Cover not available

Article published In: Gesture
Vol. 22:1 (2023) ► pp.1–38

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Weakest link or strongest link?

The effects of different types of linking gestures on learning

ORCiD logo with link | University of Wisconsin Madison
 | University of Wisconsin Madison
 | University of Wisconsin Madison
Published online: 14 November 2023
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/gest.21021.don
Abstract
Teachers often use gestures to connect representations of mathematical ideas. This research examined (1) whether such linking gestures help students understand connections among representations and (2) whether sets of gestures that include repeated handshapes and motions – termed gestural catchments – are particularly beneficial. Undergraduates viewed one of four video lessons connecting two representations of multiplication. In the control lesson, the instructor produced beat gestures that did not link the representations. In the link-only lesson, the instructor used gestures to link representations, but the gestures did not form a catchment. In the consistent-catchment lesson, the instructor highlighted corresponding elements of the two representations using identical gestures. In the inconsistent-catchment lesson, the instructor highlighted non-corresponding elements of the two representations using identical gestures. Participants who saw the lesson with the consistent catchment – which highlighted similarities between representations – were most likely to understand the novel representation and to report learning from the lesson.
Article outline
  • Introduction
    • Connecting representations in mathematics learning
    • Linking gestures in math instruction
    • Gestural catchments
    • Catchments as linking gestures
    • Teachers’ gestures and students’ metacognition
    • The current study
  • Method
    • Participants
    • Design
    • Materials
      • Warm-up worksheet
      • Video lesson
      • Posttest
    • Procedure
      • Warm-up
      • Lesson
      • Multiplication representations interview
      • Posttest
      • Additional task
      • Final interview and self-evaluation of learning
      • Demographic survey
    • Coding
      • Participant interview
        • Verbal links
        • Gestural links
      • Written work
        • Symbolic-expression-to-area-model item
        • Area-model-to-line-model and symbolic-expression-to-line-model items
        • Line-model-to-symbolic-expression items
        • Place value items
        • Coding self-evaluations of learning
  • Results
    • Overview of analyses
    • Preliminaries
    • Did the instructor’s gestures influence participants’ descriptions of links between the area and line models?
    • Did the instructor’s gestures influence participants’ performance on the written posttest?
      • Symbolic-expression-to-area-model item
      • Area-model-to-line-model items
      • Symbolic-expression-to-line-model items
      • Line-model-to-symbolic-expression items
      • Place value items
    • Did the instructor’s gestures influence participants’ judgments about their learning of multi-digit multiplication and place value?
  • Discussion
    • Summary of results
    • Theoretical significance
    • Practical significance
    • Limitations
    • Future directions
    • Conclusion
  • References
References (43)
References
Adesope, O. O., & Nesbit, J. C. (2012). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning environments: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1041, 250–263. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183–198. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alibali, M. W., & Nathan, M. J. (2007). Teachers’ gestures as a means of scaffolding students’ understanding: Evidence from an early algebra lesson. In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Barron, & S. J. Derry. (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 349–365). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Embodiment in mathematics teaching and learning: Evidence from learners’ and teachers’ gestures. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 211, 247–286. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alibali, M. W., Nathan, M. J., Church, R. B., Wolfgram, M. S., Kim, S., & Knuth, E. J. (2013). Gesture and speech in mathematics lessons: Forging common ground by resolving trouble spots. ZDM – International Journal on Mathematics Education, 451, 425–440. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alibali, M. W., Nathan, M. J., & Fujimori, Y. (2011). Gestures in the mathematics classroom: What’s the point? In N. L. Stein & S. W. Raudenbush. (Eds.), Developmental Cognitive Science Goes to School (pp. 219–234). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alibali, M. W., Nathan, M. J., Wolfgram, M. S., Church, R. B., Jacobs, S. A., Martinez, C. J., & Knuth, E. J. (2014). How teachers link ideas in mathematics instruction using speech and gesture: A corpus analysis. Cognition and Instruction, 32(1), 65–100. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Alibali, M. W., Young, A. G., Crooks, N. M., Yeo, A., Wolfgram, M. S., Ledesma, I. M., Church, R. B., & Knuth, E. J. (2013). Students learn more when their teacher has learned to gesture effectively. Gesture, 13(2), 210–233. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, S. A., & Alibali, M. W. (2018). What kind of problem is this? Labels guide generalization of math strategies [Abstract]. In T. T. Rogers, M. Rau, X. Zhu, & C. W. Kalish. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 40th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 2818). Austin TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019, March). (In)consistent labeling of math strategies and problems guides strategy choice. Poster presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bruner, J. S. (1966). Towards a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carpenter, S. K., Wilford, M. M., Kornell, N., & Mullaney, K. M. (2013). Appearances can be deceiving: Instructor fluency increases perceptions of learning without increasing actual learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(6), 1350–1356. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carpenter, S. K., Northern, P. E., Tauber, S. “U.”, & Toftness, A. R. (2020). Effects of lecture fluency and instructor experience on students’ judgments of learning, test scores, and evaluations of instructors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 26(1), 26–39.
Church, R. B., Ayman-Nolley, S., & Mahootian, S. (2004). The role of gesture in bilingual education: Does gesture enhance learning? International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 71, 303–319. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cook, S. W., Duffy, R. G., & Fenn, K. M. (2013). Consolidation and transfer of learning after observing hand gesture. Child Development, 84(6), 1863–1871. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crooks, N. M., & Alibali, M. W. (2014). Defining and measuring conceptual knowledge in mathematics. Developmental Review, 341, 344–377. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Donovan, A. M., & Fyfe, E. R. (2022). Connecting concrete objects and abstract symbols promotes children’s place value knowledge. Educational Psychology, 42(8), 1008–1026. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Donovan, A. M., & Fyfe, E. R. (2022). Connecting manipulatives and symbols promotes mathematics learning. Concrete Connections. Educational Psychology. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Donovan, A. G., & Donovan, A. M. (2022). Catchment multiplication representations instructor images. Available at [URL] (last access 1 November 2023).
Fennell, F., & Rowan, T. (2001). Representation: An important process for teaching and learning mathematics. Teaching Children Mathematics, 7(5), 288. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flevares, L. M., & Perry, M. (2001). How many do you see? The use of nonspoken representations in first-grade mathematics lessons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 330–345. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fyfe, E. R., & Nathan, M. J. (2019). Making “concreteness fading” more concrete as a theory of instruction for promoting transfer, Educational Review, 711, 403–422. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K. C., Wearne, D., Murray, H., Olivier, A., & Human, P. (1997). Making Sense: Teaching and Learning Mathematics with Understanding. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kendon, A. (1972). Some relationships between body motion and speech: An analysis of an example. In A. W. Siegman & B. Pope. (Eds.), Studies in Dyadic Communication (pp. 177–210). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 931, 187–198. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McNeil, N. M., & Fyfe, E. R. (2012). “Concreteness fading” promotes transfer of mathematical knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 221, 440–448. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McNeill, D. (2000a). Catchments and contexts: Non-modular factors in speech and gesture production. In D. McNeill (Ed.), Language and Gesture (pp. 312–328). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000b). Growth points, catchments, and contexts. Cognitive Studies, 7(1), 22–36.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McNeill, D., Quek, F., McCullough, K. -E., Duncan, S., Furuyama, N., Bryll, R., Ma, X. -F., & Ansari, R. (2001). Catchments, prosody and discourse. Gesture, 1(1), 9–33. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McNeill, D. (2002). Gesture and language dialectic. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, 34(1), 7–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mortimer, E. F., Pereira, R. R., & Moro, L. (2019). The use of recurrent gestures to give cohesion to classroom discourse. In L. Xu, G. Aranda, W. Widjaja, & D. Clarke. (Eds.), Video-based research in education: Cross-disciplinary perspectives (pp. 176–193). Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nathan, M. J., & Alibali, M. W. (2011). How gesture use enables intersubjectivity in the classroom. In G. Stam & M. Ishino. (Eds.), Integrating gestures: The interdisciplinary nature of gesture (pp. 257–266). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pozzer-Ardenghi, L., & Roth, W. -M. (2008). Catchments, growth points and the iterability of signs in classroom communication. Semiotica, 1721, 389–409. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rau, M. A., & Matthews, P. G. (2017). How to make ‘more’ better? Principles for effective use of multiple representations to enhance students’ learning about fractions. ZDM, 491, 531–544. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Richland, L. E., Zur, O., & Holyoak, K. J. (2007). Cognitive supports for analogies in the mathematics classroom. Science, 316(5828), 1128–1129. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Richland, L. E. (2015). Linking gestures: Cross-cultural variation during instructional analogies. Cognition and Instruction, 331, 295–321. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Serra, M. J., & Magreehan, D. A. (2016). Instructor fluency correlates with students’ ratings of their learning and their instructor in an actual course. Creative Education, 7(8). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sidney, P. G., & Thompson, C. A. (2019). Implicit analogies in learning: Supporting transfer by warming up. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(6), 619–625. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Valenzeno, L., Alibali, M. W., & Klatzky, R. L. (2003). Teachers’ gestures facilitate students’ learning: A lesson in symmetry. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 281, 187–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wakefield, E. M., Novack, M. A., Congdon, E. L., & Howard, L. H. (2021). Individual differences in gesture interpretation predict children’s propensity to pick a gesturer as a good informant. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 2051, 105069. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Williams, W. M., & Ceci, S. J. (1997). “How’m I doing?” Problems with student ratings of instructors and courses. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 29(5), 12–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, A. A., Boatright, M. D., & Landon-Hays, M. (2014). Middle school teachers’ discipline-specific use of gestures and implications for disciplinary literacy instruction. Journal of Literacy Research, 46(2), 234–262. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yeo, A., Ledesma, I., Nathan, M. J., Alibali, M. W., & Church, R. B. (2017). Teachers’ gestures and students’ learning: Sometimes “hands off” is better. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2, 41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Alibali, Martha W., Rui Meng, Andrea Marquardt Donovan, Meixia Ding & Amelia Yeo
2024. How teachers make connections among ideas in mathematics instruction. In Natural Behavior [Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 66], ► pp. 137 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue