Since Gardner suggested that human beings hold multiple intelligences, numerous teachers have adapted and incorporated the multiple intelligence theory (MIT) into their daily routine in the classroom. However, to date, the efficacy of MIT–inspired methodologies remains unclear. The focus of the present study was to perform a systematic review and a meta–analysis to assess the impact of these interventions on academic achievement through reading, maths, or science tests. The inclusion criteria for the review required that studies should estimate quantitatively the impact of an MIT–based intervention on the academic performance and that they followed a pre–post design with a control group. The final sample included 39 articles comprising data from 3009 pre-school to high school students, with diverse levels of achievement, from 14 different countries. The results showed that the studies had important methodological flaws, like small sample sizes or lack of active control groups; they also reported insufficient information about key elements, such as the tools employed to measure the outcomes or the specific activities performed during training, and revealed signs of publication or reporting biases that impeded a valid evaluation of the efficacy of MIT applied in the classroom. The educational implications of these results are discussed.

自从加德纳提出人类拥有多元智能以来，许多教师已经将多元智能理论 (MIT) 改编并纳入他们的课堂日常工作中。然而，迄今为止，受 MIT 启发的方法的有效性仍不清楚。本研究的重点是进行系统回顾和荟萃分析，以通过阅读、数学或科学测试评估这些干预措施对学业成绩的影响。审查的纳入标准要求研究应该定量估计基于 MIT 的干预对学业成绩的影响，并且他们遵循与对照组的前后设计。最终样本包括 39 篇文章，其中包含 3009 名学龄前到高中学生的数据，具有不同的成就水平，来自 14 个不同的国家。结果表明，这些研究存在重要的方法学缺陷，例如样本量小或缺乏积极的对照组；他们还报告了关于关键要素的信息不足，例如用于衡量结果的工具或培训期间进行的具体活动，并揭示了阻碍有效评估 MIT 在课堂上应用的有效性的出版或报告偏见的迹象。讨论了这些结果的教育意义。并揭示了出版或报告偏见的迹象，这些偏见阻碍了对 MIT 在课堂上应用的有效性的有效评估。讨论了这些结果的教育意义。并揭示了出版或报告偏见的迹象，这些偏见阻碍了对 MIT 在课堂上应用的有效性的有效评估。讨论了这些结果的教育意义。