In exploratory between-subject analyses, embodied learning showed larger effects against passive non-embodied controls (g = 0.43) than against active non-embodied controls (g = 0.86)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr3·q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? Control group characteristics significantly moderated between-subject effect sizes (F = 5.89, p = .02), with larger effects against passive than active controls. → Xiaoxuan Li · Julia Chatain · Fan Wang · Manu Kapur 2026
Evidence¶
Xiaoxuan Li · Julia Chatain · Fan Wang · Manu Kapur 2026¶
Xiaoxuan Li · Julia Chatain · Fan Wang · Manu Kapur. (2026). From Body to Word: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis of Embodied Vocabulary Learning. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10194-9
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3
Exploratory between-subject meta-regression of control group characteristics. Effects were larger against active non-embodied conditions (g = 0.86) than passive controls (g = 0.43), significant at F = 5.89, p = .02.
"only control group characteristics significantly moderated effect sizes ( F = 5.89, p = .02). Specifically, larger effects were observed when embodied learning was compared with active non-embodied learning conditions ( g = 0.86, 95% CI [0.60, 1.12]) than when it was compared with passive non-embodied control conditions ( g = 0.43, 95% CI [0.16, 0.69])."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Amount of sensorimotor engagement, target language, proficiency, and type of embodied interaction do not significantly moderate embodied vocabulary learning effects — related
- Embodied learning significantly improves vocabulary learning outcomes compared with non-embodied conditions in between-subject designs (Hedges' g = 0.65) — related
- Movement-meaning congruency is the only moderator consistently associated with stronger embodied vocabulary learning effects across both research designs — related
- Instructional moderators: effects significant against passive controls and for researcher-delivered, high-dose, and experimenter-designed trained-item tasks, but moderator contrasts not significant — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
control-group-characteristics-moderate-embodied-effects |
title |
In exploratory between-subject analyses, embodied learning showed larger effects against passive non-embodied controls (g = 0.43) than against active non-embodied controls (g = 0.86) |
description |
In exploratory between-subject analyses, embodied learning showed larger effects against passive non-embodied controls (g = 0.43) than against active non-embodied controls (g = 0.86) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2026 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-19 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — xiaoxuan-li-julia-chatain-fan-wang-manu-kapur-2026 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.