[Papers] Reconsideration of the Effects of Handwriting:

Abstract

From the observation of reading and summarizing multiple documents, O'Hara et al. reported that paper and pen effectively integrated two different activities of reading and writing 1),8) . When using digital tools, participants in their experiment could perform both reading and writing. However, low manipulability of digital tools using a mouse and a keyboard interfered with smooth integration of reading and writing. They strongly preferred to use paper and pen for annotating when they devoted themselves to active reading.In fact, many digital tools to support active reading provide digital pens to support annotation during reading 9)-15) . Additionally, many commercially available Abstract Handwriting is preferred when people take notes or annotate during listening to lectures or reading documents. This paper proves the effects of handwriting experimentally. Two experiments using a dual task method revealed that the cognitive load of handwriting was smaller than that of typing and typing interfered with memorization more than handwriting. Moreover, this tendency was also observed for people who can type fast with touch typing. This indicates that handwriting has a strong advantage in keeping information without interfering with other cognitive activities regardless of people's typing skill.

Fluency and Reading Comprehension in Typical Readers and Dyslexic Readers, volume II

“…In the same way, for Brazilian students, it was possible to notice that the decrease in the cognitive load of the writing movement favored the writing of HF words, indicating that writing practices favored the formation of long-term orthographic memory, suggesting an effect of lexicality for HF words. According with Shibata and Omura (2018), cognitive load is the amount of working memory in use to perform the task. As mentioned by Bonin et al (2016), and, although there was a reduced spelling regularity effect.…”

Introducción

“…Este aspecto es particularmente relevante en el caso de los tres idiomas tratados aquí, puesto que los tres emplean unos sistemas de escritura diferentes a las lenguas más frecuentemente estudiadas en todos los niveles de educación en España. La neurociencia ha evidenciado las diferencias entre la escritura a mano y mediante un teclado (Planton et al, 2013;Smoker et al, 2009;Erhard et al, 2014); existen además varios estudios que describen la eficacia de la escritura a mano, especialmente con fines didácticos (Mueller y Oppenheimer, 2014;Shibata y Omura, 2018). Desde otra perspectiva, la enseñanza de las lenguas extranjeras está estrechamente relacionada con la comunicación entre seres humanos, aspecto que la digitalización a veces dificulta en lugar de agilizarla.…”

Impact of Note-Taking Mediums on Memory Recognition

“…Note-taking requires more cognitive load than simply comprehending the lecture as it is divided into five processes: comprehension, pinpoint of key details, relating to past material, paraphrasing, and transforming the information through either typing or writing (Jansen, 2021). This load placed on working memory is limited to "7±2 semantic chunks" and must be used efficiently with the utilization of a note-taking medium that allows for the absorption of information in an effective manner (Shibata, 2018). The difference in cognitive load for different note-taking mediums is evident in a study conducted by Hirohito Shibata and Kengo Omura, researchers and authors of "Why Digital Displays Cannot Replace Paper", which involved 24 adults ranging from ages 20 to 30 years in a dual task experiment (Shibata, 2018).…”

“…This load placed on working memory is limited to "7±2 semantic chunks" and must be used efficiently with the utilization of a note-taking medium that allows for the absorption of information in an effective manner (Shibata, 2018). The difference in cognitive load for different note-taking mediums is evident in a study conducted by Hirohito Shibata and Kengo Omura, researchers and authors of "Why Digital Displays Cannot Replace Paper", which involved 24 adults ranging from ages 20 to 30 years in a dual task experiment (Shibata, 2018). They used a dual task experiment methodology where the second task is contingent on the first and the results are a reflection of the first task performance.…”

“…The count was analyzed using a mixed model ANOVA. The results revealed that handwriting had a higher recollection rate and therefore, less cognitive load than typing, as it did not "interfere with thinking or memorizing" to the degree that typing did (Shibata, 2018). However, a study conducted by Ian Schoen at Pitzer College in Claremont, California randomly assigned the college students to either take notes longhand or by typing on the content of textbook pages.…”