Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37888424›Full record

ArticleJournal of Intelligence2023

Instructors' Gestural Accuracy Affects Geology Learning in Interaction with Students' Spatial Skills.

Corinne A Bower, Lynn S Liben

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Intelligence, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Corinne A BowerDepartment of Psychology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90032, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7375-2842
Lynn S LibenDepartment of Psychology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8705-8189

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Complex and often unobservable STEM constructs and processes are represented using a variety of representations, including iconic gestures in which the body is configured or moved to resemble a referent's spatial properties or actions. Earlier researchers have suggested links between gesturing and expertise, leading some to recommend instructional gestures. Earlier research, however, has been largely correlational; furthermore, some gestures may be made with misleading positions or movements. Using the illustrative topic of strike in structural geology, we investigated the existence and impact of inaccurate instructional gestures. In Study 1, we examined videotapes of participants who had been asked to explain strikes to another person. We observed inaccurate (non-horizontal) strike gestures not only among novices (first introduced to strike during the study itself, n = 68) but also among participants who had greater expertise in geology (n = 21). In Study 2, we randomly assigned novices (N = 167) to watch video lessons in which the instructor accompanied verbal explanations of strikes with accurate, inaccurate, or no iconic gestures and tested students' learning on a strike-mapping task. Students with low spatial-perception skills showed no impact of their gestural condition on performance. Students with high spatial-perception skills showed no advantage from accurate gestures but performed significantly worse in the inaccurate-gesture condition. Findings suggest that recommendations to use gestures during instruction should include professional development programs that reduce the occurrence of inaccurate gestures.

Indexed as

geology instructiongesturesspatial skillsSTEM educationSTEM learning

Identifiers

PMID37888424
PMCPMC10607687

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.