View in EDS

Comparing E-quizzes (Trivia maker™) and paper-based tests on cognitive load, usability, and performance outcomes among university students.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	Comparing E-quizzes (Trivia maker™) and paper-based tests on cognitive load, usability, and performance outcomes among university students.
Authors:	Tannoubi, Amayra^1,2 (AUTHOR) elvis.hagan@ucc.edu.gh, Ouergui, Ibrahim^3,4 (AUTHOR), Bonsaksen, Tore^5,6 (AUTHOR), Srem-Sai, Medina⁷ (AUTHOR), Hagan, John Elvis^8,9 (AUTHOR) elvis.hagan@ucc.edu.gh, Setiawan, Edi¹⁰ (AUTHOR), Azaiez, Fairouz¹ (AUTHOR)
Source:	Frontiers in Education. 2026, p1-14. 14p.
Subject Terms:	Cognitive load, Educational tests & measurements, College students, Educational evaluation, Educational technology, Academic achievement, User-centered system design
Abstract:	Background: Digital educational platforms have gained notable traction as assessment tools alongside traditional methods. These different assessment tools may impact on several educational and psychological variables. This study investigated the effects of two evaluation modalities, namely Electronic-quizzes and PP, on cognitive load, usability perception, and performance outcomes among university students. Methods: In a quasi-experimental pre/post-test study design with two intact classes was employed. Ninety-four undergraduate students (age: 23 ± 1.6 years) were allocated by class to an Electronic-Quiz group (E-quiz, n = 47; male = 42%; female = 58%) or a PP group (PP, n = 47; male = 53%; female = 47). Before and after 8 weeks, students completed identical performance-based quizzes and evaluated their cognitive load using the Cognitive Load Scale (CLS), comprising three dimensions: intrinsic load (IL), extraneous load (EL), and germane load (GL), as well as their perception of usability System Usability Scale (SUS). Results: Mixed-model ANOVA revealed significant Time × Group interactions for most primary outcomes. For GL, the E-quiz group showed a large within-group gain (d = 1.40), while the PP group showed negligible change (d = 0.15); between-group post-test difference was medium (d = 0.67, ηp 2 = 0.256). For SUS, the E-quiz group demonstrated large improvement (d = 0.96) compared to PP (d = 0.17), with a medium between-group effect (d = 0.66, ηp 2 = 0.516). For performance, the E-quiz group exhibited a very large within-group gain (d = 1.71), whereas the PP group showed negligible change (d = 0.05); the post-test between-group difference was large (d = 1.82, ηp 2 = 0.623). IL increased only in the E-quiz group (d = 1.15, ηp 2 = 0.203), while both groups showed comparable increases in EL (ηp 2 = 0.030, ns). Conclusion: In this sample, E-quizzes were associated with larger gains in GL, perceived usability, and academic performance than paper-based tests, and uniquely elevated perceived intrinsic complexity. These findings align with cognitive load theory predictions regarding the potential role of digital assessment design in supporting germane processing, though the mechanisms remain hypothetical and warrant further investigation. Well-designed digital assessment tools may merit consideration for integration in higher education, contingent on careful design to minimize EL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Frontiers in Education is the property of Frontiers Media S.A. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Education Research Complete

Description
Abstract:	Background: Digital educational platforms have gained notable traction as assessment tools alongside traditional methods. These different assessment tools may impact on several educational and psychological variables. This study investigated the effects of two evaluation modalities, namely Electronic-quizzes and PP, on cognitive load, usability perception, and performance outcomes among university students. Methods: In a quasi-experimental pre/post-test study design with two intact classes was employed. Ninety-four undergraduate students (age: 23 ± 1.6 years) were allocated by class to an Electronic-Quiz group (E-quiz, n = 47; male = 42%; female = 58%) or a PP group (PP, n = 47; male = 53%; female = 47). Before and after 8 weeks, students completed identical performance-based quizzes and evaluated their cognitive load using the Cognitive Load Scale (CLS), comprising three dimensions: intrinsic load (IL), extraneous load (EL), and germane load (GL), as well as their perception of usability System Usability Scale (SUS). Results: Mixed-model ANOVA revealed significant Time × Group interactions for most primary outcomes. For GL, the E-quiz group showed a large within-group gain (d = 1.40), while the PP group showed negligible change (d = 0.15); between-group post-test difference was medium (d = 0.67, ηp 2 = 0.256). For SUS, the E-quiz group demonstrated large improvement (d = 0.96) compared to PP (d = 0.17), with a medium between-group effect (d = 0.66, ηp 2 = 0.516). For performance, the E-quiz group exhibited a very large within-group gain (d = 1.71), whereas the PP group showed negligible change (d = 0.05); the post-test between-group difference was large (d = 1.82, ηp 2 = 0.623). IL increased only in the E-quiz group (d = 1.15, ηp 2 = 0.203), while both groups showed comparable increases in EL (ηp 2 = 0.030, ns). Conclusion: In this sample, E-quizzes were associated with larger gains in GL, perceived usability, and academic performance than paper-based tests, and uniquely elevated perceived intrinsic complexity. These findings align with cognitive load theory predictions regarding the potential role of digital assessment design in supporting germane processing, though the mechanisms remain hypothetical and warrant further investigation. Well-designed digital assessment tools may merit consideration for integration in higher education, contingent on careful design to minimize EL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	2504284X
DOI:	10.3389/feduc.2026.1780194