Can augmented reality technology reduce learners' cognitive load? A meta-analysis

Abstract In the digital age, Augmented Reality (AR) technology, an interactive medium that superimposes virtual information onto the physical world, has expanded its application scope in educational settings in recent years. While AR demonstrates immense potential for educational applications, its impact on learners’ cognitive load remains a subject of ongoing debate. In this study, we used meta-analysis to systematically synthesize the findings of 27 experimental and quasi-experimental studies conducted in China and internationally and explored the effects of AR technology on learners’ cognitive load. The findings showed that AR technology has a small-to-moderate significant effect on reducing learners’ cognitive load (Hedges’ $$\textit{g} = -0.383$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>g</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mo>-</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.383</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> , 95% CI [ $$-0.740, -0.027$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>-</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.740</mml:mn> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:mo>-</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.027</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ], $$\textit{p} = 0.035$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>p</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.035</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ), with extremely high heterogeneity across studies ( $$I^2 = 92.7\%$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:msup> <mml:mi>I</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> </mml:msup> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>92.7</mml:mn> <mml:mo>%</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> , $$p &lt; 0.001$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>p</mml:mi> <mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.001</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ). Publication bias tests indicated borderline small-study effects (Egger’s test $$\textit{p} = 0.072$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>p</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.072</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ), but sensitivity analysis (trim-and-fill method) confirmed the robustness of the pooled effect (adjusted $$\textit{g} = -0.446$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>g</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mo>-</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.446</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> , 95% CI [ $$-0.804, -0.087$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>-</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.804</mml:mn> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:mo>-</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.087</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ]). Moderating effect analysis revealed that the frequency of intervention ( $$\textit{Q}=10.369, \textit{p}=0.006$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>Q</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>10.369</mml:mn> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:mi>p</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.006</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ) and the form of feedback ( $$\textit{Q}=13.245, \textit{p}=0.004$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>Q</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>13.245</mml:mn> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:mi>p</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.004</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ) had a significant moderating effect on the effect of AR technology in reducing cognitive load. In contrast, the moderating effect of AR technology application disciplines, educational stages, intervention time, learning styles, device types and cognitive load measurement tool on the effect of AR technology in reducing cognitive load was not significant. Therefore, the study suggests that educational practices should promote the effective application of AR technology in education by controlling the intervention tempo, optimizing the feedback mechanism, and adapting the content design to the characteristics of disciplines and the educational stage.