at institutions of higher education: Evidence from graph-based visualization of two models. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12771
- Hawes, Z., & Ansari, D. (2020). What explains the relationship between spatial and mathematical skills? A review of evidence from brain and behavior. In Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 27(3), 465-482. Springer. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01694-7
- Houdyshell, M., & Sanabria, A. (2025). The role of academic advising in campus integration for students with intellectual disabilities: A case study. Asia Pacific Journal of Education and Society, 13(2), 4. https://doi.org/ 10.20897/apjes/17486
- Huang, Y. H. (2018). Influence of instructional design to manage intrinsic cognitive load on learning effectiveness. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(6), 2653-2668. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/90264
- Jaelani, A. (2021). SketchUp-aided generative learning in solid geometry: Does it affected students’ spatial abilities? Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1778(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1778/1/012039
- Jeannotte, D., & Kieran, C. (2017). A conceptual model of mathematical reasoning for school mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 96(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9761-8
- Jojo, Z. (2018). Creating an environment for the restoration of dignity to disadvantaged mathematics foundation classrooms. Environment and Social Psychology, 3(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.18063/esp.v3i2.695
- Jupri, A., & Sispiyati, R. (2020). Students’ algebraic proficiency from the perspective of symbol sense. Indonesian Journal of Science and Technology, 5(1), 86–94. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijost.v5i1.23102
- Klepsch, M., Schmitz, F., & Seufert, T. (2017). Development and validation of two instruments measuring intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(NOV). https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2017.01997
- Klepsch, M., & Seufert, T. (2020). Understanding instructional design effects by differentiated measurement of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Instructional Science, 48(1), 45-77. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11251-020-09502-9
- Korbach, A., Brünken, R., & Park, B. (2018). Differentiating different types of cognitive load: A comparison of different measures. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 503-529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9404-8
- Kosch, T., Karolus, J., Zagermann, J., Reiterer, H., Schmidt, A., & WoÅ°niak, P. W. (2023). A survey on measuring cognitive workload in human-computer interaction. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(13s). https://doi.org/10.1145/3582272
- Kosko, K. W. (2022). Pre-service teachers’ professional noticing when viewing standard and holographic recordings of children’s mathematics. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 17(4), em0706. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/12310
- Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2016). Cognitive load theory and the effects of transient information on the modality effect. Instructional Science, 44(1), 107-123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9362-9
- Lee, J. (2019). Task complexity, cognitive load, and L1 speech. In Applied Linguistics, 40(3), 506-539. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amx054
- Leppink, J. (2017). Cognitive load theory: Practical implications and an important challenge. Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 12(5), 385-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2017.05.003
- Lindner, M. A. (2020). Representational and decorative pictures in science and mathematics tests: Do they make a difference? Learning and Instruction, 68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101345
- Lowrie, T., Logan, T., & Hegarty, M. (2019). The influence of spatial visualization training on students’ spatial reasoning and mathematics performance. Journal of Cognition and Development, 20(5), 729-751. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/15248372.2019.1653298
- Mainali, B. (2021). Representation in teaching and learning mathematics. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 9(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.1111
- Mayer, R. E. (2024). The past, present, and future of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review,36(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09842-1
- Mcgee, D. L., & Moore-Russo, D. (2014). Impact of explicit presentation of slopes in three dimensions on students’ understanding of derivatives in multivariable calculus. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014
- Milenković, A., Takači, Đ., & Božić, R. (2022). On the influence of software application for visualization in teaching double integrals. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(7), 1291-1306. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10494820.2020.1719164
- Mix, K. S. (2019). Why are spatial skill and mathematics related? Child Development Perspectives, 13(2), 121-126. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12323
- Naismith, L. M., Cheung, J. J. H., Ringsted, C., & Cavalcanti, R. B. (2015). Limitations of subjective cognitive load measures in simulation-based procedural training. Medical Education, 49(8), 805-814. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12732
- Natsi, I., & Vitsou, M. (2025). Belonging and identity negotiation among Japanese-background learners in Greek schools. European Journal of Education & Language Review, 1(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejelr/17642
- Ngu, B. H., Phan, H. P., Yeung, A. S., & Chung, S. F. (2018). Managing element interactivity in equation solving. Educational Psychology Review, 30(1), 255-272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9397-8
- Njiku, J. (2025). Language barriers in mathematics: Learning challenges when global languages replace native instruction. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 32(6). https://doi.org/ 10.30722/32.06.001
- Osman, N., Mahmud, S. N. D., & Arsad, N. M. (2026). Integrating metacognition and structured problem-solving in physics. European Journal of STEM Education, 11(1), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.20897/ ejsteme/17871
- Ott, N., Brünken, R., Vogel, M., & Malone, S. (2018). Multiple symbolic representations: The combination of formula and text supports problem solving in the mathematical field of propositional logic. Learning and Instruction, 58, 88-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.04.010
- Özçakir, B., Özdemir, D., & Kiymaz, Y. (2022). Effects of dynamic geometry software on students’ geometric thinking regarding probability of giftedness in mathematics. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 7(2), 48-61. https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.664985
- Papadopoulos, I. (2019). Using mobile puzzles to exhibit certain algebraic habits of mind and demonstrate symbol-sense in primary school students. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 53, 210-227. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jmathb.2018.07.001
- Pape, S., Lyublinskaya, I., Bozkurt, G., Leung, A., Pozdnyakov, S., Stacey, K., Vancsó, Ö., Li, S., Shen, Y., Jiao, X., & Cai, S. (2022). Using augmented reality to enhance students’ representational fluency: The case of linear functions †. Mathematics, 10.https://doi.org/10.3390/math
- Park, S. M. (2025). Qualitative research methods in ethnic communities: A framework for studying language and cultural preservation. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 12(3), 34–52. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejecs/2185
- Richland, L. E., Begolli, K. N., Simms, N., Frausel, R. R., & Lyons, E. A. (2017). Supporting mathematical discussions: The roles of comparison and cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 29(1), 41-53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9382-2
- Risko, E. F., & Dunn, T. L. (2015). Storing information in-the-world: Metacognition and cognitive offloading in a short-term memory task. Consciousness and Cognition, 36, 61-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2015. 05.014
- Scharinger, C. (2024). Task-irrelevant decorative pictures increase cognitive load during text processing but have no effects on learning or working memory performance: an EEG and eye-tracking study. Psychological Research, 88(4), 1362-1388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-01939-8
- Schmeck, A., Opfermann, M., van Gog, T., Paas, F., & Leutner, D. (2015). Measuring cognitive load with subjective rating scales during problem solving: Differences between immediate and delayed ratings. Instructional Science, 43(1), 93-114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9328-3
- Schroeder, N. L., & Cenkci, A. T. (2018). Spatial contiguity and spatial split-attention effects in multimedia learning environments: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 679-701. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10648-018-9435-9
- Schuessler, K., Fischer, V., & Walpuski, M. (2025). Investigating construct validity of cognitive load measurement using single-item subjective rating scales. Instructional Science, 53(1), 71-97. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11251-024-09692-6
- Schulz, A. (2024). Assessing student teachers’ procedural fluency and strategic competence in operating and mathematizing with natural and rational numbers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 27(6), 981-1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-023-09590-7
- Schweitzer, D., & Brown, W. (2007). Interactive visualization for the active learning classroom. In Proceedings of the 38th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education (pp. 208-212). https://doi.org/10.1145/ 1227310.1227384
- Shrestha, P., & Bhattarai, P. C. (2022). Application of case study methodology in the exploration of inclusion in education. American Journal of Qualitative Research, 6(1), 73-84. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/11461
- Skulmowski, A., & Xu, K. M. (2022). Understanding cognitive load in digital and online learning: A new perspective on extraneous cognitive load. In Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 171-196. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09624-7
- Sterner, G., Wolff, U., & Helenius, O. (2020). Reasoning about representations: Effects of an early math intervention. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 64(5), 782-800. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831. 2019.1600579
- Stewart, S., & Schmidt, R. (2017). Accommodation in the formal world of mathematical thinking. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 48, S40-S49. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X. 2017.1360527
- Subanji, R., & Supratman, A. M. (2015). The pseudo-covariational reasoning thought processes in constructing graph function of reversible event dynamics based on assimilation and accommodation frameworks. Research in Mathematical Education, 19(1), 61-79. https://doi.org/10.7468/jksmed.2015.19.1.61
- Swanson, H. L. (2016). Word problem solving, working memory and serious math difficulties: Do cognitive strategies really make a difference? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 5(4), 368-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2016.04.012
- Swanson, H. L., Lussier, C. M., & Orosco, M. J. (2015). Cognitive strategies, working memory, and growth in word problem solving in children with math difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(4), 339-358. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413498771
- Sweller, J. (2020). Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09701-3
- Sweller, J. (2023). The development of cognitive load theory: Replication crises and incorporation of other theories can lead to theory expansion. Educational Psychology Review, 35(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09817-2
- Szabo, Z. K., Körtesi, P., Guncaga, J., Szabo, D., & Neag, R. (2020). Examples of problem-solving strategies in mathematics education supporting the sustainability of 21st-century skills. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(23), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122310113
- Tatar, E., & Zengin, Y. (2016). Conceptual understanding of definite integral with GeoGebra. Computers in the Schools, 33(2), 120-132. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2016.1177480
- Wang, C.-C., Kuan-Hao Cheng, P., & Wang, T.-H. (2022). Citation: Measurement of extraneous and Germane cognitive load in the mathematics addition task: An event-related potential study. Brain Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci
- Weis, P. P., & Wiese, E. (2019). Using tools to help us think: Actual but also believed reliability modulates cognitive offloading. Human Factors, 61(2), 243-254. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720818797553
- Weurlander, M., Cronhjort, M., & Filipsson, L. (2017). Engineering students’ experiences of interactive teaching in calculus. Higher Education Research and Development, 36(4), 852-865. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 07294360.2016.1238880
- Williamson, B. (2016). Digital education governance: data visualization, predictive analytics, and ‘real-time’ policy instruments. Journal of Education Policy, 31(2), 123-141. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2015.1035758
- Yenilmez, K., & Kakmaci, O. (2015). Investigation of the relationship between the spatial visualization success and visual/spatial intelligence capabilities of sixth grade students. International Journal of Instruction, 8(1), 189-204. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2015.8114a
APA 7th edition
In-text citation: (Muzaini et al., 2026)
Reference: Muzaini, M., Arriah, F., Sulong, A., Kaharuddin, A., & Jumiarti, J. (2026). Mapping students’ cognitive load profiles in solving geometric integral problems.
European Journal of STEM Education, 11(1), Article 19.
https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/18288
AMA 10th edition
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Muzaini M, Arriah F, Sulong A, Kaharuddin A, Jumiarti J. Mapping students’ cognitive load profiles in solving geometric integral problems.
European Journal of STEM Education. 2026;11(1), 19.
https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/18288
Chicago
In-text citation: (Muzaini et al., 2026)
Reference: Muzaini, Muhammad, Fatrul Arriah, Amart Sulong, Andi Kaharuddin, and Jumiarti Jumiarti. "Mapping students’ cognitive load profiles in solving geometric integral problems".
European Journal of STEM Education 2026 11 no. 1 (2026): 19.
https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/18288
Harvard
In-text citation: (Muzaini et al., 2026)
Reference: Muzaini, M., Arriah, F., Sulong, A., Kaharuddin, A., and Jumiarti, J. (2026). Mapping students’ cognitive load profiles in solving geometric integral problems.
European Journal of STEM Education, 11(1), 19.
https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/18288
MLA
In-text citation: (Muzaini et al., 2026)
Reference: Muzaini, Muhammad et al. "Mapping students’ cognitive load profiles in solving geometric integral problems".
European Journal of STEM Education, vol. 11, no. 1, 2026, 19.
https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/18288
Vancouver
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Muzaini M, Arriah F, Sulong A, Kaharuddin A, Jumiarti J. Mapping students’ cognitive load profiles in solving geometric integral problems. European Journal of STEM Education. 2026;11(1):19.
https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/18288