Make Gestures to Learn: Reproducing Gestures Improves the Learning of Anatomical Knowledge More than Just Seeing Gestures

Abstract

Manual gestures can facilitate problem solving but also language or conceptual learning. Both seeing and making the gestures during learning seem to be beneficial. However, the stronger activation of the motor system in the second case should provide supplementary cues to consolidate and re-enact the mental traces created during learning. We tested this hypothesis in the context of anatomy learning by naïve adult participants. Anatomy is a challenging topic to learn and is of specific interest for research on embodied learning, as the learning content can be directly linked to learners' body. Two groups of participants were asked to look at a video lecture on the forearm anatomy. The video included a model making gestures related to the content of the lecture. Both groups see the gestures but only one also imitate the model. Tests of knowledge were run just after learning and few days later. The results revealed that imitating gestures improves the recall of structures names and their localization on a diagram. This effect was however significant only in long-term assessments. This suggests that: (1) the integration of motor actions and knowledge may require sleep; (2) a specific activation of the motor system during learning may improve the consolidation and/or the retrieval of memories.

Keywords: anatomy; embodied cognition; learning and memory; long-term memory; manual gesture.

Figure 1

Main diagram of the forearm anatomy used in learning and testing phases. In total 14 different names had to be memorized on the main diagram (left) and two more on the diagram with ligaments (on the right). The two diagrams share two structures with different views (1 and 15; 2 and 18).

Figure 2

Overview of the procedure of the experiment (see text for details).

Figure 3

Average proportion of correct responses (PROP_CORRECT) in each test and group in the short-term session (n = 21 in each group). Error-bars represent between participants standard errors.

Figure 4

Average proportion of correct responses (PROP_CORRECT) for the participants and the tests performed in both the short-term and long-term session (n = 19 in each group). Error-bars represent between participants standard errors.

Figure 5

Distribution of QUAL_EVAL scores (subjective evaluations on Likert-scale, 10: most positive evaluation) for each DIMENSION depending on the GROUP.

Figure 6

Number of gestures made by each participant during the learning phase (first row) and the evaluation phase (second row). Results are given for each step of the learning phase and each test in the evaluation phase. The number of expected gestures was: 2 gestures in Steps 1, 3 and 5; 3 gestures in Step 2; 1 gesture in Step 4, see Table 1 for details.