Abstract:

Learning by enacting is a generative learning activity that allows students to engage in task-relevant movements, such as manipulating objects. There are different theories to explain learning by enacting: embodied cognition theory and generative learning theory support the positive effect while cognitive load theory provides evidence for negative effect of learning by enacting. This comprehensive review of previous empirical studies aims to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of learning by enacting and explore the potential for future research. On retention test, a majority of the reviewed studies (11 of 13 studies, 85%) found that enactment could improve retention test scores, while a smaller proportion (2 of 13 studies, 15%) did not find a facilitation effect. The median effect size for enactment facilitating retention test performance was d = 0.57. When comparing physical enactment (experimental group) to virtual enactment (control group), 2 (50%) of 4 studies demonstrated that the physical enactment group outperformed the virtual enactment group on retention tests, while the other half found lower retention scores for the physical enactment group. The median effect size for physical enactment facilitating retention test performance, compared to virtual enactment, was d = 0.01. On transfer test, most studies (17 of 20 studies, 85%) found that enactment could improve transfer test scores, while a smaller proportion (2 of 20 studies, 10%) did not find a facilitation effect. 1 (5%) of 20 studies showed that learning by enacting decreased learners' transfer scores. The median effect size for learning by enacting facilitating transfer test performance was d = 0.63. When examining the effects of different types of learning by enacting on transfer tests, a minority of studies (3 of 23 studies, 13%) found better transfer test scores in physical enactment conditions than in virtual enactment conditions. While 4 (17%) of 23 studies found lower transfer scores for the physical enactment group. The majority of studies (16 of 23 studies, 70%) did not find differences between the two types of learning by enacting. The median effect size for physical enactment facilitating transfer test performance, compared to virtual enactment, was d = 0.01. On subjective experience, only five studies compared conditions with and without learning by enacting and measured subjective experiences. One study found that learning by enacting increased students' learning confidence. Two studies explored perceived cognitive load during learning by enacting, and three other studies measured learning interest (d = 0.21), but none found significant effects of learning by enacting on these subjective experiences. When comparing physical enactment and virtual enactment, four studies measured learning confidence. Half of the studies found that students in the physical enactment group perceived higher learning confidence than those in the virtual enactment group, while the other half found no difference. The median effect size for physical enactment improving learning confidence, compared to virtual enactment, was d = 0.28. Additionally, in the studies comparing physical enactment and virtual enactment, four studies measured cognitive load. Half of the studies found that physical enactment decreased cognitive load compared to virtual enactment, while the other half found no difference. The median effect size for physical enactment increasing cognitive load, compared to virtual enactment, was d = -0.16. Furthermore, two studies measured learners' learning interest, with both finding that physical enactment induced higher learning interest than virtual enactment. The median effect size for physical enactment increasing learning interest, compared to virtual enactment, was d = 0.40. These findings generally support the embodied cognitive theory and generative learning theory, suggesting that learning by enacting can be an effective method for improving retention and transfer test performance. Further research needs to optimize learning by enacting, identify influencing factors, and integrate and verify the theories that support this pedagogical approach.

Key words: learning by enacting, manipulation, generative learning, embodied cognition, embodied learning