Contemporary cognitive load theory research: The good, the bad and the ugly

Kirschner, P. A., Ayres, P., & Chandler, P. (2011). Contemporary cognitive load theory research: The good, the bad and the ugly. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 99-105. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.025This paper reviews the 16 contributions of the special issue entitled Current Research in Cognitive Load Theory. Each paper is briefly summarized and some critical comments made. The overall collection is then discussed in terms of the positive contributions they make to the field of learning and instruction, and cognitive load theory in particular (the good), as well as problematical issues such as unresolved explanations and conflicting results (the bad) and the special case of measuring cognitive load (the ugly)

Optimal Delegation and Decoupling in the Design of Liability Rules

The central allocative decision confronting a judge in a nuisance dispute should not concern the identity of the initial entitlement recipient but rather the identity of the more efficient chooser—the litigant who can more efficiently allocate the entitlement. We show that liability rules can produce four basic allocations which differ centrally in the ways in which courts delegate to litigants the authority to ultimately allocate the entitlement. Two classes concern single chooser rules that vest (in the absence of an agreement to the contrary) the allocative decision solely in one of the litigants. The other two classes concern a new type of rule, dual chooser rules, that allow either party to veto the transfer of an entitlement. Dualchooser rules are more than a theoretical curiosity both because they exist in our current law and because at times they produce systematically greater allocative efficiency than either type of single-chooser rule. Two heads are sometimes better than one. A central result of the paper is that in choosing among different liability rules allocative concerns can be decoupled from distributive concerns. There exist an infinite number of liability rules which produce each of the four basic allocations, but every rule within a particular class divides differently between the litigants the expected value of the allocation. To successfully decouple, courts should at times impose call option, put option, Pay or be Paid, and Pay or Pay rules

Editorial: State of the art research into Cognitive Load Theory

Ayres, P., & Van Gog, T. (2009). Editorial: State of the art research into Cognitive Load Theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 253-257

Optimal Delegation and Decoupling in the Design of Liability Rules

Calabresi and Melamed began a scholarly revolution by showing that legal entitlements have two readily distinguishable forms of protection: property rules and liability rules. These two archetypal forms protect an entitlement holder\u27s interest in markedly different ways - via deterrence or compensation. Property rules protect entitlements by trying to deter others from taking. Liability rules, on the other hand, protect entitlements not by deterring but by trying to compensate the victim of nonconsensual takings. Accordingly, the compensatory impetus behind liability rules focuses on the takee\u27s welfare - making sure the sanction is sufficient to compensate the takee. The deterrent impetus behind property rules, however, focuses on the potential taker\u27s welfare - making sure the sanction is sufficient to deter the taker. Thus, disgorgement and prison terms exemplify traditional property rule remedies, while expectation and other compensatory damages fall squarely within the liability rule camp

Crafting a Scholarly Persona: A Panel Discussion

This is an edited transcript of Crafting a Scholarly Persona, the Scholarship Section\u27s program from the AALS Annual Meeting in 2007. During this program, three established scholars, Ian Ayres, Paul Robinson, and Carol Sanger, discussed their individual career paths – How they chose their article topics, what the goals of their scholarship are, how they view their research agendas, etc. The discussion was intended roughly to mirror Bravo\u27s Inside the Actor\u27s Studio

The mirror-neuron system and observational learning: Implications for the effectiveness of dynamic visualizations.

Van Gog, T., Paas, F., Marcus, N., Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2009). The mirror-neuron system and observational learning: Implications for the effectiveness of dynamic visualizations. Educational Psychology Review, 21, 21-30.Learning by observing and imitating others, has long been recognized as constituting a powerful learning strategy for humans. Recent findings from neuroscience research, more specifically, on the mirror-neuron system, begin to provide insight into the neural bases of learning by observation and imitation. These findings are discussed here, along with their potential consequences for the design of instruction, focusing in particular on the effectiveness of dynamic vs. static visualizations

The mirror-neuron system and observational learning: Implications for the effectiveness of dynamic visualizations.

Learning by observing and imitating others, has long been recognized as constituting a powerful learning strategy for humans. Recent findings from neuroscience research, more specifically, on the mirror-neuron system, begin to provide insight into the neural bases of learning by observation and imitation. These findings are discussed here, along with their potential consequences for the design of instruction, focusing in particular on the effectiveness of dynamic vs. static visualizations