Back to the directoryFind in the timeline
The learning styles meshing claim
A 2008 review found that people report learning preferences, but found virtually no evidence that matching teaching to a diagnosed style improves learning. A 2015 search of higher-education papers found most still endorsed learning styles.
- Where it sits
- Pop claimA popular book, media story or folk belief.
- Evidence level
- Unsupported claimA popular claim that the sources do not support.
- Sources inspected
- 3 of 31 with the relevant text, company document or archive item checked, 2 as an abstract or reference article, 0 not verified.
What happened
In 2008 Harold Pashler, Mark McDaniel, Doug Rohrer and Robert Bjork published Learning styles: concepts and evidence in Psychological Science in the Public Interest. They asked whether assessing students' learning styles and tailoring instruction to them is supported by scientific evidence. Philip Newton and, separately, Daniel Willingham, Elizabeth Hughes and David Dobolyi returned to the question in 2015.
The psychological idea
The idea tested is the meshing hypothesis: students grouped by learning style do better when taught in the method that matches their style. The review says valid support needs a specific design. Students are sorted by style, randomly assigned to different instructional methods and given the same final test, and the best method must differ between style groups.
In practice
According to the review's abstract, an industry sells learning-styles tests and teacher guides. Newton searched PubMed and ERIC, limited to higher education, for studies from July 2013 to 2015 and analyzed 109 of 236 results. He found that 97 of 109 (89 per cent) reached a positive conclusion about learning styles. Only one analyzed study tested matching, and it found no effect.
Why it mattered
In Newton's higher-education search, most recent papers endorsed learning styles, although the 2008 review found no adequate evidence base for using learning-styles assessments in general education. Willingham and colleagues describe scientific support for these theories as lacking. The case suggests that a large literature is not evidence of an effect: the study design decides.
Limits and qualifications
Pashler and colleagues say plentiful evidence shows that people differ in specific aptitudes and express preferences about how information is presented. They found virtually no evidence for the matching interaction, and several studies using a suitable method contradicted the meshing hypothesis. Many variants have not been tested at all. Newton's count rests on one researcher's judgments and on freely available full texts, and it measures published papers, not teachers' beliefs. Only the 2008 abstract was read.
Evidence behind the claims
Pashler and colleagues (2008) say valid support for learning-styles assessments needs students sorted into groups by style, randomly assigned to different instructional methods and given the same final test, with the best method differing between style groups.
The 2008 abstract says there is plentiful evidence that people differ in specific aptitudes and express preferences about how information is presented, but virtually no evidence for the interaction pattern, that several studies with a suitable method contradict the meshing hypothesis, and that many variants have not been tested at all.
The 2008 review concluded there is no adequate evidence base to justify incorporating learning-styles assessments into general educational practice, and its abstract notes that an industry sells related tests and teacher guides.
Newton searched PubMed and ERIC, limited to higher education, for 2013 to 2015, got 236 results and analyzed 109 studies that met his criteria.
Newton found that 97 of 109 studies (89 per cent) reached a positive conclusion about learning styles, and only one study in the analyzed set tested the matching hypothesis, finding no effect.
Newton states that a single researcher made subjective judgments about whether each paper endorsed learning styles and that only freely available full texts were consulted.
Willingham, Hughes and Dobolyi (2015) say in Teaching of Psychology that learning styles theories hold that people learn best in different ways, reflecting preferences, and that scientific support for them is lacking.
People involved
- Harold Pashler. Co-author of the 2008 review
- Mark McDaniel. Co-author of the 2008 review
- Doug Rohrer. Co-author of the 2008 review
- Robert Bjork. Co-author of the 2008 review
- Philip M. Newton. Author of the 2015 literature search
- Daniel T. Willingham. Co-author of the 2015 paper on the scientific status of learning styles theories
- Elizabeth M. Hughes. Co-author of the 2015 paper on the scientific status of learning styles theories
- David G. Dobolyi. Co-author of the 2015 paper on the scientific status of learning styles theories
In the Psy101 course
- OpenStax Psychology 2e, section 7.4: What Are Intelligence and Creativity?Chapter 7, Thinking and Intelligence. Context. Nearest related section; it does not discuss this topic by name.Nearest related section: it covers Gardner's multiple intelligences and notes educators still use them despite criticism, but it does not mention learning styles.
This is course relevance only. It is not evidence for the historical or corporate claims on this page.See the full course map.
Sources and inspection
3 of 3 sources were opened and read at the level shown. A source marked as not verified supports no claim on this page by itself.
- [1]Learning Styles: Concepts and EvidencePashler, H; McDaniel, M; Rohrer, D; Bjork, R. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105-119 (record via Europe PMC), 2008. Journal article. Primary source.Abstract or publisher record onlyRead the abstract as returned by the fetch tool from a Europe PMC record. The full review was not opened.
- [2]The Learning Styles Myth is Thriving in Higher EducationNewton, P. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 2015. Journal article. Critique or replication.Relevant text checkedRead the open-access article page as returned by the fetch tool: search method, results and stated limitations. Not every section was read.
- [3]The Scientific Status of Learning Styles TheoriesWillingham, D; Hughes, E; Dobolyi, D. Teaching of Psychology, 42, 266-271 (record via Crossref), 2015. Journal article. Critique or replication.Abstract or publisher record onlyRead the abstract in a Crossref record. Full text not opened.
Access note: Only the abstract of the 2008 review was read. Newton (2015) counts research papers that endorse learning styles in higher education; it does not measure teachers' beliefs.
Independent source review: Claude review agent, independent of the research agent, 2026-10-21. Verdict: pass-with-edits.