Contiguity

10
 m

Teach and/or support learning

How students learn, both generally and within their subject/disciplinary area(s)

Respect individual learners and diverse learning communities

What can I do?

Impact
5
Quality
4
  • Use animations in presentations so information appears as and when you talk about it
  • Put separate ideas on separate slides, so students are only looking at one thing at a time
  • Label visuals directly, rather than having notes or legends

What is this about?

Contiguity refers to how close together things are in time and space. The closer together they are, the more integrated they're said to be. In higher education, contiguity can refer to the way information is presented in multimedia presentations, video-based learning, or online learning sites. It can refer to how integrated things are in space like labels on diagrams (known as spatial contiguity) or how integrated they are in time like how points on a slide appear as you speak (known as temporal contiguity).

Poor Practice (spatial contiguity)
Good Practice (spatial contiguity)

What's the evidence say?

Contiguity has a large effect on learning (d = 0.89) ➕➕➕➕➕ (Ginns, 2006). Spatial contiguity (presenting related text and visuals close together) improves learning in both static and dynamic formats ➕➕➕➕ (Schroeder & Cenkci, 2018). Effects are larger for:

  • Complex materials ➕➕➕➕➕
  • Transfer tasks compared to recall tasks ➕➕➕
  • University-level learners compared to younger students ➕➕➕
  • Animations with synchronized narration (temporal contiguity) ➕➕➕➕
  • Visuals with embedded text instead of separated legends ➕➕➕➕

These effects hold across content areas including science, engineering, and mathematics.

What's the underlying theory?

Contiguity effects are rooted in cognitive load theory, which says working memory is limited. When related text and images are far apart or not shown at the same time, students have to mentally combine them, wasting cognitive resources. Contiguity reduces this extra effort so students can focus on learning. Mayer’s cognitive theory of multimedia learning adds that people process visuals and words in separate channels. When both are presented together, learners can make connections more easily and store them in long-term memory.

Where does the evidence come from?

This summary is based on two large and high-quality meta-analyses. Ginns (2006) analysed 50 studies covering both spatial and temporal contiguity, with detailed moderator analysis based on material complexity and learner level. Schroeder & Cenkci (2018) focused specifically on spatial contiguity, using 60 effect sizes and examining effects across different content domains, test types, and formats. Both found consistent results and used rigorous methods to check for bias and heterogeneity.

References

Ginns, P. (2006). Integrating information: A meta-analysis of the spatial contiguity and temporal contiguity effects. Learning and Instruction, 16(6), 511–525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.10.001

Schroeder, N. L., & Cenkci, A. T. (2018). Spatial contiguity and spatial split-attention effects in multimedia learning environments: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 679–701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-018-9435-9

Additional Resources