Study Myths Debunked:
What doesn't work (and why)

Many popular study techniques don't hold up to research scrutiny. Here's what science actually says.

Why Study Myths Matter

Most students are never taught how to study effectively. Instead, they pick up techniques from peers, parents, or trial-and-error—many of which feel productive but produce poor results.

These myths waste countless hours. Students work hard using ineffective methods, then blame themselves when results don't match effort.

The good news: effective techniques exist, and they're not harder—just different. Knowing what doesn't work is the first step to learning what does.

Common Study Myths

What research tells us about popular beliefs

Myth: "Learning styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic) improve learning"

Reality: No credible evidence supports matching teaching to learning styles

Multiple studies have failed to find benefits from learning-style-matched instruction. People may have preferences, but there's no evidence that catering to them improves outcomes.

Use multiple modalities and active learning strategies instead

Myth: "Highlighting and re-reading are effective study methods"

Reality: Both have low utility and create illusions of learning

Highlighting requires minimal cognitive engagement. Re-reading produces familiarity, which is confused with actual learning. Neither involves the retrieval that strengthens memory.

Replace with practice testing and self-quizzing

Myth: "Cramming works if you do it right"

Reality: Cramming produces short-term gains but rapid forgetting

Massed practice keeps information in working memory without building durable long-term traces. You might pass tomorrow's test, but you won't remember next week.

Distribute practice over time with spaced repetition

Myth: "The more time spent studying, the better"

Reality: How you study matters more than how long

10 minutes of effective practice (testing, spaced) beats hours of ineffective practice (re-reading, highlighting). Time is necessary but not sufficient.

Focus on quality techniques: testing, spacing, interleaving

Myth: "If it feels easy, you're learning"

Reality: Fluent studying often produces poor retention

When studying feels easy, you're likely just recognizing material—not learning it. The desirable difficulties that feel harder actually produce better learning.

Embrace productive struggle with active retrieval

Myth: "Multitasking while studying is fine"

Reality: Task-switching severely impairs learning

Every switch costs cognitive resources. Studying while checking phone, watching TV, or browsing leads to shallower encoding and worse retention.

Single-task with focused attention, even for short periods

What Actually Works

The research is clear on what produces durable learning:

  • Practice testing — Quiz yourself instead of re-reading
  • Spaced practice — Distribute study over time instead of cramming
  • Interleaved practice — Mix topics instead of blocking
  • Active retrieval — Pull from memory instead of passively reviewing

Learn more about evidence-based techniques →

FAQ

Why do these myths persist?

Many feel intuitively true. Re-reading feels productive. Learning styles seem logical. But intuition about learning is often wrong—that's why we need research.

Did my teachers teach me wrong?

Probably. Most teachers aren't trained in learning science, and textbooks rarely cover effective study techniques. It's not their fault—this knowledge isn't widely disseminated.

Is all my previous studying wasted?

No—you learned something. But you likely could have learned more with less effort using effective techniques. Going forward, you can study smarter.

How do I unlearn bad habits?

Replace them with better ones. Instead of re-reading, quiz yourself. Instead of cramming, space your practice. Apps like Cruxly make this automatic.

Study smarter, not harder

Cruxly applies proven techniques—none of the myths.

Get Early Access