Modalities for Learning

–By Richard Trotta —

The latest research confirms the effectiveness, which depends on the task, and crucially, combining senses increases the effectiveness of the learning process.

Visual + auditory together (words + pictures/narration), the most reliable overall

Humans process information through dual channels; aligning concise visuals with spoken or written words reduces cognitive load and improves transfer and retention across various ages and subjects.

Visual + auditory + purposeful action (manipulation/gesture/handwriting), powerful when the concept benefits from doing.

  1. Multisensory learning (coordinating sight, sound, and action) often outperforms single-sense training, especially for perceptual, spatial, and symbol-learning tasks. Examples: handwriting can improve letter recognition; teacher/learner gestures and well-scaffolded manipulatives can boost math learning when they highlight the underlying ideas. Arizona State University+4PubMed+4UCR Faculty+4
  2. Single-modality instruction (visual-only or auditory-only) is helpful but generally less effective when employed alone
  3. Use when: you must minimize overload (e.g., complex diagram studied quietly) or when the content is purely verbal (e.g., phoneme discrimination). As a rule, add the complementary channel (brief narration for diagrams; a simple diagram for explanations) for better outcomes.

Source: SpringerLink

 

Annotated Bibliography

(Latest Research on Modalities for Learning, 2024–2025)

  1. Mayer, R. (2024). The Past, Present, and Future of the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning. Educational Psychology Review.

Comprehensive review of 40+ years of CTML. Confirms robust evidence for combining words + pictures/narration, summarizing 15 validated design principles. → Use as your anchor citation.

  1. Chen, C., et al. (2024). Effects of Video Playback Speed and Distractors on Learning. Educational Psychology Review.

Finds that even under distractions, dual-channel audio-visual materials outperform audio-only; reinforces resilience of multimodal design.

  1. Kleftodimos, A. (2024). Animated Educational Video: Evidence-Based Design. Information.

Supports multimedia + modality principles: animation with narration beats narration alone or text redundancy.

  1. Visual + Auditory + Purposeful Action (When “Doing” Matters)

4. Ibaibarriaga, I., et al. (2025). Handwriting vs. Typing in Children’s Literacy

Learning. Journal of Educational Psychology.

Handwriting produced more accurate mental representations of letters/words than typing. Shows strong behavioral advantage for “see+hear+do.”

  1. Marano, A., et al. (2025). Handwriting and Learning: A Neuroscience Review. Brain Sciences.

Synthesis of fMRI + behavioral studies: handwriting engages visual-motor networks, boosting encoding and recall.

  1. Kersey, A., et al. (2024). Gesture Training in Elementary Math. Frontiers in Psychology.

Students using gestures generalized learning better than action-only groups; gestures highlight underlying math concepts.

  1. Paraskevopoulos, E., et al. (2024). Multisensory Training Supports Generalization. NeuroImage.

 

Multisensory (vs. uni-sensory) training produced broader neural generalization, confirming added value of coordinated senses.

  1. Di Fuccio, R., et al. (2025). Multisensory Interfaces in Early Learning. Interactive Learning Environments.

Classroom RCT: children using multisensory (sight+sound+smell) interfaces showed higher recall than peers with standard digital tools.

  1. Single Modality (Useful, but Limited)

9. Clinton-Lisell, V. (2024). Learning Styles: A Meta-Analysis. Meta-Psychology. Finds no evidence that matching teaching to single-modality “learning styles” improves achievement. Counters common myths.

  1. Fan, L., et al. (2024). Multisensory Toys in Education: A Review. Frontiers in Education.

Shows that single-channel tools underperform compared to well-designed multisensory toys; children engage and learn more with richer sensory input.

Leave a Reply