Mon, May 18, 2026
[Archive]
Volume 19, Issue 2 (2026)
J Med Edu Dev 2026, 19(2): 58-68 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IHEC-II/0963/25
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Aristotle S, aristotle S, Jayakumar S, Ramamoorthy B. Assessment of anatomy learning preferences and their association with academic performance among first-year medical students: a cross-sectional study. J Med Edu Dev 2026; 19 (2) :58-68
URL: http://edujournal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-2651-en.html
URL: http://edujournal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-2651-en.html
1- Department of Anatomy, Chettinad Hospital and Research Institute, Chettinad Academy of Research and Education, kelambakkam 603103, Tamil Nadu, India , sharmianat@gmail.com
2- Professor and head,Department of Anatomy, Chettinad Hospital and Research Institute, Chettinad Academy of Research and Education, kelambakkam 603103, Tamil Nadu, India.
3- Associate professor of anatomy,dept of maxillofacial surgery and diagnostic sciences, college of dentistry,majmaah university,AI majmaah,kingdom of saudiarabia 11952
2- Professor and head,Department of Anatomy, Chettinad Hospital and Research Institute, Chettinad Academy of Research and Education, kelambakkam 603103, Tamil Nadu, India.
3- Associate professor of anatomy,dept of maxillofacial surgery and diagnostic sciences, college of dentistry,majmaah university,AI majmaah,kingdom of saudiarabia 11952
Abstract: (21 Views)
Background & Objective: Medical education demands understanding of complex anatomical structures and functional correlations. Anatomy learning presents unique challenges requiring spatial visualization, memory consolidation, and conceptual understanding. Despite competency-based curricula implementation, considerable variability persists in student anatomy performance. This study aimed to assess anatomy learning preferences among first-year Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) students and analyze their relationship with academic performance in anatomy.
Materials & Methods: A cross-sectional analytical study was carried out among 233 first-year MBBS students at the Department of Anatomy of a medical institute in Chennai, achieving a response rate of 93.2% (233/250). A validated 20-item questionnaire assessed four learning preference modalities: Visual-Spatial (VS), Auditory-Verbal (AV), Textual-Analytical (TA), and Tactile-Kinesthetic (TK). Academic performance was measured through formative theory and practical assessments. Statistical analyses included Spearman correlation, Kruskal-Wallis test, chi-square test, and independent t-tests.
Results: Among 233 participants, learning preference distribution showed: visual-spatial dominance in 30.9% (n = 72), tactile-kinesthetic in 28.3% (n = 66), auditory-verbal in 20.2% (n = 47), textual-analytical in 13.3% (n = 31), and multimodal preferences in 7.3% (n = 17). Tactile-kinesthetic preference showed a significant positive correlation with practical performance (r = 0.187, p = 0.004). Students with kinesthetic dominance scored significantly higher in practical assessments (53.25 ± 12.21) compared to non-kinesthetic learners (49.56 ± 12.66, p = 0.047). Textual-analytical preference demonstrated a negative correlation with both theory (r = -0.208, p = 0.001) and practical performance (r = -0.216, p < 0.001). Memory retention was identified as the primary learning challenge by 55.8% of students.
Conclusion: Learning preferences, particularly kinesthetic preference, significantly influence practical anatomy performance. The findings validate the continued importance of hands-on dissection and laboratory-based learning while highlighting the inadequacy of text-based learning as a sole approach. Integration of traditional cadaveric dissection with emerging technologies and blended learning approaches offers optimal pathways for anatomy education.
Materials & Methods: A cross-sectional analytical study was carried out among 233 first-year MBBS students at the Department of Anatomy of a medical institute in Chennai, achieving a response rate of 93.2% (233/250). A validated 20-item questionnaire assessed four learning preference modalities: Visual-Spatial (VS), Auditory-Verbal (AV), Textual-Analytical (TA), and Tactile-Kinesthetic (TK). Academic performance was measured through formative theory and practical assessments. Statistical analyses included Spearman correlation, Kruskal-Wallis test, chi-square test, and independent t-tests.
Results: Among 233 participants, learning preference distribution showed: visual-spatial dominance in 30.9% (n = 72), tactile-kinesthetic in 28.3% (n = 66), auditory-verbal in 20.2% (n = 47), textual-analytical in 13.3% (n = 31), and multimodal preferences in 7.3% (n = 17). Tactile-kinesthetic preference showed a significant positive correlation with practical performance (r = 0.187, p = 0.004). Students with kinesthetic dominance scored significantly higher in practical assessments (53.25 ± 12.21) compared to non-kinesthetic learners (49.56 ± 12.66, p = 0.047). Textual-analytical preference demonstrated a negative correlation with both theory (r = -0.208, p = 0.001) and practical performance (r = -0.216, p < 0.001). Memory retention was identified as the primary learning challenge by 55.8% of students.
Conclusion: Learning preferences, particularly kinesthetic preference, significantly influence practical anatomy performance. The findings validate the continued importance of hands-on dissection and laboratory-based learning while highlighting the inadequacy of text-based learning as a sole approach. Integration of traditional cadaveric dissection with emerging technologies and blended learning approaches offers optimal pathways for anatomy education.
Keywords: learning preferences, anatomy, education, medical, academic performance, kinesthetic learning
Article Type : Orginal Research |
Subject:
Medical Education
Received: 2025/11/26 | Accepted: 2026/02/22 | Published: 2026/04/1
Received: 2025/11/26 | Accepted: 2026/02/22 | Published: 2026/04/1
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
