How Common Is Belief in the Learning Styles Neuromyth, and Does It Matter? A Pragmatic Systematic Review
Newton PM, Salvi A · 2020
grade Creviewindependentunreplicated
Sample
37 studies, 15,405 educators, 18 countries, 2009 to early 2020
Population
In-service and pre-service educators worldwide
Design
Systematic review of prevalence surveys. This is evidence about the BELIEF, not about the claim - a distinction this archive treats as load-bearing. The authors are notably careful about their own limits: most included studies used convenience samples and it is often unclear whether respondents understood they were being asked specifically about matching instruction rather than about learning styles broadly.
Key findings
Weighted 89.1% of educators endorse matching instruction to learning styles (range 58 to 97.6%), with no evidence of decline over the decade; 95.4% among trainee teachers. Self-reported use, or planned use, is similarly high. Educational interventions explaining the lack of evidence reduce self-reported belief by an average of 37%.
Genetic confound
Not applicable; the outcome is a belief prevalence, not a child outcome.
Effects
| Outcome | Metric | Value | Measure | Timing | Vs | Horizon | Class |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Educator belief in matching instruction to learning styles | weighted percentage endorsing | 89.1% (range 58-97.6%); 95.4% of trainee teachers | self-report survey | 2009-2020 | none | not-applicable | non-cognitive |
| Effect of debunking interventions on stated belief | mean reduction | -37% self-reported belief | self-report survey | post-intervention | none | end-of-treatment | non-cognitive |
Cited by
- Does matching instruction to a child's "learning style" improve learning?debunkedconf: highgc: low