Sociodemographic and workload-related determinants of cognitive perception among university faculty members: a cross-sectional survey study

The demands of modern higher education extend far beyond the traditional boundaries of lecturing and classroom management. Today’s university faculty members operate in a high-pressure ecosystem characterized by competing responsibilities, including intensive teaching loads, rigorous research output expectations, and multifaceted administrative duties. A recent comprehensive cross-sectional study conducted at King Faisal University in Saudi Arabia has shed light on a critical, yet frequently overlooked, consequence of these intense professional demands: everyday cognitive failures.

Published under the leadership of researcher Maryam N. ALNasser, the study investigates the complex interplay between sociodemographic characteristics, specific academic workload domains, and self-perceived cognitive functioning among 112 faculty members at the institution’s College of Science. The findings reveal a high prevalence of subjective cognitive difficulties—such as lapses in memory, attention, and motor performance—directly linked to specific occupational pressures. As higher education institutions globally grapple with issues of faculty burnout and occupational well-being, this research provides vital regional data and underscores the urgent need for structured workload management strategies.

Methodology and Research Scope

To evaluate how routine academic tasks affect mental functioning, the investigation utilized a cross-sectional, self-report survey design. The target population comprised full-time academic staff across various departments within the College of Science, including biology, chemistry, mathematics, and physics. Out of an initial estimated target sample size of 152 participants calculated via Cochran’s formula, 112 complete and valid responses were collected during the designated data collection window.

Data collection relied on a bilingual questionnaire distributed digitally via university email and messaging platforms between March and September 2026. The survey incorporated the widely validated Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ), a 25-item instrument designed to measure subjective cognitive slips in daily life across categories such as memory, distractibility, and action lapses. In addition to the CFQ, the survey gathered granular data regarding participants’ demographic backgrounds—including age, gender, marital status, and academic rank—as well as detailed breakdowns of their weekly professional workloads, spanning teaching hours, research commitments, and administrative responsibilities.

Statistical evaluation was executed using robust multivariable models, specifically proportional-odds ordinal logistic regression, which allowed researchers to control for potential confounding variables and accurately assess the independent predictors of perceived cognitive strain.

Key Findings: Workload Intensity and Gender Disparities

The empirical results of the study paint a revealing picture of cognitive health within the academic workforce. Nearly half of the participating faculty members (48%) reported moderate levels of everyday cognitive failures, while 36% reported low levels and 16% reported severe perceived cognitive difficulties.

Through univariable and multivariable regression analyses, the study identified several significant independent predictors of these cognitive lapses. Most notably, gender emerged as a prominent factor: female faculty members demonstrated significantly higher odds of reporting greater levels of self-perceived cognitive difficulties compared to their male colleagues, with an adjusted odds ratio of 4.43.

Workload distribution also played a pivotal role, though its effects varied starkly depending on the domain of academic activity:

• Teaching Workload: Heavy teaching commitments were strongly associated with an escalation in perceived cognitive failures. Faculty members reporting a teaching workload of 31 to 40 hours per week faced dramatically higher odds of reporting elevated cognitive difficulties (adjusted odds ratio of 13.52) compared to those teaching fewer than 10 hours weekly.
• Research Engagement: Conversely, moderate involvement in research activities demonstrated an inverse relationship with cognitive failures. Engaging in 5 to 10 hours of research per week was independently associated with lower odds of reporting cognitive deficits (adjusted odds ratio of 0.21). Researchers suggest this protective association aligns with the "use-it-or-lose-it" hypothesis, wherein mentally stimulating problem-solving and critical thinking foster cognitive resilience.
• Administrative Responsibilities: Similar to research engagement, moderate administrative tasks (5 to 10 hours per week) were linked to lower odds of self-reported cognitive difficulties (adjusted odds ratio of 0.26), potentially reflecting a sense of professional autonomy and variety.
• Seniority and Rank: Interestingly, while univariable analyses initially suggested that higher academic rank (such as full professorships) correlated with fewer cognitive complaints, these associations lost statistical significance after multivariable adjustment. This indicates that immediate occupational and psychological demands—such as weekly teaching hours—exert a far more potent influence on daily cognitive perception than accumulated professional seniority alone.

Broader Implications for Occupational Health in Academia

The implications of these findings extend well beyond a single institution, offering critical insights for academic administrators, human resource planners, and policymakers across the Middle East and international higher education landscapes.

From a theoretical standpoint, the results can be contextualized through Cognitive Load Theory and the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) model. When institutional demands—particularly excessive classroom contact hours—outpace available personal and organizational resources, working memory becomes overloaded. This surplus cognitive strain manifests as everyday errors in attention and memory, which can ultimately impair teaching quality, research accuracy, and overall professional productivity.

The study also highlights lifestyle factors prevalent among the surveyed cohort that may compound cognitive vulnerability. More than half of the participants (50.9%) reported sleeping less than 6 hours per night, 58.0% engaged in no weekday exercise, and 63.4% frequently worked beyond regular office hours. Nearly a third (31.2%) reported experiencing constant work-related stress or fatigue.

Institutional Recommendations and Future Directions

In light of these findings, the research advocates for a fundamental reassessment of how academic workloads are structured and monitored. While teaching remains a core mission of any university, disproportionate teaching loads without adequate recovery time or administrative buffering can severely compromise faculty well-being. Universities are urged to implement balanced workload management frameworks that protect time for scholarly research and creative academic engagement, which appear to act as cognitive buffers.

Despite its valuable contributions, the study’s authors acknowledged certain limitations. The cross-sectional design prevents the establishment of direct causal relationships—leaving open the possibility that individuals experiencing higher cognitive fatigue perceive their workloads differently. Furthermore, reliance on subjective self-report questionnaires, while methodologically sound and supported by rigorous internal consistency metrics (Cronbach’s $alpha$ = 0.96), calls for future prospective research incorporating objective neuropsychological testing and longitudinal tracking.

As academic institutions continue to navigate the competing pressures of global competitiveness and educational expansion, prioritizing faculty cognitive health remains an operational imperative. Safeguarding the mental well-being and cognitive resilience of university educators is not merely an institutional courtesy, but a foundational requirement for sustaining academic excellence and institutional longevity.