then, when you see a picture, the idea finally clicks?

後來當你看到一張圖，馬上豁然開朗？

If that sounds familiar, maybe you might consider yourself a visual learner.

如果這聽起來很熟悉，你也許該把自己當成是一個「視覺型學習者」

Or, if reading or listening does the trick, maybe you feel like you're a verbal learner.

或者，如果是讀出聲或傾聽是理解的關鍵，你也許是一個「口語型」的學習者

We call these labels learning styles, but is there really a way to categorize different

我們把這些標籤為學習型態，但真有這些不同

types of students?

區分學生的方法

Well, it actually seems like multiple presentation formats, especially if one of them is visual,

好的，實際上它看起來像是多重表達方式，特別是視覺型只是其一種方式

help most people learn.

有助於多數人學習

When psychologists and educators test for learning styles, they're trying to figure

當心理學家和教育者在測試不同學習型態時，他們想找出

out whether these are inherent traits that affect how well students learn, instead of

究竟是內在特質在影響學生的程度，而非

just a preference.

只是學習偏好

Usually, they start by giving a survey to figure out what style a student favors, like

通常，他們會以透過調查方式開始，找出一個學生喜歡什麼的學習型態，例如

visual or verbal learning.

視覺或口語型的學習方式

Then, they try to teach the students something with a specific presentation style, like using

接著，他們會用特定的展示方式來教學生，像是使用

visual aids, and do a follow-up test to see how much they learned.

視覺輔助，並進行後續測試，以了解他們學了多少

That way, the researchers can see if the self-identified verbal learners really learned better when

如此，研究人員可以看到自認是口語型的學習者是否學得更好

the information was just spoken aloud, for example.

例如，讓教材資訊大聲唸出來

But, according to a 2008 review, only one study that followed this design found that

但是，根據2008年的一份調查，只有一個研究遵循這種設計

students actually learned best with their preferred style…

發現學生能依照他們喜好的方式學得非常好

And it had some pretty big flaws.

然而它也有一些很大的缺陷

The researchers excluded two-thirds of the original participants because they didn't

研究人員排除三分之二的原始參與者，因為他們

seem to have any clear learning style from the survey at the beginning.

從調查一開始，似乎並沒有任何比較清楚的學習型態

Plus, they removed outliers from the data if they thought they were “extreme,” without

此外，他們從資料中刪除離群值，如果研究者認為他們很「極端」，沒有

defining exactly what that meant.

清楚地定義「學習型態」的意義

And, they didn't even report the actual test scores in the final paper.

而且，他們甚至沒有在最終文件中報告實際測試的分數

So ... it doesn't really seem like learning styles are an inherent trait that we all have.

所以...它似乎不像是我們所擁有的內在特性對應的學習型態

But, that doesn't mean that all students will do amazingly if they just spend all their

但是，這並不意味所有的學生都會驚人地照辦，如果他們只是花上

time reading from a textbook.

所有時間來閱讀教科書

Instead, most people seem to learn better if they're taught in several ways – especially

相反的，大多數人在被教授以多種方式學習後會學得更好 - 特別是

if one is visual.

其中一種方式是視覺型

In one study, researchers tested whether students remembered lists of words better if they heard

一項研究顯示，研究人員曾經測試學生能否將單字表記得更牢，如果他們能聽到

them, saw them, or both.

看到，或者同時聽、看到這些字彙

And everyone seemed to do better if they got to see the words in print, even the self-identified

而一旦每個人看到這些列印出來的字，大家學習效果都變好，即便是自認為

auditory learners.

聽覺型的學習者

That preference didn't seem to matter.

與他們的偏好並沒有關係

Similar studies tested whether students learned basic physics and chemistry concepts better

類似的研究，也曾針對學習基本物理學和化學觀念的學生

by reading plain text or viewing pictures, too.

同樣只憑純文字或者閱覽圖片

And everyone did better with the help of pictures.

在圖片的輔助下，大家都學得不錯

So the question of whether or not you're a visual learner could best be answered with:

所以問題又回到，不管你是不是視覺型的學習者都會這樣回答

"Well, yeah, kinda.

對，是呀，有些幫助

But so are most people."

但是，大部分人也都是這樣

Thanks for asking, and thanks especially to all of our patrons on Patreon who keep these

感謝你的提問，同時也特別感謝我們Patreon所有的支持者

answers coming.

持續提供答案

If you'd like to submit questions to be answered, or get some videos a few days early,

如果你有提問問題需要解答，或者提早幾天拿到短片

go to patreon.com/scishow.

請到patreon.com/scishow

And don’t forget to go to youtube.com/scishow and subscribe!

也別忘了到 youtube.com/scishow來訂閱