Theoretical Accounts on Modality Effects on Handwriting vs. Typing

11

been generally reported to lead to deeper understanding and memory, as with the situation model (Bohay et al., 2011; Slotte & Lonka, 1999). With the concrete base of the effectiveness of note-taking, the current study aims to take a step further and investigate the influence of taking text notes via different modalities, i.e., longhand versus laptop.

2.2 Theoretical Accounts on Modality Effects on Handwriting vs. Typing

Before going into the more detailed functions and effects of text note-taking, this section will discuss the recent theoretical currents of handwriting and typing. In the past few decades, computers, laptops, tablets and smart phones have risen to

dominance in terms of note-taking media, and research on whether handwriting can be replaced by typewriting has attracted great interest.

Despite the fact that it has long been recognized that there are perceptual

differences between reading handwritten and typed words (Corcoran & Rouse, 1970;

Ford & Banks, 1977), what the perceptual processes actually are, and how they influence reading outcomes have not yet reached an agreement (Barnhart &

Goldinger, 2010; Nakamura, Kuo, Pegado, Cohen, Tzeng, & Dehaene, 2012; Perea, Gil-López, Beléndez, & Carreiras, 2016). On the contrary, there is a greater consensus on the findings of production in these two different modalities. Handwriting is more than just an archaic tool of learning and recording; it has been proven to hold a positive effect over typing on written text comprehension (Klatzky, Lederman,

& Mankinen, 2005; Mueller & Oppenheimer, 2014).

12

While there are handful studies on the effects of longhand notes versus computer notes, theoretical accounts onto notes taking on these two modalities are missing (Mueller & Oppenheimer, 2014). Nevertheless, insights obtained from the literature addressing possible effects of longhand and typewriting output can still lay the ground for the inquiries for the present study. Fundamental differences of two modalities will be introduced with supportive findings in the ensuing subsections (Mangen & Velay, 2010).

2.2.1 Kinesthetic engagement.

While handwriting requires unique depiction and reproduction of each letter, typing contains much less kinesthetic engagement. The physical movements of typing are not directly related to the letter shape and therefore no graphomotor component is involved. As recent psychological research has shown that hand-brain relationship and haptic experiences are important to text acquisition, it would be no surprise that typing (which lacks motor programs that provide memory traces) may impact learning outcomes, especially with regards to graphic shapes (Kiefer, Schuler, Mayer, Trumpp, Hille, & Sachse, 2015; Klatzky et al., 2005). Only the process of handwriting creates sensory-motor memory trace, which is the meaningful coupling of perception and action. When learners write, additional information of the shape of letters is

developed and may facilitate later recall (Kiefer et al, 2015). This again echoes back to the claim that the perception of written languages and motor action are closely related (Smoker, Murphy, & Rockwell, 2009).

13

As visual processing of graphic shapes is salient to efficient reading, the studies on the effects of handwriting and typing production center on quite similar issues, namely letter recognition and word recall. For instance, Longcamp, Zerbato-Poudou and Velay (2005) investigated children’s memory of letters after an exercise involving the copying of the alphabet by either handwriting or typing. The results showed that the children who went through handwriting training had a significant increase in letter recognition. This suggests that the meaningful coupling between action and

perception during handwriting aids memory retention. Based on this study, extensive research has explored adults’ memory and recognition of non-letters by looking at images of the brain taken via functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) during the process of recognition (Longcamp, Boucard, Gilhodes, Anton, Roth, Nazarian, &

Velay, 2008). Better and longer-lasting recognition of the new letters was found in the group that had learned by handwriting. On top of that, greater activity in the

left Broca’s area (which is related to various linguistic functions) was found

when recognizing letters written by hand rather than typed. Motor knowledge gained by handwriting thus seems to suggest better outcomes for learning individual

characters. Similar results have been found in fMRI images of pre-literate children’s brains in the process of word recognition (James & Engelhardt, 2012). Only those who had handwritten—not those who had typed or traced letters—showed

recruitment of reading components in the brain when they perceived the letters. The findings suggest that handwriting is important for letter processing that may later determine later successful reading comprehension.

14 2.2.2 Attention and distraction.

Another major difference between these two text-production modalities lies with focus and attention. Learners concentrate on the tip of the pen when they handwrite, whereas during typewriting, their attention is divided into two parts: the motor space (e.g. the keyboard) and the visual space (e.g. the screen) (Mangen & Velay, 2010).

While this may not be true for professional typists who do not need to look at the keyboard during typing, there is a lack of research on this fundamental issue.

Furthermore, the use of a laptop while learning has been found to increase the chance of distraction (Gipson, Kim, Shin, Kitts, & Maneta, 2017; Kay & Lauricella, 2011; Yamamoto, 2007). Students nowadays use laptops in class or during self-studying for mainly two purposes: taking notes or searching for related information.

While most students claim that they learn better with laptops, researchers have found that laptops in class can distract both users and nearby classmates, and may hinder learning (Fried, 2008; Sana, Weston, & Cepeda, 2013; Skolnick & Puzo, 2008; Wurst, Smarkola, & Gaffney, 2008). With internet access available on most campuses,

students can easily switch between online news, chat windows and their email accounts when they take notes. In their study on note-taking in different media environments, Lin and Bigenho (2011) found that multitasking not only distracted students from the learning tasks but also made note-taking itself yet another

distraction rather than an assistance. Moreover, when there are too many distractions from multimedia (which is a common case of using laptops), learners may be

overwhelmed and experience difficulty in using cognitive strategies such as note-taking to help with their understanding and memorizing.

15

Regarding the influence of handwriting and typing on text comprehension and memory, two competing hypotheses are therefore postulated. On the one hand, handwriting creates sensory-motor memory traces that benefit learners on letter-level and word-level acquisition. On the other hand, the convenience and efficiency of typing may suggest richer recordings and longer production. In short, the better quality of handwriting and the larger quantity of typewriting are on either side of the scales of text comprehension. While both modalities have their supporters, the issue under debate has recently extended to the field of note-taking.