记忆的生成绘图效应及其边界条件：一项元分析

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2024.01.04

Abstract

Abstract: In terms of the inconsistent findings in previous studies regarding the effect of generative drawing on memory, the present meta-analytic review aimed at investigating the overall effect of generative drawing on item memory performance as well as its potential boundary conditions. After the systematic search and standard selection, a total of 65 related empirical papers which met the inclusion criteria were finally reanalyzed in this meta-analysis. These papers contained 103 experiments, and computed 110 independent effect sizes (7921 participants). The main-effect analysis showed that the pooled effect size was statistically significant and medium-to-large in magnitude with a positive direction (Cohen’s d_pooled = 0.65), suggesting that individuals in the generative drawing condition performed better memory outcome than those in the no-drawing condition. This result confirmed generative drawing effect in memory. The moderator analyses showed that; (1) Old people benefited more from generative drawing than those in other age groups on memory performance; (2) Generative drawing was more beneficial to simple word memory than complex text memory; (3) The memory performance was better when generative drawing was supported with drawing training than when it was supported with minimal guidance, and (4) The memory outcome of finger-on-screen drawing was better than stylus-on-screen drawing, pencil-based drawing, and mouse-based drawing. These results indicate that: (1) Generative drawing, overall, can indeed facilitate item memory, supporting the integrated-components model of the drawing effect, and (2) Individuals’ age, type of materials, drawing support, and drawing mode are boundary conditions of generative drawing effect in memory.

Key words: generative drawing, memory, boundary condition, meta-analysis

CLC Number:

B844

XIE Heping, WANG Yanqing, WANG Fuxing, ZHOU Zongkui, DENG Sue, DUAN Zhaohui. Generative Drawing Effect in Memory and Its Boundary Conditions: A Meta-analysis[J].Psychological Development and Education, 2024, 40(1): 29-43.

References

^*表示元分析用到的文献
^*Aeineh, A., Moeeni, S., & Merati, H. (2014). The effect of learner-generated illustrations on the immediate and delayed recall of English idioms. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 5(3), 28-31.
Ainsworth, S., Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2011). Drawing to learn in science.Science, 333(6046), 1096-1097.
^*Ainsworth, S. E., & Iacovides, I. (2005). Learning by constructing self-explanation diagrams. Paper presented at the meeting of 11th Biennial Conference of European Association for Resarch on Learning and Instruction, Nicosia, Cyprus.
^*Bollen, L., Gijlers, H., & van Joolingen, W. (2015). Drawings in computer-supported collaborative learning-Empirical and technical results. Computing and Informatics, 34(3), 559-587.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009).Introduction to meta-analysis. Wiley.
^*Chang, C. J., Liu, C. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2016). Supporting scientific explanations with drawings and narratives on tablet computers:An analysis of explanation patterns. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(1), 173-184.
^*Cheng, L., & Beal, C. R. (2020). Effects of student-generated drawing and imagination on science text reading in a computer-based learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 225-247.
^*Christensen, L. B. (2016). Artistic drawing as a mnemonic device (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). Antioch University Seattle.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer.Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155-159.
Craik, F. I. M., & Jennings, J. M. (1992). Human memory. In F. I. M. Craik, & T. A. Salthouse (Eds.),The handbook of aging and cognition (pp. 51-110). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
^*Cromley, J. G., Bergey, B. W., Fitzhugh, S., Newcombe, N., Wills, T. W., Shipley, T. F., & Tanaka, J. C. (2013). Effects of three diagram instruction methods on transfer of diagram comprehension skills:The critical role of inference while learning. Learning and Instruction, 26, 45-58.
Cromley, J. G., Du, Y., & Dane, A. P. (2020). Drawing-to-learn:Does meta-analysis show differences between technology-based drawing and paper-and-pencil drawing?Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29, 216-229.
^*Dean, R. S., & Kulhavy, R. W. (1981). Influence of spatial organization in prose learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(1), 57-64.
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test.British Medical Journal, 315(7109), 629-634.
Engelkamp, J., & Zimmer, H. D. (1989). Memory for action events:A new field of research.Psychological Research, 51(4), 153-157.
Fernandes, M. A., Wammes, J. D., & Meade, M. E. (2018). The surprisingly powerful influence of drawing on memory.Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(5), 302-308.
^*Fiorella, L., & Kuhlmann, S. (2020). Creating drawings enhances learning by teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(4), 811-822.
^*Fiorella, L., Stull, A. T., Kuhlmann, S., & Mayer, R. E. (2020). Fostering generative learning from video lessons:Benefits of instructor-generated drawings and learner-generated explanations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(5), 895-906.
Fiorella, L., & Zhang, Q. (2018). Drawing boundary conditions for learning by drawing.Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 1115-1137.
^*Gan, Y. (2008). The effect of drawing generated by students on idea production and writing in grade 4. In B. Chang, & H. J. So (Eds.), Workshop proceedings:Supplementary proceedings of ICCE2008. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the 16^th International Conference on Computers in Education, Taipei, Taiwan.
Höffler, T. N. (2010). Spatial ability:Its influence on learning with visualizations-A meta-analytic review.Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 245-269.
^*Hellenbrand, J., Mayer, R. E., Opfermann, M., Schmeck, A., & Leutner, D. (2019). How generative drawing affects the learning process:An eye-tracking analysis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33(6), 1147-1164.
Higgins, J. P. T., Li, T., & Deeks, J. J. (2021). Chapter 6:Choosing effect measures and computing estimates of effect. In J. P. T. Higgins, J. Thomas, J. Chandler, M. Cumpston, T. Li, M. J. Page, & V. A. Welch (Eds.), Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.2 (updated February 2021). Cochrane, 2021. Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.British Medical Journal, 327(7414), 557-560.
^*Jaeger, A. J., Velazquez, M. N., Dawdanow, A., & Shipley, T. F. (2018). Sketching and summarizing to reduce memory for seductive details in science text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(7), 899-916.
^*Jansen, K. (2015). The impact of student generated sketches on vocabulary knowledge of fifth graders (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). Widener University, Chester.
^*Jonker, T. R., Wammes, J. D., & MacLeod, C. M. (2019). Drawing enhances item information but undermines sequence information in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45(4), 689-699.
^*Kasay, T. M. (2018). Using the multimedia strategies of learner-generated drawing and peer discussion to retain terminology in middle school secondary education science classrooms (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). The University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
^*Kombartzky, U., Ploetzner, R., Schlag, S., & Metz, B. (2010). Developing and evaluating a strategy for learning from animations. Learning and Instruction, 20(5), 424-433.
^*Kostons, D., & de Koning, B. B. (2017). Does visualization affect monitoring accuracy, restudy choice, and comprehension scores of students in primary education? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 51, 1-10.
^*Kulhavy, R. W., Lee, J. B., & Caterino, L. C. (1985). Conjoint retention of maps and related discourse. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10(1), 28-37.
^*Lam, D. P. N. (2015). Independent study strategies for learning about the cardiovascular system from text:A comparison of self-explanation and drawing (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). University of California, Berkeley.
^*Landin, J. (2011). Perceptual drawing as a learning tool in a college biology laboratory (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). North Carolina State University, Raleigh.
^*Lesgold, A. M., De Good, H., & Levin, J., R. (1977). Pictures and young children's prose learning:A supplementary report. Journal of Reading Behavior, 9(4), 353-360.
^*Lesgold, A. M., Levin, J. R., Shimron, J., & Guttmann, J. (1975). Pictures and young children's learning from oral prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(5), 636-642.
Li, H., Li, J., Li, N., Li, B., Wang, P., & Zhou, T. (2011). Cognitive intervention for persons with mild cognitive impairment:A meta-analysis.Ageing Research Reviews, 10(2), 285-296.
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001).Practical meta-analysis. Sage Publications.
^*Lorenz, L. A. (2018). Computer-based visualizing:Learning from science texts by means of self-generated computer-based drawings (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). University of Duisburg-Essen.
Mayer, R. E., & Sims, V. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning.Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 389-401.
^*Mcguinness, J. (2013). Investigating the effects of multimedia learning and learner generated drawing (Unpublished dissertation). Lancaster University.
^*Meade, M. E., Ahmad, M., & Fernandes, M. A. (2020). Drawing pictures at encoding enhances memory in healthy older adults and in individuals with probable dementia. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 27(6), 880-901.
^*Meade, M. E., Klein, M. D., & Fernandes, M. A. (2020). The benefit (and cost) of drawing as an encoding strategy. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73(2), 199-210.
^*Meade, M. E., Wammes, J. D., & Fernandes, M. A. (2018). Drawing as an encoding tool:Memorial benefits in younger and older adults. Experimental Aging Research, 44(5), 369-396.
^*Meade, M. E., Wammes, J. D., & Fernandes, M. A. (2019). Comparing the influence of doodling, drawing, and writing at encoding on memory. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73(1), 28-36.
Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design:Recent developments.Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1-4.
Paivio, A. (1969). Mental imagery in associative learning and memory.Psychological Review, 76(3), 241-263.
^*Paivio, A., & Csapo, K. (1973). Picture superiority in free recall:Imagery or dual coding? Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 176-206.
Patchan, M. M., & Puranik, C. S. (2016). Using tablet computers to teach preschool children to write letters:Exploring the impact of extrinsic and intrinsic feedback.Computers & Education, 102, 128-137.
Picard, D., Martin, P., & Tsao, R. (2014). iPads at School? A quantitative comparison of elementary schoolchildren's pen-on-paper versus finger-on-screen drawing skills.Journal of Educational Computing Research, 50(2), 203-212.
Pieger, E., Mengelkamp, C., & Bannert, M. (2017). Fostering analytic metacognitive processes and reducing overconfidence by disfluency:The role of contrast effects.Applied Cognitive Psychology, 31(3), 291-301.
^*Pillsbury, R. T. (2008). Diagramming the Never Ending Story:Student-generated diagrammatic stories integrate and retain science concepts improving science literacy (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
^*Ploetzner, R., & Fillisch, B. (2017). Not the silver bullet:Learner-generated drawings make it difficult to understand broader spatiotemporal structures in complex animations. Learning and Instruction, 47, 13-24.
^*Ploetzner, R., Fillisch, B., Gewald, P. A., & Ruf, T. (2016). The role of student-generated externalizations in strategic multimedia learning and how current (web-)technology fails to support learner engagement. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(7), 1610-1628.
^*Price, G. A. (2006). The effects of learner-generated representations versus computer-generated representations on physics problem solving (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University.
Raz, N., Lindenberger, U., Rodrigue, K. M., Kennedy, K. M., Head, D., Williamson, A., … Acker, J. D. (2005). Regional brain changes in aging healthy adults:General trends, individual differences and modifiers.Cerebral Cortex, 15(11), 1676-1689.
Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results.Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 638-641.
^*Rotbain, Y., Marbach-Ad, G., & Stavy, R. (2006). Effect of bead and illustrations models on high school students' achievement in molecular genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(5), 500-529.
^*Scheiter, K., Schleinschok, K., & Ainsworth, S. E. (2017). Why sketching may aid learning from science texts:Contrasting sketching with written explanations. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9(4), 866-882.
^*Schleinschok, K., Eitel, A., & Scheiter, K. (2017). Do drawing tasks improve monitoring and control during learning from text? Learning and Instruction, 51, 10-25.
Schmeck, A., Mayer, R. E., Opfermann, M., Pfeiffer, V., & Leutner, D. (2014). Drawing pictures during learning from scientific text:Testing the generative drawing effect and the prognostic drawing effect.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(4), 275-286.
^*Schmidgall, S. P., Eitel, A., & Scheiter, K. (2019). Why do learners who draw perform well? Investigating the role of visualization, generation and externalization in learner-generated drawing. Learning and Instruction, 60, 138-153.
^*Schmidgall, S. P., Scheiter, K., & Eitel, A. (2020). Can we further improve tablet-based drawing to enhance learning? An empirical test of two types of support. Instructional Science, 48(4), 453-474.
^*Schwamborn, A., Mayer, R. E., Thillmann, H., Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2010). Drawing as a generative activity and drawing as a prognostic activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 872-879.
^*Schwamborn, A., Thillmann, H., Opfermann, M., & Leutner, D. (2011). Cognitive load and instructionally supported learning with provided and learner-generated visualizations. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 89-93.
^*Seufert, T., Zander, S., & Brünken, R. (2007). Das Generieren von Bildern als Verstehenshilfe beim Lernen aus Texten[The generation of pictures as an aid to understanding during learning from texts]. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Padagogische Psychologie, 39(1), 33-42.
^*Smith, A., Leeman-Munk, S., Shelton, A., Mott, B., Wiebe, E., & Lester, J. (2018). A multimodal assessment framework for integrating student writing and drawing in elementary science learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 12(1), 3-15.
^*Stagg, B. C., & Verde, M. F. (2019). A comparison of descriptive writing and drawing of plants for the development of adult novices' botanical knowledge. Journal of Biological Education, 53(1), 63-78.
^*Stephenson, S. R. (2015). The impact of representation format and task instruction on student understanding in science (Unpublished master's thesis). The University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
^*Thomas, D. B. (2017). Using the multimedia strategies of learner-generated drawing and peer discussion to retain terminology in secondary education science classrooms (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). The University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
^*Thomas, S. (2013). Improving vocabulary acquisition and reading comprehension through cartoon drawing instruction method (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). Walden University, Minneapolis.
Toomela, A. (2002). Drawing as a verbally mediated activity:A study of relationships between verbal, motor, and visuospatial skills and drawing in children.International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26(3), 234-247.
^*van Dijk, A. M., Gijlers, H., & Weinberger, A. (2014). Scripted collaborative drawing in elementary science education. Instructional Science, 42(3), 353-372.
^*van Essen, G., & Hamaker, C. (1990). Using self-generated drawings to solve arithmetic word problems. Journal of Educational Research, 83(6), 301-312.
^*van Joolingen, W. R., Aukes, A. V. A., Gijlers, H., & Bollen, L. (2015). Understanding elementary astronomy by making drawing-based models. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(2-3), 256-264.
^*van Meter, P. (2001). Drawing construction as a strategy for learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 129-140.
^*van Meter, P., Aleksic, M., Schwartz, A., & Garner, J. (2006). Learner-generated drawing as a strategy for learning from content area text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31(2), 142-166.
van Meter, P., & Garner, J. (2005). The promise and practice of learner-generated drawing:Literature review and synthesis.Educational Psychology Review, 17(4), 285-325.
Vandenbroucke, J.P. (1988). Passive smoking and lung cancer:A publication bias? British Medical Journal of Clinical Research Education, 296, 391-392.
Wünstel, C. (2012).The role of expert feedback during a learning-by-drawing task (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Twente.
Wammes, J. D. (2017).On the mnemonic benefits of drawing (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). University of Waterloo.
^*Wammes, J. D., Jonker, T. R., & Fernandes, M. A. (2019). Drawing improves memory:The importance of multimodal encoding context. Cognition, 191, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.04.024
^*Wammes, J. D., Meade, M. E., & Fernandes, M. A. (2016). The drawing effect:Evidence for reliable and robust memory benefits in free recall. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(9), 1752-1776.
^*Wammes, J. D., Meade, M. E., & Fernandes, M. A. (2017). Learning terms and definitions:Drawing and the role of elaborative encoding. Acta Psychologica, 179, 104-113.
^*Wammes, J. D., Meade, M. E., & Fernandes, M. A. (2018). Creating a recollection-based memory through drawing. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44(5), 734-751.
^*Wammes, J. D., Roberts, B. R. T., & Fernandes, M. A. (2018). Task preparation as a mnemonic:The benefits of drawing (and not drawing). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(6), 2365-2372.
Wang, L. C., Yang, H. M., Tasi, H. J., & Chan, S. Y. (2013). Learner-generated drawing for phonological and orthographic dyslexic readers.Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34(1), 228-233.
^*Webb, J. M., Thornton, N. E., Hancock, T. E., & McCarthy, M. T. (1992). Drawing maps from text:A test of conjoint retention. Journal of General Psychology, 119(3), 303-313.
^*Wiley, J. (2019). Picture this! Effects of photographs, diagrams, animations, and sketching on learning and beliefs about learning from a geoscience text. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33(1), 9-19.
^*Wilson, R. E., & Bradbury, L. U. (2016). The pedagogical potential of drawing and writing in a primary science multimodal unit. International Journal of Science Education, 38(17), 2621-2641.
^*Wu, S. P. W., Corr, J., & Rau, M. A. (2019). How instructors frame students' interactions with educational technologies can enhance or reduce learning with multiple representations. Computers & Education, 128, 199-213.
^*Zhang, Z. H., & Linn, M. C. (2013). Learning from chemical visualizations:Comparing generation and selection. International Journal of Science Education, 35(13), 2174-2197.
王燕青, 王福兴, 谢和平, 陈佳雪, 李文静, 胡祥恩. (2019). 一图抵千言:多媒体学习中的自我生成绘图策略. 心理科学进展, 27(4), 623-635.
^*韦雨亭. (2020). 学习者生成绘图对高中生物学习效果的影响 (硕士学位论文). 上海师范大学.
^*谢和平. (2020). "妙指生花":触屏指绘对词语记忆和文本学习的影响 (博士学位论文). 华中师范大学, 武汉.
^*张婉莹. (2020). 学习者生成性绘图对高中生科学文本学习的影响:合作学习的作用 (硕士学位论文). 华中师范大学, 武汉.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Comments

Recommended 0

No Suggested Reading articles found!

[1]	YANG Ming, XIN Sufei, XIN Ziqiang. Weakening Social Support and the Tendency to Avoid Failure: Intergenerational Changes of Achievement Motivation among Chinese College Students [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2026, 42(4): 525-535.
[2]	CHEN Ziwei, HUANG Xiaoxiao, YU Guoliang. A Three-level Meta-analysis of the Relationship between Parenting Practices and Children’s Mental Health [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2026, 42(4): 563-576.
[3]	HAN Yan, GUO Xiaolin, YANG Wenjing, ZHANG Heng, WANG Tengfei. Structural Differentiation of Executive Function in Children with Reading Difficulties Lags behind that of Typically Developing Children [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2026, 42(3): 326-336.
[4]	HE Mengjie, YAO Yao, CHEN Fei. Musical Experience Mitigates the Age-related Decline in Categorical Perception of Lexical Tones: Working Memory Is the Mediator [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2026, 42(3): 348-357.
[5]	ZHANG Pan, YANG Juan, WANG Xiaoying. The Effects of Iconic Gestures on Memory and Generalization of Chinese Action Verbs in 3~4-year-old Children [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2026, 42(2): 153-161.
[6]	LIU Tuanli, XU Yang, BAI Xuejun. The Influence of Part-list Cuing on Memory Retrieval: Integrated Evolution from Single-to Multi-mechanism [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2026, 42(2): 285-294.
[7]	JIANG Ying, GAI Xiaosong. A Meta-analysis Comparing the Training Effects of English Phonological Awareness between Native Chinese Speakers and Native English Speakers [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2026, 42(1): 70-84.
[8]	CAO Xiancai, ZHANG Hao, ZHOU Bolin, CHEN Xiantao, CUI Chenghong, WU Jie. A Meta-analysis of the Impact Factors of Technology Acceptance among Older Adults Based on Technology Acceptance Model [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2025, 41(6): 799-816.
[9]	ZHANG Ruzhuo, WANG Dahua. Assimilation or Contrast? Effects of Age Stereotypes on Middle-aged Adults’ Subjective Memory [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2025, 41(6): 817-829.
[10]	DONG Yueqing, XIAO Fenni. Effect of Target Detection on Familiarity and Recollection of Memory Retrieval [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2025, 41(5): 609-615.
[11]	WANG Yanjiao, HUANG Jiazhen, LONG Jia, WANG Pei. The Intrinsic Relationship between Domain General and Domain Specific Abilities and Dyscalculia and Its Implications: Based on A Meta-analysis Perspective [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2025, 41(4): 473-481.
[12]	LI Li, LI Qianqian, NGUYEN Thiphuong, ZHANG Yunyun. Within- and Cross-domain Associations between the Quality of Teacher-child Interaction and Child Outcomes: A Meta-analysis Based on 45 Empirical Studies [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2025, 41(3): 332-347.
[13]	ZHAO Xiaomei, CHENG Shi, LIU Zihan, LIU Hong. The Effects of Different Language Conditions and Executive Functions on Memory Integration in College Students [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2025, 41(2): 153-162.
[14]	GUO Ying, CHEN Xiaodan, LIU Wenzhi, LIU Yutong, ZHU Bi. Development of Semantic False Memories in Adolescents: Study and Test Factors [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2025, 41(1): 12-21.
[15]	YANG Yunmei, ZHAO Lihua, LI Jing. Social Working Memory Training and Its Transfer Effect [J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2024, 40(5): 750-760.

Generative Drawing Effect in Memory and Its Boundary Conditions: A Meta-analysis

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0