تازش، مریم، حسنآبادی، حمیدرضا و کدیور، پروین. (۱۳۹۵). نقش جزئیات فریبنده در یادگیری درس علوم چندرسانه‌ای: اثرها بر بار شناختی و عملکرد. فصلنامه روانشناسی شناختی، ۴ (۳)، 51-60.
دلاور، علی. (1396). طرحهای آزمایشی در روانشناسی و علوم تربیتی. تهران: سمت.
رمضانی، ملیحه و خامسان، احمد. (1396). شاخصهای روانسنجی پرسشنامه درگیری تحصیلی ریو 2013: با معرفی درگیری عاملی. فصلنامه اندازهگیری تربیتی، 8(29)، 185-204.
زاهد، سعیده، درتاج، فریبرز، اسدزاده، حسن، کدیور، پروین و فرخی، نورعلی. (1400). ساختار عاملی و اعتباریابی نسخهی فارسی پرسشنامه بار شناختی. فصلنامه روانشناسی شناختی، 9(1)، 32-44.
Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 219–235.
Alter, A. L., Oppenheimer, D. M., Epley, N., & Eyre, R. (2007). Overcoming intuition: Metacognitive difficulty activates analytic reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 136, 569–576.
Bateman, S., Mandryk, R. L., Gutwin, C., Genest, A., McDine, D., & Brooks, C. (2010). Useful junk? The effects of visual embellishment on comprehension and memorability of charts. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2573–2582). Association for Computing Machinery.
Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe & A. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 185–205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2020). Desirable difficulties in theory and practice. Journal of Applied research in Memory and Cognition, 9 (4), 475-479.
Chi, M. T. H. & Wylie, R. (2014). “The ICAP Framework: Linking Cognitive Engagement to Active Learning Outcomes”. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. http//doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823.
Clark, R. E. (1999). The CaNE (Commitment and Necessary Effort) model of work motivation: a two-stage process of goal commitment and mental effort. In J. Lowyck (Ed.), Trends in corporate training. Leuven, Belgium: University of Leuven Press.
Diemand-Yauman, C., Oppenheimer, D. M., & Vaughan, E. B. (2011). Fortune favors the Bold (and the Italicized): Effects of disfluency on educational outcomes. Cognition, 118(1), 111–115.
Eitel, A., Kühl, T., Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2014). Disfluency meets cognitive load in multimedia learning: Does harder-to-read mean better-to-understand? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28(4), 488–501.
Feldon, D. F., Callan G., Juth, S. & Jeong, S. (2019). Cognitive Load as Motivational Cost. Educational Psychology Review, http//doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09464-6
Feldon, D. F., Franco, J., Chao, J., Peugh, J., & Maahs-Fladung, C. (2018). Self-efficacy change associated with a cognitive load-based intervention in an undergraduate biology course. Learning and Instruction, 56, 64–72.
Fredricks, J. A., Phyllis, C. B. & Alison, H. P. (2004). “School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence”. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. http//doi.org/103102/00346543074001059.
Harp, S. F., & Mayer, R. E. (1998). How seductive details do their damage: A theory of cognitive interest in science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 414–434.
Kahu, E., Stephens, C., Leach, L. & Zepke, N. (2015). “Linking academic emotions and student engagement: Mature-aged distance students’ transition to university”, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 39(4), 481–497. http//doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2014.895305.
Klepsch, M., Schmitz, F. & Seufert, T. (2017). Development and Validation of Two Instruments Measuring Intrinsic, Extraneous, and Germane Cognitive Load. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1997.
Klepsch, M. & Seufert, T. (2020). Understanding instructional design effects by differentiated measurement of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Instructional Science, 48, 45-77. http//doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09502-9.
Marks, H. M. (2000). “Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years”, American Educational Research Journal, 37, 153-184.
Mayer, R. E. (2014). Incorporating motivation into multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 171–173.
Plass, J. L. & Kalyuga, S. (2019). Four Ways of Considering Emotion in Cognitive Load Theory. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 339-359. http//doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09473-5.
Reeve, J. (2013). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves: The concept of agentic engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 579–595. http//doi.org/10.1037/a0032690
Salomon, G. (1984). Television is "easy" and print is "tough": the differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 647–658.
Shi, Y., Tong, M. & Long, T. (2021). Investigating relationships among blended synchronous learning environments, students’ motivation, and cognitive engagement: A mixed methods study. Computers & Education, 168, 104193.http//doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104193
Skulmowski, A. & Xu, K. M. (2022). Understanding Cognitive Load in Digital and Online Learning: a New Perspective on Extraneous Cognitive Load. Educational Psychology Review, 34, 171–196. http//doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09624-7
Smiley, W. & Anderson, R. (2011) “Measuring Students’ Cognitive Engagement on Assessment Tests: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Short Form of the Cognitive Engagement Scale” Research and Practice in Assessment, 6, 17–28.
Seufert, T. (2020). Building Bridges between Self-Regulation and Cognitive Load—an Invitation for a Broad and Differentiated Attempt. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 1151–1162. http//doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09574-6
Seufert, T., Wagner, F. & Westpha, J (2016). The effects of different levels of disfluency on learning outcomes and cognitive load. Instructional Science. http//doi.org/10.1007/s11251-016-9387-8
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296.
Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. & Ayres, P. (2005). Research on Cognitive Load Theory and Its Design Implications for E-Learning. ETR&D, 53(3), 5-13.
Vesga, J. B., Xu, X., & He, H. (2021). The effects of cognitive load on engagement in a virtual reality learning environment. In 2021 IEEE Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR) (pp. 645-652). IEEE..
Xu, K. M., Koorn, P., de Koning, B., Skuballa, I., Lin, L., Henderikx. M., Marsh, H. W., Sweller, J. & Paas, Fred (2021). A growth mindset lowers perceived cognitive load and improved learning: integrating motivation to cognitive load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(6), 1177.
Zepeda, C. D., Martin, R. S., & Butler, A. C. (2020). Motivational strategies to engage learners in desirable difficulties. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 9(4), 464-470. http//doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.08.007
Delavar, A. (2016). Experimental designs in psychology and educational sciences. Tehran: Samt Publications. [In Persian]
Ramazani, M., & Khamesan, A. (2017). Psychometric characteristics of Reeve’s academic engagement questionnaire 2013: with the introduction of the Agentic Engagement. Quarterly of Educational Measurement, 8(29), 185-204. doi: 10.22054/jem.2018.22660.1555. [In Persian]
Tazesh, M., hassanabadi, H. m., & Kadivar, P. (2016). Role of Seductive Details in multimedia learning of science:Effects on Cognitive load and performance.
Journal of cognitive psychology, 4(3), 51-60.
http://jcp.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2555-fa.html. [In Persian]
Zahed, S., dortaj, F., asadzadeh, H., kadivar, P., & farokhi, N. (2021). Structure and validation of the Persian version of the Cognitive Load Questionnaire.
Journal of cognitive psychology, 9(1), 39-54.
http://jcp.khu.ac.ir/article-1-3375-fa.html. [In Persian]
)