Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-7ccbd9845f-s2vjv Total loading time: 1.547 Render date: 2023-01-30T07:53:15.477Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

30 - The Drawing Principle in Multimedia Learning

from Part VII - Principles Based on Generative Activity in Multimedia Learning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2021

Richard E. Mayer
University of California, Santa Barbara
Logan Fiorella
University of Georgia
Get access


This chapter discusses the drawing principle in multimedia learning. It proposes that asking students to create drawings while reading text causes generative processing that leads to better learning outcomes. In drawing, students have to translate the verbal text information into a picture that represents spatial relationships among functional elements referred to in the text. Asking students to draw a picture of the text content as they read encourages them to actively engage in deep cognitive and metacognitive processing and thus fosters deep understanding of the material to be learned. The drawing principle has been supported by many studies, especially when students engage in drawing using paper and pencil. An important logistical issue is to create a form of drawing activity that minimizes extraneous cognitive processing by providing appropriate support for drawing.

Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


Ainsworth, S. (2010). Improving learning by drawing. In Goldman, S. R., Pellegrino, J., Gomez, K., Lyons, L., & Radinsky, J. (eds.), Learning in the Disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 167168). Chicago, IL: International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
Ainsworth, S., Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2011). Drawing to learn in science. Science, 333, 10961097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alesandrini, K. L. (1981). Pictorial-verbal and analytic-holistic learning strategies in science learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 358368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alesandrini, K. L. (1984). Pictures and adult learning. Instructional Science, 13, 6377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, M. M., Stieff, M., & DeSutter, D. (2017). Sketching the invisible to predict the visible: From drawing to modeling in chemistry. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9, 902920.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cromley, J. G., Du, Y., & Dane, A. P. (2020). Drawing-to-learn: Does meta-analysis show differences between technology-based drawing and paper-and-pencil drawing? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29, 216229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorella, L., & Kuhlmann, S. (2020). Creating drawings enhances learning by teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112, 811822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2015). Learning as a generative activity: Eight learning strategies that promote understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorella, L., & Zhang, Q. (2018). Drawing boundary conditions for learning by drawing. Educational Psychology Review, 30, 11151137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedrich, L. A., Schmeck, A., Opfermann, M., & Leutner, D. (2013). Computer-based visualizations as comprehension aids for science text learning. Paper presented at the AERA Conference, April 2013, San Francisco, USA.Google Scholar
Gobert, J. D., & Clement, J. J. (1999). Effects of student-generated diagrams versus student-generated summaries on conceptual understanding of causal and dynamic knowledge in plate tectonics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 3953.3.0.CO;2-I>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hellenbrand, J., Mayer, R. E., Opfermann, M., Schmeck, A., & Leutner, D. (2019). How generative drawing affects the learning process: An eye-tracking analysis. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33, 11471164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kollmer, J., Schleinschok, K., Scheiter, K., & Eitel, A. (2020). Is drawing after learning effective for metacognitive monitoring only when supported by spatial scaffolds? Instructional Science, 48, 569589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2012). Science text comprehension: Drawing, main idea selection, and summarizing as learning strategies. Learning and Instruction, 22, 1626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2015). Improving students’ science text comprehension through metacognitive self-regulation when applying learning strategies. Metacognition and Learning, 10, 313346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leopold, C., Sumfleth, E., & Leutner, D. (2013). Learning with summaries: Effects of representation mode and type of learning activity on comprehension and transfer. Learning and Instruction, 27, 4049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leutner, D., Leopold, C., & Sumfleth, E. (2009). Cognitive load and science text comprehension: Effects of drawing and mentally imagining text content. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 284289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leutner, D., & Opfermann, M. (2013). Selbstreguliertes Lernen mit Texten und Bildern im naturwissenschaftlichen Unterricht [Self-regulated learning with texts and pictures in science instruction]. In Fischer, H. E., & Sumfleth, E. (eds.), nwu-essen – 10 Jahre Essener Forschung zum naturwissenschaftlichen Unterricht (pp. 209249). Berlin: Logos.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist, 59, 1419.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pashler, H., Bain, P., Bottage, B., Graesser, A. Koedinger, K., McDaniel, M., & Metcalfe, J. (2007). Organizing instruction and study to improve student learning. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Research.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasco, R. W., Tennyson, R. D., & Boutwell, R. C. (1975). Imagery instructions and drawings in learning prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 188192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheiter, K., Schleinschok, K., & Ainsworth, S. (2017). Why sketching may aid learning from science texts: Contrasting sketching with written explanations. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9, 866882.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schleinschok, K., Eitel, A., & Scheiter, K. (2017). Do drawing tasks improve monitoring and control during learning from text? Learning and Instruction, 51, 1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmeck, A. (nee Schwamborn) (2010). Visualisieren naturwissenschaftlicher Sachverhalte: Der Einsatz von vorgegebenen und selbst generierten Visualisierungen als Textverstehenshilfen beim Lernen aus naturwissenschaftlichen Sachtexten [Visualization of science text content: Using provided and learner-generated visualizations as aids for comprehension in learning from science texts] [PhD thesis]. Duisburg-Essen University: Faculty of Education. Available from (last accessed May 3, 2021).Google Scholar
Schmeck, A., Mayer, R. E., Opfermann, M., Pfeiffer, V., & Leutner, D. (2014). Drawing pictures during learning from scientific text: Testing the generative drawing effect and the prognostic drawing effect. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39, 275286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidgall, S. P. (2017). Drawing to learn: Investigating the role of contributing factors and instructional support for learner-generated drawing [PhD thesis]. Faculty of Mathematics and Sciences, Tübingen University.Google Scholar
Schmidgall, S. P., Eitel, A., & Scheiter, K. (2019). Why do learners who draw perform well? Investigating the role of visualization, generation, and externalization in learner-generated drawing. Learning and Instruction, 60, 138153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidgall, S. P., Scheiter, K., & Eitel, A. (2020). Can we further improve tablet-based drawing to enhance learning? An empirical test of two types of support. Instructional Science, 48, 453474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwamborn, A., Mayer, R. E., Thillmann, H., Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2010). Drawing as a generative activity and drawing as a prognostic activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 872879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwamborn, A., Thillmann, H., Leopold, C., Sumfleth, E., & Leutner, D. (2010). Der Einsatz von vorgegebenen und selbst generierten Bildern als Textverstehenshilfe beim Lernen aus einem naturwissenschaftlichen Sachtext [Using presented and self-generated pictures as learning aids for learning from science text]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 24, 221233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwamborn, A., Thillmann, H., Opfermann, M., & Leutner, D. (2011). Cognitive load and instructionally supported learning with provided and learner-generated visualizations. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 8993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tirre, W. C., Manelis, L., & Leicht, K. (1979). The effects of imaginal and verbal strategies on prose comprehension by adults. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11, 99106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Meter, P. (2001). Drawing construction as a strategy for learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 129140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Meter, P., Aleksic, M., Schwartz, A., & Garner, J. (2006). Learner-generated drawing as a strategy for learning from content area text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 142166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Meter, P., & Garner, J. (2005). The promise and practice of learner-generated drawings: Literature review and synthesis. Educational Psychology Review, 12, 261312.Google Scholar
Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In Wittrock, M. C. (ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 315327). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Wittrock, M. C. (1990). Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24, 345376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Q., & Fiorella, L. (2019). Role of generated and provided visuals in supporting learning from scientific text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 59, 101808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats