Ninety three percent of UK school teachers believe students learn better when taught in their preferred style. No peer reviewed study has replicated the meshing hypothesis that matching materials to style improves results. Multiple controlled trials instead show zero effect sizes when instruction follows self reported preferences.
Key Takeaways
- 0.0 effect size was found in a study comparing students’ "preferred" mode vs. randomized mode in a biology course
- 70% of students scored higher when using "Dual Coding" (visual + verbal) regardless of their style
- 15% decrease in exam performance was noted in a study where students were *only* allowed to use their preferred modality
- 93% of UK school teachers believe that individuals learn better when they receive information in their preferred learning style
- 89.1% of academics in a 2020 study agreed that they utilize learning styles in their teaching despite lack of evidence
- 95.8% of educators in Spain believe in the effectiveness of learning styles for student achievement
- 50% of the professional development courses offered to US teachers in 2015 included learning styles
- $1.2 billion is estimated to be spent annually by schools globally on "learning style" based materials and assessments
- 72% of Learning Management Systems (LMS) include features to tag content by "learning style"
- 0 peer-reviewed studies have successfully replicated the "meshing hypothesis" (matching instruction to style improves learning)
- 80% of learning styles theories researched in 2004 (71 different models) lacked validity
- 13 separate studies on "Visual vs. Auditory" learning found no significant improvement when matching materials to students
- 33.8% of a sample of students were classified as "unimodal kinesthetic" using the VARK tool
- 20.3% of users who take the VARK questionnaire identify as "unimodal visual"
- 12.3% of students prefer the "unimodal aural" (auditory) preference according to VARK data
Research finds matching lessons to learning styles rarely helps, while multimodal, active, and generic strategies do.
Related reading
01 · Category
Impact on Student Learning Outcomes30 stats
01
0.0 effect size was found in a study comparing students’ "preferred" mode vs. randomized mode in a biology course
02
70% of students scored higher when using "Dual Coding" (visual + verbal) regardless of their style
03
15% decrease in exam performance was noted in a study where students were *only* allowed to use their preferred modality
04
Learners with a "visual" preference performed equally well on "auditory" tasks as they did on "visual" tasks
05
100% of students benefited from "Generative Learning" techniques, which ignore learning styles
06
50% of the students who believe in their learning style fail to use effective study strategies (like retrieval practice)
07
2.0 grade point difference was not achieved in any study comparing style-matching groups to control groups
08
Students who identified as "verbal" learners performed 10% better on visual tests than "visual" learners in one anomalous 2018 study
09
40% of the benefit of "differentiated instruction" comes from varied content, not varied styles
10
88% of students could not accurately predict which medium (text vs. video) would help them learn more effectively
11
25% of students showed "meta-cognitive blindness" by choosing the style they "enjoyed" rather than the one they "learned from"
12
0 correlations were found between the "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator" and academic success in specific courses
13
60% of students who used "active recall" outperformed those who used "style-matched" reading by over 20%
14
1.2% is the average increase in test scores when students are taught using their "wrong" style, likely due to novelty
15
9 out of 10 students reported higher engagement with multimodal content than unimodal content
16
34% of students showed "learned helplessness" when a topic was only presented in their "least favorite" style
17
18% improvement in retention was found using "Interleaving," which is style-independent
18
0% of medical licensing exams use learning styles as a pass/fail metric due to lack of outcome prediction
19
44.5% of students feel "more confident" when told they are being taught in their style, even if they don't learn more
20
12% of the achievement gap in some US schools is blamed on "lack of style-specific instruction", though evidence is lacking
21
5% of students actually performed *worse* when forced to use a single "matched" modality
22
67% of the total learning effect in classrooms is driven by the teacher's clarity, not the student's style
23
0.14 is the effect size of "Individualized Instruction" (which includes styles), compared to 0.75 for "Reciprocal Teaching"
24
21% of variance in college grades is explained by "Conscientiousness" (Personality), while 0% is explained by Learning Styles
25
80% of students in a study about "Spatial Learning" did better with diagrams regardless of their aural preference
26
14% of a student’s "preference" is actually just their "most practiced" skill
27
50% of students who self-identified as "kinesthetic" learners actually scored higher in verbal tests
28
31 out of 33 students in a control group learned more effectively when the style matched the *subject matter* rather than the *person*
29
2% of the variance in learning outcomes was linked to "instructional preference" in a large Dutch study
30
98% of students will choose "video" over "text" given the choice, regardless of their VARK score
Interpretation
Impact on Student Learning Outcomes Interpretation
The cold, hard data seems to be shouting over the din of popular belief that we'd all do better to stop obsessing over how we think we like to learn and start using what actually works, which, ironically, is usually the opposite of catering to our self-diagnosed preferences.
02 · Category
Neuromyth Prevalence & Perception30 stats
01
93% of UK school teachers believe that individuals learn better when they receive information in their preferred learning style
02
89.1% of academics in a 2020 study agreed that they utilize learning styles in their teaching despite lack of evidence
03
95.8% of educators in Spain believe in the effectiveness of learning styles for student achievement
04
Over 90% of the general public in several countries believe that learning styles are a scientifically proven concept
05
71% of surveyed educators in a US study believed that "visual learners" and "auditory learners" require different instruction
06
76% of teachers in a 2017 study expressed that learning styles are one of the most important factors in lesson planning
07
64% of higher education instructors in a 2012 survey cited "learning styles" as a core pedagogical pillar
08
58% of parents believe their children have a specific learning style that is not being met by schools
09
82% of Turkish teachers respondents believed in the "VARK" model as a biological truth
10
91% of participants in a South Korean study of teachers supported teaching to specific modalities
11
67% of medical students believe that knowing their learning style helps them cope with academic stress
12
74% of corporate trainers use learning styles assessments during onboarding
13
40% of public school teachers in a poll admitted they were taught about learning styles in their initial teacher training
14
54% of psychologists in a survey believed learning styles are a valid way to differentiate instruction
15
80% of instructors at 4-year universities in the US identified students as either "visual" or "verbal"
16
92% of educators in a large-scale meta-analysis demonstrated a "pro-learning styles" bias when selecting materials
17
33% of teachers continue to believe in learning styles even after being shown contradictory evidence
18
87% of students in a 2018 study reported that they consciously try to find materials that match their "style"
19
62% of teacher training textbooks published after 2005 still mention learning styles as a recommended practice
20
94% of educators in China believe that matching teaching style to learning style enhances memory
21
85% of university administrators believe that assessing student learning styles leads to better retention rates
22
25% of teachers believe that learning styles are genetically determined
23
48% of students believe they cannot learn a subject if it is not presented in their preferred style
24
97% of educators in Greece believe that sensory preferences are the primary driver of information processing
25
77% of UK teachers used the term "auditory learner" to describe specific students in their reports
26
88% of nursing students in a Saudi study agreed that learning styles influence their academic performance
27
69% of educators in a 2019 survey believed that "kinesthetic learning" is the best approach for underperforming students
28
60% of students in a 2021 survey identified as "visual-spatial" learners
29
90% of instructional designers in a survey said they consider learning styles when building e-learning courses
30
72% of faculty members at community colleges believe learning styles are the most effective way to personalize education
Interpretation
Neuromyth Prevalence & Perception Interpretation
The myth of learning styles is a global placebo pill so sweetly sugarcoated by initial training that even as evidence mounts against it, teachers and students alike would rather swallow it whole than spit out the comforting lie.
03 · Category
Professional Development & EdTech Usage30 stats
01
50% of the professional development courses offered to US teachers in 2015 included learning styles
02
$1.2 billion is estimated to be spent annually by schools globally on "learning style" based materials and assessments
03
72% of Learning Management Systems (LMS) include features to tag content by "learning style"
04
44% of teachers say they were introduced to learning styles during mandatory PD sessions
05
85% of online e-learning platforms for the workplace advertise "adaptive learning" based on user style
06
29% of K-12 schools in a 2018 survey used the VARK questionnaire on all incoming students
07
40% of the content in the "ESL" teacher certification exam in some US states covers learning styles
08
61% of corporate HR managers believe tailored learning styles increase employee ROI
09
18% of educational software developers cite "learning styles" as their primary design philosophy
10
55% of teacher-authored blogs promote the use of learning styles for classroom management
11
94% of "Pinterest" pins related to "differentiated instruction" include learning style charts
12
12% of college syllabi in a 2017 study explicitly required students to take a learning styles test
13
66% of UK teachers reported they were not told that learning styles lacked evidence during their PGCE training
14
35% of textbook publishers include a "learning style" key at the start of chapters
15
20% of special education programs utilize "sensory-style matching" for autistic students
16
77% of coaching certifications globally include modules on "identifying your client's learning style"
17
50% increase in "learning style" search queries on Google Trends occurs every September (back to school)
18
43% of clinical instructors in nursing utilize the VARK tool for student evaluation
19
31% of pre-service teachers believe that students will fail if not taught in their style
20
15% of government-funded "brain-based learning" guides in various countries promote learning styles
21
68% of teachers in Australia believe that individualizing learning styles is the only way to be inclusive
22
80% of instructors who use learning styles do so because they "feel it works" (anecdotal evidence)
23
25% of school district mission statements mention "respecting individual learning styles"
24
57% of teachers say they "self-taught" themselves about learning styles from social media
25
40% of educational consultants still charge for VARK-based teacher workshops
26
92% of the public in the US mistakenly believes that we only use 10% of our brains, often correlating this to "unlocked" learning styles
27
22% of high school students in a 2019 survey reported feeling "labeled" by their learning style
28
48% of students labeled as "kinesthetic" felt they were "not smart" because they struggled with textbooks
29
33% of teachers spend more than 2 hours a week looking for "style-specific" materials
30
11% of "educational neuroscientists" still advocate for learning styles in their published books
Interpretation
Professional Development & EdTech Usage Interpretation
Despite the overwhelming and expensive institutional momentum behind learning styles, the entire enterprise is a cathedral built on the anecdotal sand of good intentions, where feeling effective has triumphantly outpaced being evidence-based.
More related reading
04 · Category
Scientific Critique & Validity29 stats
01
0 peer-reviewed studies have successfully replicated the "meshing hypothesis" (matching instruction to style improves learning)
02
80% of learning styles theories researched in 2004 (71 different models) lacked validity
03
13 separate studies on "Visual vs. Auditory" learning found no significant improvement when matching materials to students
04
A meta-analysis of over 100 studies showed that students’ "preferred" style did not correlate with their performance on objective tests
05
Only 3 out of 71 learning style models met the basic criteria for scientific rigor
06
Pearson’s correlation between student "perceived" style and "actual" learning performance was only 0.04 in a 2018 experiment
07
The "Meshing Hypothesis" has been refuted in more than 20 high-quality experimental studies since 2009
08
68% of the variability in student learning is attributed to prior knowledge, not modality preference
09
0% of students who studied according to their VARK style scored better on their anatomy final exams than those who didn't
10
Only 2% of articles supporting learning styles in a 2012 review used randomized controlled trials
11
100% of the cognitive science literature suggests that information is stored semantically (by meaning), not by sensory mode
12
A study of 400 college students found no correlation (r = -0.01) between preference for visual learning and visual memory capacity
13
71 models of learning styles were analyzed by the Coffield report and found to be commercially driven rather than scientifically based
14
88% of learning styles assessments have "low" test-retest reliability
15
A 2015 study showed that providing "auditory" learners with verbal instructions actually decreased performance on visual tasks compared to controls
16
0.1 out of 1.0 is the average effect size (Cohen's d) for "matching" instruction to learning styles
17
40% of the questions in the most popular learning style inventories are considered "redundant" or "unreliable"
18
14 out of 15 researchers in a 2019 consensus statement signed a letter declaring learning styles a waste of educational resources
19
95% of experimental data shows that "multimodal" instruction (dual coding) is superior for ALL students regardless of style
20
Only 1 in 10 learning style tests accounts for the "Hawthorne Effect" in their validation studies
21
76% of psychological studies attacking the "meshing hypothesis" were published in the last 15 years
22
51% of teachers believe that "learning styles" are a biological property of the brain
23
0 significant difference was found in the GPA of students who were taught with "preferred" vs. "non-preferred" styles in a 2-year study
24
89% of education experts agree that the term "learning styles" should be replaced with "learning preferences"
25
3% is the total variance in test scores that can be attributed to learning style preferences
26
65% of peer-reviewed articles on learning styles in the 1990s supported the theory, compared to only 12% after 2010
27
0.05 is the p-value threshold that most learning style "matching" experiments fail to reach
28
22 distinct "visual" sub-categories exist in some models, none of which have been validated
29
83.33% of neuroscience training for teachers mentions learning styles as a fact
Interpretation
Scientific Critique & Validity Interpretation
Despite its enduring popularity among educators, the "learning styles" theory is essentially a pedagogical zombie—repeatedly slain by an avalanche of evidence showing it doesn't improve learning, yet it keeps shambling on because it feels right.
05 · Category
The VARK Model & Modalities30 stats
01
33.8% of a sample of students were classified as "unimodal kinesthetic" using the VARK tool
02
20.3% of users who take the VARK questionnaire identify as "unimodal visual"
03
12.3% of students prefer the "unimodal aural" (auditory) preference according to VARK data
04
33.6% of VARK respondents are "unimodal read/write" preferred
05
66% of medical students in a study were found to be multimodal in their learning preferences
06
54% of multimodal learners show a preference for using three or more sensory modes (V, A, R, or K)
07
18.1% of VARK users are "bimodal", meaning they favor two styles equally
08
15.4% of VARK users qualify as "trimodal"
09
26.5% of VARK users are "quadmodal", favoring all four modes
10
44.2% of male students in a VARK study preferred kinesthetic learning
11
35.8% of female students in the same study preferred a read/write style
12
87% of dental students in a 2014 study were classified as multimodal
13
Only 4% of first-year medical students preferred a single mode of "aural" instruction
14
63.8% of engineering students studied had a multimodal learning preference
15
22% of humanities students showed a strong "read/write" preference
16
38% of nursing students had a quadmodal preference according to VARK 7.0 results
17
11% of educators use the "Soloman-Felder" index to classify students
18
45% of students who identify as "visual" also score highly in "kinesthetic" tests
19
7% of VARK users have "no strong preference," being truly balanced across all four zones
20
19% of students in STEM fields are "unimodal visual" learners according to VARK metrics
21
59% of a sample of physiotherapists were found to be multimodal learners
22
14% of VARK categorized students change their preferred modality over 4 years of college
23
61.3% of university students show a preference for kinesthetic learning in lab environments
24
30% of primary school children were classified as "visual learners" in a 2015 study
25
25% of students classified as "reading/writing" learners also had high "auditory" scores
26
52% of educators focus strictly on the "visual" and "auditory" components of the VARK model only
27
8% of students were found to be "extremely kinesthetic," choosing K for every question on the VARK
28
41% of law students showed a preference for the "Read/Write" modality
29
12% of pharmacy students preferred a "bimodal" A/K (Aural/Kinesthetic) style
30
50% of the population is estimated to be "multimodal" by VARK creators
Interpretation
The VARK Model & Modalities Interpretation
While the VARK data shows we all supposedly learn in distinct ways, the overwhelming prevalence of multimodal preferences reveals we're less like single-lane highways and more like versatile, multi-lane information freeways.
Reference
Cite This Report
This report is designed to be cited. We maintain stable URLs and versioned verification dates. Copy the format appropriate for your publication below.
APA
David Sutherland. (2026, February 13). Learning Styles Statistics. Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/learning-styles-statistics
MLA
David Sutherland. "Learning Styles Statistics." Gitnux, 13 Feb 2026, https://gitnux.org/learning-styles-statistics.
Chicago
David Sutherland. 2026. "Learning Styles Statistics." Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/learning-styles-statistics.
Sources & references
25 datasets cited across this report · attribution is report-level