Bot or Not? Differences in Cognitive Load Between Human- and Chatbot-Led Post-Simulation Debriefings

Understanding how different debriefing formats impact learner’s cognitive load is crucial for designing effective post-simulation reflection activities. This paper examines cognitive load after post-simulation debriefings facilitated either by a human instructor or a generative AI Chatbot. In a controlled study with N = 45 educational science students, 23 participants engaged in a lecturer-facilitated debriefing, while 22 completed a chatbot-guided session. Cognitive load was assessed across intrinsic, extraneous, and germane dimensions. Results revealed no statistically significant differences between the two debriefing methods. Future research should examine AI-led debriefings with larger samples and employ complementary measures of cognitive load to provide a more comprehensive understanding.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Education Sciences
Published
2026-02-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci16020255
Citations
1
Primary Topic
AI in Service Interactions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
52.10
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Bot or Not? Differences in Cognitive Load Between Human- and Chatbot-Led Post-Simulation Debriefings

Kristian H. Träg, Dominik Evangelou, Miriam Mulders
1 citations
Education Sciences
AI in Service Interactions
52.10
article

Bot or Not? Differences in Cognitive Load Between Human- and Chatbot-Led Post-Simulation Debriefings

Kristian H. Träg, Dominik Evangelou, Miriam Mulders
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Understanding how different debriefing formats impact learner’s cognitive load is crucial for designing effective post-simulation reflection activities. This paper examines cognitive load after post-simulation debriefings facilitated either by a human instructor or a generative AI Chatbot. In a controlled study with N = 45 educational science students, 23 participants engaged in a lecturer-facilitated debriefing, while 22 completed a chatbot-guided session. Cognitive load was assessed across intrinsic, extraneous, and germane dimensions. Results revealed no statistically significant differences between the two debriefing methods. Future research should examine AI-led debriefings with larger samples and employ complementary measures of cognitive load to provide a more comprehensive understanding.

Education SciencesVol. 16(2)
University of Duisburg-Essen (DE)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
AI in Service Interactions
52.10
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Bot or Not? Differences in Cognitive Load Between Human- and Chatbot-Led Post-Simulation Debriefings — Kristian H. Träg, Dominik Evangelou, et al. · Education Sciences (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS