Drawing on memory: A meta‐analytic review

Abstract

Drawing is commonly used to facilitate event recall in eyewitness and therapeutic settings. Building on Derksen and Connolly’s (2022) review, we meta‐analytically examined how drawing affects memory relative to purely verbal methods of communication (e.g. ‘talk only’ interviews). Database searches identified 36 randomised controlled trials of the effect of drawing‐based interventions on event memory (N = 2013). Our memory outcome measures were amount and accuracy of information reported, errors and confabulations. Random‐effects analysis indicated drawing was favoured relative to verbal controls across these four outcomes. Drawing enhanced the amount (g = 0.63, p < .001) and accuracy (g = 0.29, p = .014) of information reported, but did not reduce errors (g = 0.05, p = .633) or confabulations (g = 0.22, p = .488) relative to control. The memory benefits of drawing were not moderated by age (children vs. adults), event type (autobiographical vs. live/staged vs. video), control type (visual‐active vs. verbal‐only) or task timing (immediate vs. delay). Two potential moderators could not be analysed due to the paucity of studies: event focus (trauma‐related vs. non‐trauma‐related) and drawing focus (event‐focused vs. non‐event‐focused). Our meta‐analysis indicates that drawing is a valuable facilitator of event recall relative to traditional methods of communication. However, our review also highlights the need for more trauma‐specific studies. We address and offer practical recommendations for future studies to address potential risks that may result from using drawing in applied settings.