一、中文參考文獻
王保進(1999)。視窗版SPSS與行為科學研究。台北市:心理出版社。
宋曜廷(2000)。先前知識、文章結構與多媒體呈現對文章學習的影響。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系博士論文。全國博碩士論文資訊網,88NTNU0328003。胡士(2004)。升高中win贏自然與生活科技生物複習講義。台南市:翰林出版社。
唐非凡(2004)。升高中win贏自然與生活科技理化複習講義。台南市:翰林出版社。
郭璟瑜(2003)。媒體組合方式與認知型態對學習成效與認知負荷之影響。國立中央大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。全國博碩士論文資訊網,91NCU05396010。
翁嘉鴻(2001)。以認知負荷觀點探討聽覺媒體物件之媒體呈現方式對學習成效之影響。國立中央大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。全國博碩士論文資訊網,89NCU00396033。徐易稜(2001)。多媒體呈現方式對學習者認知負荷與學習成效之影響研究。國立中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。全國博碩士論文資訊網,89NCU00396042。莊良寶(2000)。知識圖學習活動設計對網路化學習的影響。國立台灣師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。全國博碩士論文資訊網,88NTNU0395001。莊雅茹(2000)。不同學習者特質在多媒體環境中學習成效之比較。輔仁學誌:法/管理學院之部,31,97-116。
陳明溥、莊良寶、林育聖(2002)。建構式網路學習活動成效之探討。師大學報:科學教育類,47(2),71-82。
陳彙芳、范懿文(2000)。認知負荷對多媒體電腦輔助學習成效之影響研究。資訊管理研究,2(2),45-59頁。
陳密桃(2003)。認知負荷理論及其對教學的啟示。國立高雄師範大學教育學系教育學刊,21,29-51。黃巧琪(2003)。認知負荷理及其在教學上的啟示。教育資料與研究,66,77-83。黃柏勲(2003)。認知上的瓶頸─認知負荷理論。教育資料與研究,55,71-78。
黃克文(1996)。認知負荷與個人特質及學習成就之關聯。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。全國博碩士論文資訊網,84NTPTC576002。張春莉(1999)。減輕學生課業負擔─一種認知負荷觀。教育理論與實踐,69-73。
游光昭、蔡福興(2003),以認知型態為基礎的網路化學習研究。教育研究資訊,12(1),51-76。二、西文參考文獻
Bruken R., Plass., Leutner.(2003). Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1),53-61.
Bobis, J. & Sweller , J.(1994). Demands imposed on primary-school students by geometric models. Contemporary educational psychology 19(1), 108-117.
Cooper, G.(1990). Cognitive load theory as an aid for instructional design. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 6(2),108-113.
Cooper, G.(1998). Research into Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design at UNSW, Retrieved October 5,2004, from http://education.arts/.unsw. Edu.au/CLT.HTML.
Ellis, R.D., & Kurniawan, S.H. (2000). Increasing the usability of online information for older users: A case study in participatory design. International journal of Human-Computer Interaction,12(2),263-276.
Ford, N., & Chen, S. Y. (2001). Matching/mismatching revisited: an empirical study of learning and teaching styles. British Journal of Educational Technology.32,1,5-22. Retrieved June 3, from the World Wide Web http:// www.brunel.ac.uk/~csstsyc/matching.pdf
Gerjets, P., & Scheiter K. (2003). Goal configurations and processing strategies as moderator between instructional design and cognitive load: evidence from hypertext-based instruction. Educational psychologist,38(1),33-41.
Marcus, N., Cooper, M., & Sweller, J. (1996). Understanding instruction. Journal of Edcuational Psychology, 88(1), 49-63.
Mayer, R. E.(2001). Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge University press.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 43–52.
Paas, F. (1992). Traning Strategies for attaining transfer of problem solving skill in statistics:A cognitive load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology,84(4), 429-434.
Paas, F. G. W., & Van, Merri螚boer J. J. G. (1994). Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem solving: A cognitive load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology,86,122-133.
Paas, F., Renkle, A., & Sweller (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1-4.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving:Effect on learning. Cognitive Science ,12, 257-285.
Sweller, J., van Merrierboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F.(1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Education Psychology Review. 10,251-296.
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4, 295-312.
Sweller, J. (2002) Visualization and Instructional Design. Retrieved June 3,2004, from http:// www.iwm-kmrc.de/workshops/visualization/sweller.pdf.
Sweller, J. (2003,11月). Why understanding instructional design principles requires an understanding of the evolution of human cognitive architecture。載於「全國教育資訊」學術研討會論文集(頁1-22),宜蘭縣。
Sankey, M. D. (2003).Visual and multiple representation in learning materials: an issue of literacy. Retrieved July 7,2004, from http://www.usq.edu.au/users/sankey/Resources/CreatEd2003.pdf
Yeung, A. , Jin, P. & Sweller, J. (1998). Cognitive load and learner expertise : split-attention and redundancy effects in reading with explanatory. Contemporary Educational Psychology 23(1),1-21.