Measuring physician cognitive load: validity evidence for a physiologic and a psychometric tool

Area of Science:

• Cognitive science
• Medical education research
• Human factors engineering

Background:

• Researchers commonly use physiologic and psychometric measures to quantify cognitive load.
• Few studies directly compare these distinct measurement approaches.
• Understanding the validity of each method is crucial for accurate cognitive load assessment.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare pupillometry (physiologic) with the Paas scale (psychometric) for measuring cognitive load.
• To determine if these tools accurately reflect the cognitive load construct.
• To investigate the relationship between cognitive load and expertise levels in resuscitation medicine.

Main Methods:

• Thirty-two participants with varying resuscitation medicine experience completed multiple-choice and arithmetic questions.
• Cognitive load was measured simultaneously using pupillometry and the Paas scale.
• Data were analyzed to compare measurements across question difficulty, accuracy, and participant expertise.

Main Results:

• Both pupillometry and the Paas scale indicated higher cognitive load for more difficult and incorrectly answered questions (p < 0.001).
• Less experienced participants exhibited higher cognitive load on domain-specific questions compared to experienced groups (p < 0.05).
• A strong positive correlation was observed between pupillometry and Paas scale measures (Spearman's ρ = 0.827 for arithmetic, ρ = 0.606 for medical questions).

Conclusions:

• Findings support the validity of both pupillometry and the Paas scale in measuring cognitive load.
• These tools can differentiate cognitive load based on task difficulty and individual expertise.
• The strong correlation suggests convergence between physiologic and psychometric measures of cognitive load.