Comparing E-Quizzes (Trivia Maker™) and Paper-based Tests on Cognitive Load, Usability, and Performance Outcomes among University Students

Amayra Tannoubi^1*Ibrahim Ouergui²Tore Bonsaksen³Medina Srem-Sai⁴John Elvis Hagan Jnr.^5*Edi Setiawan⁶AZAIEZ Fairouz¹

• ¹Universite de Gafsa, Gafsa, Tunisia
• ²Universite de Jendouba, Jendouba, Tunisia
• ³Universitetet i Innlandet, Elverum, Norway
• ⁴University of Education Winneba, Winneba, Ghana
• ⁵Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany
• ⁶Universitas Suryakancana, Cianjur, Indonesia

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 Paper-Pencil, 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 (94) 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 Paper-Pencil 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 x 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, ηp² = 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, ηp² = 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, ηp² = 0.623). IL increased only in the E-quiz group (d = 1.15, ηp² = 0.203), while both groups showed comparable increases in EL (ηp² = 0.030, ns). Conclusions: In this sample, E-quizzes were associated with larger gains in germane load, 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 extraneous load.