ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Action-Based Encoding Improves Instruction Following in Children and Adolescents.
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Encoding and recalling spoken instructions play a key role in successful learning in the classroom. Previous research in adults suggests that, relative to simple verbal rehearsal, three forms of action-based encoding (i.e., motor imagery, action observation, or self-enactment) facilitate instruction recall to a similar extent. This study aimed to examine whether motor imagery, action observation, and self-enactment could improve memory for instructions in children and adolescents, and to compare the effectiveness of these strategies. In Experiment 1, children aged 8 and 9 years listened to instructional sequences that varied in length (2, 3 and 4 actions) while using one of the encoding techniques (i.e., motor imagery, action observation, self-enactment, or verbal rehearsal), followed by oral repetition or enacted recall. In Experiment 2, adolescents between age 12 and 14 were tested using a similar design except that the instructions were all four-action sequences. In Experiment 1, for both verbal and enacted recall, children's memory performance in each of the three action-based encoding conditions was superior to the rehearsal condition, although the benefit from motor imagery was relatively smaller. In Experiment 2, adolescents displayed similar patterns as children, except that motor imagery yielded a stronger and more reliable advantage in this age group. The current findings suggest that, for both children and adolescents, encoding spoken instructions by imagining, observing, or performing the actions yields comparable mnemonic advantages, and thus provides practical ways for supporting and enhancing working memory in classroom environments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.