Abrahamson, D., & Sanchez-Garcia, R. (2016). Learning is moving in new ways: the ecological dynamics of mathematics education. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(2), 203–239.
Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: a conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183–198.
Akcayir, M., & Akcayir, G. (2017). Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: a systematic review of the literature. Educational Rearch Review, 20, 1–11.
Atkinson, R. K., & Renkl, A. (2007). Interactive example-based learning environments: using interactive elements to encourage effective processing of worked examples. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 375–386.
Barrouillett, P., Portart, S., & Camos, V. (2011). On the law relating processing to storage in working memory. Psychological Review, 118(2), 175–192.
Barsalou, L. W. (2016). On staying grounded and avoiding quixotic dead ends. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(4), 1122–1142.
Berthold, K., Eysink, T. H. S., & Renkl, A. (2009). Assisting self-explanation prompts are more effective than open prompts when learning with multiple representations. Instructional Science, 37(4), 345–363.
Bric, J. D., Lumbard, D. C., Frelich, M. J., & Gould, J. C. (2016). Current state of virtual reality simulation in robotic surgery training: a review. Surgical Endoscopy, 30(2169), 2169–2178.
Burgoon, E. M., Henderson, M. D., & Markman, A. B. (2013). There are many ways to see the forest for the trees: a tour guide for abstraction. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(5), 501–520.
Butcher, K. R., & Davies, S. (2015). Inference generation during online study and multimedia learning. In E. J. O’Brien, A. E. Cook, & R. F. Lorch (Eds.), Inferences during reading (pp. 321–347). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cangelosi, A., & Invitto, S. (2017). New technologies for human robot interaction and neuroprosthetics. IEEE Computer Electronics Magazine(July 1).
Carbonneau, K. J., Marley, S. C., & Selig, J. P. (2013). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of teaching mathematics with concrete manipulatives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 380–400.
Chaudhary, U., Birbaumer, N., & Ramos-Murguialday, A. (2016). Brain-computer interfaces for communication and rehabilitation. Nature Reviews: Neurology, 12(9), 513–525.
Connors, E. C., Chrastil, E. R., Sanchez, J., & Merabet, L. B. (2014). Virtual environments for the transfer of navigation skills in the blind: a comparison of directed instruction vs. video game based learning approaches. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8(223).
Cooper, L. A., & Shepard, R. N. (1973). Chronometric studies of the rotaton of mental images. In W. A. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing. New York: Academic Press.
Corbett, A. T., McLaughlin, M., Scarpinatto, K. C., & Hadley, W. (2000). Analyzing and generating mathematical models: an Algebra II Cognitive Tutor design study. In G. Gauthier, C. Frasson, & K. VanLehn (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems: 5th international conference (pp. 314–323). New York: Springer.
Cumming, J., & Williams, S. E. (2014). The role of imagery in performance. In S. M. Murphy (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of sport and performance psychology (pp. 213–232). New York: Oxford University Press.
Dede, C. (2009). Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning. Science, 323(5910), 66–69.
Dogov, I., Graves, W. J., Nearents, M. R., Schwark, J. D., & Volkman, C. B. (2014). Effects of cooperative gaming and avatar customization on subsequent spontaneous helping behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 49–55.
Dumontier, M., Baker, C. J., Baran, J., Callahan, A., Chepelev, L. L., Cruz-Toledo, J.,... Hoehndorf, R. (2014). The Semanticscience Integrated Ontology (SIO) for biomedical research and knowledge discovery. Journal of Biomedical Semantics, 5(4), 1–11.
Engelkamp, J. (1998). Memory for actions. Hove: Psychology Press.
Finke, R. A. (1990). Creative imagery: discoveries and inventions in visualization. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Frank, C., Land, W. M., Poppp, C., & Schack, T. (2014). Mental representation and mental practice: experimental investigation on the functional links between motor memory and motor imagery. PLoS One, 9(4), 1–12.
Fyfe, E. R., McNeil, N. M., Son, J. Y., & Goldstone, R. L. (2014). Concreteness fading in mathematics and science instruction: a systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 9–25.
Glenberg, A. M., Gutierrez, T., Levin, J. R., Japuntich, S., & Kaschak, M. P. (2004). Activity and imagined activity can enhance young children’s reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 424–436.
Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). Hearing gesture: how our hands help us think. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Goldstone, R. L., Marghetis, T., Weitnauer, E., Ottmar, E. R., & Landy, D. (2017). Adapting perception, action, and technology for mathematical reasoning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(5), 434–441.
Goldstone, R. L., & Son, J. Y. (2005). The transfer of scientific principles using concrete and idealized simulations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(1), 69–110.
Holmes, P. S., & Collins, D. J. (2001). The PETTLEP approach to motor imagery: a functional equivalence model for sports psychologists. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13(1), 60–83.
Hostetter, A. B., & Alibali, M. S. (2008). Visible embodiment: gestures as simulated action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(3), 495–514.
Howard, H. (2016). Architecture’s odd couple: Frank Lloyd Wright and Philip Johnson. New York: Bloomsbury Press.
Hutto, D. D., Kirchhoff, M. D., & Abrahamson, A. (2015). The enactive roots of STEM: rethinking educational design in mathematics. Educational Psychology Review, 27(3), 371–389.
Johnson-Glenberg, M. C., Birchfield, D. A., Tolentino, L., & Koziupa, T. (2014). Collaborative embodied learning in mixed reality motion-capture environments: Two science studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 86–104.
Kalyuga, S., & Singh, A.-M. (2016). Rethinking the boundaries of cognitive load theory in complex learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 831–852.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: a paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kirsh, D. (2009). Problem solving and situated cognition. In P. Robbins & M. Aydede (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition (pp. 264–306). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Klahr, D., Triona, L. M., & Williams, C. (2007). Hands on what? The relative effectiveness of physical vs. virtual materials in an engineering design project by middle school children. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 183–203.
Klopfer, E., & Squire, K. (2008). Environmental detectives: the development of an augmented reality platform for environmental simulations. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(2), 203–228.
Koedinger, K. R., Corbett, A. T., & Perfetti, C. (2012). The knowledge-learning-construction framework: bridging the science-practice chasm to enhance robust student learning. Cognitive Science, 36(5), 757–798.
Kosslyn, S. M. (1981). The medium and the message in mental imagery: a theory. Psychological Review, 88(1), 46–66.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Laski, E. V., Jor'dan, J. R., Daoust, C., & Murrray, A. K. (2015). What makes mathematics manipulatives effective? Lessons from cognitive science and Montessori education. SAGE Open, April–June, 1–8.
Leinenger, M. (2014). Phonological coding during reading. Psychological Bulletin, 140(6), 1534–1555.
Lillard, A. S. (2005). Montessori: the science behind the genius. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ma, T., Li, H., Deng, L., Yang, H., Lv, X., Li, P., … Xu, P. (2017). The hybrid BCI system for movement control by combining motor imagery and moving onset visual evoked potential. Journal of Neural Engineering, 14, 1–12.
Marley, S. C., Szabo, S., Levin, J. R., & Glenberg, A. M. (2011). Investigation of an activity-based text-processing strategy in mixed-age child dyads. The Journal of Experimental Education, 79(3), 340–360.
Martin, T., & Schwartz, D. L. (2005). Physically distributed learning: adapting and reinterpreting physical environments in the development of fraction concepts. Cognitive Science, 29(4), 587–625.
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
McCrudden, M. T., & Rapp, D. N. (2017). How visual displays affect cognitive processing. Educational Psychology Review, 29(3), 623–639.
Merabet, L. B., Connors, E. C., Halko, M. A., & Sanchez, J. (2012). Teaching the blind to find their way by playing video games. PLoS One, 7(9), e44958.
Moyer-Packenham, P. S. (Ed.). (2016). International perspectives on teaching and learning mathematics with virtual manipulatives. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Moyer-Packenham, P. S., & Bolyard, J. J. (2016). Revisiting the definition of virtual manipulatives. In P. S. Moyer-Packenham (Ed.), International perspectives on teaching and learning mathematics with virtual manipulatives (pp. 3–23). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Novack, M. A., Congdon, E. L., Hermani-Lopez, N., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2014). From action to abstraction: using the hands to learn math. Psychological Science, 25(4), 903–910.
Novack, M. A., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2017). Gesture as representational action: a paper about function. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(3), 652–665.
Pouw, W. T. J. L., van Gog, T., & Paas, F. (2014). An embedded and embodied cognitive review of instructional manipulatives. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 51–72.
Rau, M. A. (2017). Conditions for the effectiveness of multiple visual representations in enhancing STEM learning. Educational Psychology Review, 29(4), 717–761.
Reed, S. K. (1985). Effect of computer graphics on improving estimates to algebra word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(3), 285–298.
Reed, S. K. (2005). From research to practice and back: the Animation Tutor project. Educational Psychology Review, 17(1), 55–82.
Reed, S. K. (2006). Cognitive architectures for multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 87–98.
Reed, S. K. (2008). Manipulating multimedia materials. In R. Zheng (Ed.), Cognitive effects of multimedia learning (pp. 51–66). New York: IGI Global.
Reed, S. K. (2010). Thinking visually. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Reed, S. K. (2016). A taxonomic analysis of abstraction. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(6), 817–837.
Reed, S. K. (2018). A taxonomic analysis of encoding. unpublished manuscript.
Reed, S. K. (in press). Modeling visuospatial reasoning. Spatial Cognition & Computation.
Reed, S. K., Corbett, A. T., Hoffman, B., Wagner, A., & MacClaren, B. (2013). Effect of worked examples and cognitive tutor training on constructing equations. Instructional Science, 41(1), 1–24.
Reed, S. K., & Ettinger, M. (1987). Usefulness of tables for solving word problems. Cognition and Instruction, 4(1), 43–59.
Reed, S. K., & Hoffman, B. (2010). Animation Tutor DVD Thinking Visually. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Richmond, L. L., & Zachs, J. M. (2017). Constructing experience: event models from perception to action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(12), 962–980.
Ritter, S., Anderson, J. R., Koedinger, K. R., & Corbett, A. (2007). Cognitive Tutor: applied research in mathematics education. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(2), 249–255.
Shepard, R. N., & Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171(3972), 701–703.
Shrout, P. E., & Rodgers, J. L. (2018). Psychology, science, and knowledge construction: broadening perspectives from the replication crisis. Annual Review of Psychology, 69(1), 487–510.
Skulmowski, A., & Rey, G. D. (2018). Embodied learning: introducing a taxonomy based on bodily engagement and task integration. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 3(6), 1–10.
Spataro, R., Chella, A., Allison, B., Giadina, M., Sorbello, R., Tramonte, S., et al. (2017). Reaching and grasping a glass of water by locked-in ALS patients through a BCI-controlled humanoid robot. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11, 1–10.
Sridhar, A. N., Briggs, T. P., Kelly, J. D., & Nathan, S. (2017). Training in robotic surgery—an overview. Current Urology Reports, 18(58), 58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-017-0710-y.
Stieff, M., & Uttal, D. (2015). How much can spatial ability improve STEM achievement? Educational Psychology Review, 27(4), 607–615.
Triona, L. M., & Klahr, D. (2003). Point and click or grab and heft: comparing the influence of physical and virtual instructional materials on elementary school students’ ability to design experiments. Cognition and Instruction, 21(2), 149–173.
Uttal, D. H., Newcombe, N. S., Meadow, N. G., Tipton, E., Hand, L. L., Alden, A. R., & Warren, C. (2013). The malleability of spatial skills: a meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139(2), 352–402.
van Elk, M., van Schie, H., & Bekkering, H. (2014). Action semantics: a unifying conceptual framework for the selective use of multimodal and modality-specific object knowledge. Physics of Life Reviews, 11(2), 220–250.
van Gog, T., Paas, F., & Van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2004). Process-oriented worked examples: Improving transfer performance through enhanced understanding. Instructional Science, 32, 83–98.
VandenBoss, G. R. (Ed.). (2006). APA dictionary of psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & de Corte, E. (Eds.). (2000). Making sense of word problems. Heereweg: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Weiner, E. (2016). The geography of genius: a search for the world’s most creative places, from ancient Athens to Silicon Valley. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Wu, H.-K., Lee, S. W.-Y., Chang, H.-Y., & Liang, J.-C. (2013). Current status, opportunities and challenges of aumented reality in education. Computers & Education, 62, 41–49.
Zwaan, R. A. (2016). Situation models, mental simulations, and abstract concepts in discourse comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(4), 1028–1034.