Handwriting but not typewriting leads to widespread brain connectivity
frontiersin.org
frontiersin.org
Could never find anything again long after I wrote it, or took way too long to look it up. Idiotically transcribing my notes into emails to send off as meeting notes.
Switched to typing everything, even stream-of-consciousness stuff for myself, a couple years ago and would never want to go back. Feel quite foolish for falling for this for so long.
In the heyday of handwritten notes it wasn't so different from how we organize files on computers today. After all where do we think those common fields came from? Timestamps, data blocks, pages, tags/keywords, etc.
Notes are front-to-back and empty space on pages is minimal (especially pocket notebooks). Regions of the pages are broken into numbered blocks. Index is written back-to-front with each entry containing at least a timestamp and block number. Keywords, if you can fit them, greatly enhances searchability.
I'd love to know of any books written about this topic.
A regular topic-to-page-number index has served for about 1500 pages of work notes since ~2018, but my personal journal's quite a bit longer and I lacked the foresight to index that from the start. It's not that I mind an excuse to reread in detail, but I'd like to begin as I mean to go on and I just haven't come up with a way to do it that looks maintainable.
I don't group anything when I'm writing and just stick to a more or less consistent set of general keywords per entry. Each index entry is its own numbered row. Index entries may need their own numbers so I can come back later to group. I may not even index if I'm really rushed until later as long as I mark my regions I can index it all later. Not hard to count them up.
An example of an index entry: "56 2024-02-13@22:30 39.1 hn"
where the format is: "<index entry #> <timestamp> <page #>.<region #> <keyword>"
I would have to linearly search if I haven't yet updated my groups in a meta index that spans notebooks e.g. "showerthoughts: 3.30.3 9.42.1 10.3.2 ... " where the format is <book #>.<page #>.<region #> or more concisely <book #>.<index #> I've done both before. I prefer the latter when my index has lots of columns that are more helpful (such as bigger notebooks and I always label my columns so I don't confuse myself because not all my notebooks are the same format depending on size).
There's always time for indexing and metaindexing later and I find it relaxing. Sort of like washing the dishes. It's a discipline thing, but doesn't have to be perfect. If I had a bunch of old unindexed books I'd start by just broadly labeling the books first (mostly/all school, mostly/all work, mostly/all personal, etc.) and then lazily drill down into pages and regions and keywords as I actually need the info. Just as long as I didn't waste the effort I took to find things the hard way and be sure to index it's better than no index at all... wabi-sabi and all that.
Also worth pointing out I don't have separate books for topics. Fuck that it's going on whatever paper I've got on hand and I've even stuck loose pages into books later. As long as the actual content has matching numbers on it (in the corner) the index will keep track. I number it according to where I'm gonna stick it or just n+1 non-loose soon-to-no-longer-be-blank pages/regions. I truly treat paper like disk space and write whatever whenever. It really freed me to think that way. If the index is lost it's not unrecoverable either, just tedious.
Pretty sure I picked up the habit of decimal numbering in like the 3rd grade. I had teachers whose assignments were like that: <assignment #>.<problem #>
i.e. "Did you turn in homework 5.1 through 7.15? No?! You're going to the office if you can't sit in the hall to finish it by the end of class!" Thought all teachers were like that.
A master of understatement! But this is an impressively well developed scheme, and if I take nothing else away from it I suspect the idea of metaindexing will prove useful. Thanks for taking the time to go into such detail!
Yes - it is true that I sometimes have to thumb through a couple different notebooks to find what I'm looking for, but most of the time it's only my current and maybe last notebook I need to reference.
Suddenly I went from taking horrific notes to taking absolutely amazing notes that I could actually use later. I believe that this contributed a decent amount to my success later on in college.
But now I'm close to 100% on note taking apps like bear or ios default notes.
If it's about trying to understand what's bothering me on a subject, audio journal ("talking it out") seems to work better, though writing also works.
Sometimes I'll be surprised when I see or hear my thoughts laid out like that. Often I've thought something for a long time and never realized it explicitly.
I found value in hand-writing by doing morning-pages as a regular high volume stream-of-conscious practice which allowed my hand-writing to free itself from the deliberate part of my mind.
The mind should be alive while you hand-write rather than, as a imagine it, a child spelling out the letters as they print them. Ideally it should be more of a flow state with multiple parts of your mind working in parallel. You can basically queue up a sentence for the more autonomous part of the brain to hand-write while the rest of your mind is thinking more strategically and refining arguments.
For me, hand-writing can be magical because that semi-conscious autonomous part can be a source of creativity of it's own. The conscious mind has ordered a vanilla statement but the hand has embellished it with unplanned rhetorical flourish which can take the observing part of the mind by surprise by it's beauty.
This can feel like a bit of dialogue between parts of my mind as I write. The planning part is reading what is emerging from the hand and getting inspired beyond it's own plans. I'd be curious if this has any genuine physiological basis with multiple parts of the brain because it does fit into those right-brain / left-brain type models.
I go in cycles and start assuming I'm getting the same benefit with typing but I then rediscover how the craft of hand-writing opens up something fresh I've been missing. There is something to the constant forward progression, the uneditable ink and the physical movement that helps. The way words appear is allowing for creative supervention. There is something about how ink on a page materially changes the world but letters on a screen are intangible vapour. For me typing, can always feel a little unserious and uncommitted. No matter how I might try to set my mind, there is a temptation to edit after every keystroke.
I think it's related to how some people can speak with simplicity and grace but they write turgid crap. Whatever that natural off-the-top-of-your-mind circuit we use to speak can become overpowered by an overthinking inner bore. For me at least, hand-writing can activate some different brain areas and find some freedom.
What made me change my mind was (1) noticing that my digital notes were usually buried under several layers of backups of tarballs of backups of tarballs of backups so it was getting inconvenient because I have multiple devices and don't want to set up sync for reasons.
And then (2) there was this notebook from fscking high school that has somehow survived everything I've been through up until now, mocking me with all its perfectly preserved information that has lived more than my oldest device. Not useful information, mind you. But just the fact that it's still there, conveniently at hand, accessible in less time than it would take me to search my unorganized mess of backups.
Something clicked in me around last year, and realized that I could use notebooks for small things that I might want to reference in the future. Like some useful commands, ideas for things to improve, and small things like that.
So now I treat notes on my phone and computer as ephemeral, even if they might still exist in a nested backup somewhere.
Haven't regretted it so far.
Yes, I could improve how I organize my backups, but I won't. For reasons that I'm fully aware don't make sense to others. It basically boils down to (1) it's a back up, touch it as little as possible; and (2) whenever I change devices (e.g. because hardware upgrades), I usually want to start afresh because I no longer like the old way I organized things, while I also don't want to bring my old notes and re-organize them in the new way I like now.
But only loose-leaf notebooks work for me. I can't use more "permanent" notebooks because I still want to be able to move stuff around somewhat.
Insufficient canvas on a digital screen, lack of immediate access that flipping pages has, and poor handwriting recognition.
Wish I could get all the wasted hours back that I spent correcting bad OCR.
So when you go slow and engage more senses and muscles, you aren't taking "better notes", you're making your brain linger on the content longer and in more depth. It's borderline useless if it's a business meeting that you're notetaking, but it's also potentially very helpful for developing the language of shapes and lines, math symbols, molecular diagrams, etc. A lot of study recommendations now say, "take the notes twice". Once in lecture, just letting your hand move without understanding and reducing anything that's lengthy and repetitive to a shorthand symbol. And then a second time when you are at home, allowing yourself to go slowly and develop more comprehension as a mode of study.
It probably boils down to actually giving a thought, consciously or not, to the new information: be it in a conversation with a person, when learning something new at school or at work, or in a work meeting making important decisions. Almost impossible if you only rush all the time, or if you are overloaded with the influx of the information.
A couple of years ago I switched to ipad and apple pencil. The key is that the ipad indexes the handwritten text.
It’s nowhere near as nice as pen and paper (and I’m no snob — mechanically it’s not great). I added a screen cover to increase friction and practiced a little. Works pretty well and I have all my notes with me.
That's not what most of the studies I've seen say. I can't remember the specifics (since I didn't write them down by hand) but IIRC the differentiating factor was whether you hand wrote your notes, not how you organized them. In other words the literal act of jotting it down is the source of the benefit.
That said, these psychology studies are pretty useless most of the time.
> That said, these psychology studies are pretty useless most of the time.
There is a definite reproducibility issue but we don't need to bin the work of a whole academic category.
This is the exact opposite of everything I have ever read singing the praises of handwritten notes.
In other words, I think there's a strong selection bias at play here. Meta analysis would shed light there but I am satisfied with my note management so I don't really wanna put any effort into that.
I've never heard anyone suggest you should only hand write. I type most of the time, but use handwriting whenever I need to learn something or absorb a lot of information at once. It's not an effective filing/information retrieval system, it's an effective brain training system.
I use a notebook to write stuff down while studying. I don't always refer back to them. Especially not after I've finished studying the topic but the process ingrains the ideas into my head in a way that typing can't. I also draw diagrams and things to illustrate ideas which further help retention.
And --- you can't make this s*#% up --- that was twelve years to the day (I just checked); 14 Feb 2012.
As it turns out, that page is still entirely relevant, and I'm still working on it. [Insert :sweat-smile: emoji].
Back to hand writing; Too late in life I realised its value. I spent all my school and college life absolutely hating it --- writing was too hard.
Now I use it when I really need to pay attention to detail. It compels me to slow down and that is how I absorb material better. Further, I realized it is most useful when I am reading / thinking on my own, whereas live classroom note-taking disconnects me from the topic. So now I just listen through live lectures and only jot down keywords at points of confusion and/or insight.
This applies to code too. From time to time, for difficult topics, I will hand-copy code from textbook examples, and also hand-evaluate them on paper before typing the thing into the computer to see if it works. Even if I am following along by typing directly in my Emacs, I always type out any demo / sample code; never copy-pasting. Some of the mechanics remain the same; i.e. slow down, breathe, and pay attention to detail.
Apart from helping with faster memorisation, I have noticed that writing a problem down / solving on paper improves problem solving significantly. I always diagram out the problem & solution on paper whenever i get stuck.
compare writing to typing in a computer, if while typing you start to visualize the concepts/topics and want to do some small doodles while thinking you're kinda out of luck, even if you have a tablet there's still friction and you having to have what's written and what's doodled in separate files.
tablets screen texture still feels less comfortable than plain paper and a ballpoint pen, that why I always have one on my desk.
I almost never return back to my handwritten notes.
Write by hand if you want to internalize it in your memory.
Everything else like recipe, TODO list, I just type it directly into my phone/tablet.
But the other thing is - as soon as I start (or started, back when I was a pupil/student) taking notes, I stop learning. Everybody always insisted that "you have to take notes!", so I tried that sometimes - and it was a disaster. Didn't learn. Had to go over the notes and trying to learn from that. Not good at all.
When I didn't take notes I could focus 100% on what was shown and said, and I learned it. I understood it, to the extent that there was nothing to remember (just like you don't have to remember that an apple will fall, if given the chance). So, when class was over, I understood. Easy on the brain.
Obviously there are equations and pure facts. Those you should simply look up when needed. That's how we were thought in my college anyway - learn how to find what you need, when you need it.
For other things - not attending classes I mean - I most definitely prefer using a keyboard (designs, thoughts about designs etc). Handwriting would be the worst for this.
TL;DR - my own experience absolutely tells me that typing is at least as good, probably much better, than handwriting, and it's all a red herring anyway because taking notes is detrimental to deep understanding. Keep that to the absolute minimum, and it can be useful, but only then. And for that, it makes no difference what writing method you use.
In math, at least, part of the difficulty of higher level problem solving is that you simply need to have a large number of definitions and theorems memorised to be able to do anything interesting or difficult. And you need to have seen (and remember!) examples of things. This lets you reach a higher level of thinking where your intuition about what is and isn't true is much better.
"Look at up when you need it" doesn't work if you don't know what you need.
Typing out math doesn't really get my juices flowing. I freely admit I have no real evidence for this.
Sketching out ideas for something I'll build over the weekend: paper. A list of things I need to get done and chip away at over the next 2 months: paper. A complicated web of info that I might need just a part of at some indeterminate point in the future: digital.
I’m not a research scientist, but it seems like you could look at this evidence and just as easily conclude that writing by hand increases the extraneous load for learners, i.e. that the task of writing itself requires more attention or “mental bandwidth” which would be diverted away from whatever you’re hoping they will learn.
I’d like to know if there’s evidence against this alternative explanation.
> "The present findings suggest that the intricate and precisely controlled handwriting movements have a beneficial impact on the brain’s connectivity patterns related to learning and remembering."
But you are right, they do not directly _prove_ that handwriting yields a greater learning effect.
I find the extraneous load helpful as it forces my attention. But this only works in cases when I can control the pace, such as when reading (as opposed to listening.)
"Forty university students in their early twenties"
Most older people learned to write and only learned to type when access to typewriters and computers became common.But these forty 20-year-olds? They were probably using keyboards since the beginning, and may have written maybe in grade school or for a signature.
Fluency using a keyboard can be quite easy on the brain. I've been typing a long time and I don't even think of the spelling or word, it just comes out on the screen. In fact, I have forgotten logins and passwords, but my fingers will dutifully type them anyway.
I can also write, but I gave it for keyboards, and now I'm quite rusty. My writing is less legible and requires more concentration.
(b) type the presented word using the right index finger on the keyboard.
That's really one thing that threw me off, when I stumbled upon it: How is this realistic typing?.. Sounds almost like comparing a flute and a piano and concluding the superiority of the former, because the pianist had to play only using one finger at a time?I hate writing with my hand. Hate it. It's slow, it's friction, and I have to pay attention to writing instead of thinking. To back up and dot my i's, whether I can cram another word on this line or not, do I need to slow down to be more legible or speed up to catch up? Ugh is my hand cramping? If I'm writing, I'm thinking about writing rather than thinking about the thing. You might as well be asking me to listen and waterski at the same time. It's not gonna help.
I love typing. It's effortless and fast and I can do it without thinking (or looking), so I'm actually thinking about the content of what I'm writing.
If I'm taking notes by hand in a lecture, I simply will not remember most of the lecture because I was too distracted by the mechanical process of writing it down. If I'm typing out notes, it's totally fine -- I pay attention perfectly, maybe even better because I've even got it outlined in sections.
I've always been baffled at how some people remember things better with writing. Are they better at multitasking? Are they bad at typing? Is writing just easier for them than it is for me? Is it something about muscle tension in the hand?
Probably. Every skill requires practice to become effortless.
You're complaining about handwriting, some people are saying reading is an effort and waste their life watching talking heads on youtube...
I think that handwriting and its constraints, lead to a different mindset from when you're typing on a keyboard:
- It's write Only; You can't erase easily, so you either accept it and just keep pushing forward or you get distracted by not being able to do so (good), leading you to think twice before writing (bad).
- The physical coordination involved is a soothing and mindful process (at least for me) and it feels much more creative than typing. It's way easier to stay focused while doing so (might relate to my ADHD).
I rememeber vividly myself asking my dad when I was a kid why his handwriting was so different from what I learning at school. He told me that the success criteria for writing is can you read your own writing? Can you make an effort to make readable for others when you intend it to be read by someone else? If yes, that's good enough, nobody cares if you draw letters in a uncommon fashion, as long as they can understand the words.
While questionable at times, the way that doctors write follows this logic, because when writing the prescription the tend to optimize for writing more than reading, and therefore allow themselves more freedom.
I feel that once you've taken that step, writing becomes a much more enjoyable process. When I write, a "f" will be drawn differently, depending if it's the first letter of the word, or in the middle (as in "effort").
So I end up having three "modes" for handwriting:
- Ephemeral, I'll write things so quickly that I know I'll be able to decipher it only for a few days, while the topic is still fresh in my brain.
- Just for me, so I make zero efforts, just paying a bit more attention so I don't end up scribbling "effort" into "e||o||" which may cause problems in a month or two.
- For others, where I'll keep my handwriting peculiarities, but make sure it's absolutely decipherable (so no shortcuts, no stroked words, etc ..)
Strangely, I remember myself handwriting things, but I never remember typing something (though I'll remember about the thoughts of course). It's like handwriting is a more anchored experience somehow.
As a teacher my grandfather had a special fondness for teaching handwriting. He read literature on it and conducted his own experiments using his pupils, trying to figure out what worked and what didn't.
One of the things I recall vividly is him explaining to me as I started school, how it was vastly beneficial to use thick pencils when first learning to write by hand. He gave me, as he gave his students, a pencil he preferred which as I recall had a diameter about 1.5x a regular pencil. It was also slightly softer, around 2B.
As I recall his explanation was that the larger pencil required less motor skill precision, which lead to more relaxed fingers hence reduced strain. The softer graphite also required less pressure, again reducing strain.
As I recall he had found the reduction in strain really helped kids get comfortable with writing by hand.
I feel like since I've mostly been typing things for the last 30 years that my motor control for hand writing isn't all that good anymore either. When I do write by hand it's less legible than it was when I was in my 20s (now in my 60s).
for me that's the point of handwriting. you have to think careful what you want to write or stick with what you wrote for the sake of authenticity.
> Now young children, by forcing them to handwrite, are denied both these affordances
this sentiment feels very wrong to me for cultural as well as paedagogical reasons.
I'll bet dollars to donuts that there are myriad ways to increase these connectivity markers in the brain without such laborious processes.
I get it, somebody is today's 1 in 10000. I'm just trying to get them all in one place
No way this replicates.
(baseless speculation below)
One thing I've noticed is how drastically my handwriting (and maybe hand dexterity in general) varies wildly from hour to hour, mostly depending on how tired I am or how much caffeine I've had.
If I'm feeling tired and sluggish, my handwriting is a disaster. It doesn't look good. It doesn't feel good. But after some caffeine, or otherwise becoming more alert, suddenly it looks better, and it feels much better as I do it.
Is this just me? I guess it's not surprising that caffeine would have an impact like this. But the part that's surprising to me is how pronounced and reliable it is.
Handwriting things results in much better retention for me, but the notes are useless. Typed notes are a fantastic, easily edited artifact, but I feel the practice actually lowers my overall comprehension.
I want to concretely know if this is true, or just some weird bias.
I also want a tool that works well with both human memory and editability/searchability.
Even simple trivia type questions like "what's the V chord in F" are on basically instant recall for an experienced musician but without your instrument you have to stop and think (possibly even picturing your hands on your instrument) to answer.
As a seemingly overly visual thinker the aspect of making several small decisions about how to layout what I'm writing down by hand also seems to play a huge role in that. I have to make positioning and thereby spacing and sizing decisions, choose the color, as well as making decisions on in what style (caps, cursive, script) I write each letter. I can easily use graphical elements like lines, arrows, boxes, etc.
Anything created digitally by primarily typing will always have a more dynamic and flowing nature, while following the linearity of the typed sequence of characters. It takes away a lot of the decisions that I have to make when laying out a handwritten note.
Anecdotally, I seem to remember mindmaps created with digital tools that rearrange elements automatically based on available space much less than hand-drawn ones. Yet, those come with their own downsides.
Maybe the repeated parsing and checking for legibility is the foil that improves memory retention!
I tried skipping the paper but typing notes didn't have close to the same effect, by an order of magnitude or two.
I still do this in meetings with customers and similar, keeping a small notebook. I'll write down key points, but I very seldom have to reference it later.
Would be interesting to know if people who take shorthand notes (they still do that at trials?) remember what they've written.
I'm not a super-fast typist, but do write quite quick by hand, so speed difference isn't great.
The intro states they type one-fingered to avoid hard-to-interpret brain activity and then they draw conclusions as broad as "handwriting promotes learning" because using a pen activates more of the brain that hunt-and-pecking with one finger?
Sure - start with the doable and learn a little. But the breadth of conclusion here is seriously questionable vs. the method of the experiment.
> In the present study, participants only used their right index finger for typing to prevent undesired crossover effects between the two hemispheres.
"We didn't want to see too much brain activity".
There may be merit to the research, or not; but that's not how the "popular" part of popular science works.
I also noticed that when learning math, handwriting enhanced my understanding more than typing, but I thought it was because typing latex was distracting.
Manipulating equations with pen and paper is just in a different league to typing, LaTeX or not.
> Copying material by hand is important because this forces the ideas to go through the mind. The mind is on the path between the eyes and the hands. So when you copy something, it must go through your mind!
For me this is definitely true. Maybe it's like that because when I was growing up we still didn't have smartphones, tablets and widespread computer use at schools and everything was written on paper with a pen/pencil. Most children and young people today probably don't use such tools as much as we did? With that said, I do believe there's something very real in the tactile and spatial feeling of writing on paper that does help learning and greatly improves memorising information. For myself it is definitely true. Maybe for a child today that would be an alien feeling? No idea. I'd be curious to read an actual research on something like this.
What probably makes the most difference between the two is thinking about what you are writing. No matter how. Typing is likely to have the same effect provided you're not simply blindly copying stuff.
A more powerful effect that you hint at is the fact that writing by hand transfers the information to a physical location. You remove a layer of abstraction between your memory and what you've written down (yes we try to tie virtual stuff to a 'location' as well, but quite a lot of problems can be explained by people struggling with that abstraction).
True. Although the article is about writing on paper. I'm a pretty good touch typist and years of Vim have made me efficient with the keyboard. My typing is much faster than my writing. I'd say that even if I am thinking deeply about a subject, if I'm copying the text via typing, it I'll be a lot faster than writing. On the other hand writing gives me the opportunity to slow down. Maybe you're right that both should work equally if I'm invested mentally in the material, but then I'll have the internal pressure to type faster which might hurt that. As a physical motion typing is rather static when compared to writing, so I do believe an actual difference exists.
It was something of a problem in university. While I’m not a particularly slow writer, I’m not a fast one either and as such it was often a struggle to keep up with what the professor was saying and putting up on the chalkboard when taking notes. Trying to summarize and write succinctly helped some but I’d still sometimes end up far enough behind that I ran out of mental “buffer” to summarize in which would lead to rote copying, making things even worse. All in all I regret not picking up a laptop of some kind for those years, because even 15 years ago I was much faster at typing.
These days when I write notes for studying the slowness isn’t an active problem, but more of a persistent irritation stemming from how much time is being spent that could be going elsewhere instead. This may just be an artifact of not writing often enough though.
Quickly retyping/rewriting what they're saying never got me any benefit, though that was mech eng courses where nothing the lecturer says matters at all compared to practicing the math.
That does require the lecture to have slides that are given to the students before the lecture though...
There's a feeling to drawing a really thick box circle around some text
2. Burn notes periodically
3. Accept that they may be read at some point, and write anyways
(Unfortunately Remarkable doesn't support device encryption, so it's not an option: https://support.remarkable.com/s/article/Does-reMarkable-off...)
Also: If your papers are taken, you probably can figure it out.
At the nation state level... honestly, they'll read it straight off your montior's emissions. TEMPEST exists for a reason.
For these reasons, I tend to NOT trust my computer for absolutely critical things. I prefer paper.
Also remember yesterday's unbreakable crypto is 10 year's from now's breakable and 20 years from now they'll be doing class projects on it in college.
The "look over your shoulder" attack is omni-present. (Also easier to prevent with paper, in general, than with a larger computer screen.)
A simple safe will stop most prying people. And if you die... Well, you are dead... there ain't much stopping anyone at that point.
Keeping secrets is hard. Very hard. There's a reason for the most part... I don't bother, except if/when I need to, and even then, if they can be timed out, all the better.
Paper also has a big benefit in that we know how to destroy it. :)
... Simple things are often best. Understanding how your system will bend/break is critical in security situations.
For these purposes, written journals or letters can be opened opportunistically if found. If I had a safe, it would be opened after my death. If the documents are known to exist in the clear anywhere, then they're subject to probate.
But if they're encrypted and the secret is unknown and hard to guess, then most likely everyone gives up and that's the end of that.
In the end, a computer may be a bit safer. But if it is high enough value... someone will find a way.
If you lose your onenote encryption key, your data is lost forever.
Another solution is Apple Notes with Advanced Data Protection turned on for your Apple ID. That encrypts your entire iCloud Drive with your encryption key and again if you lose your key data is gone; although there are some recovery options which require a trusted contact.
I don't like the way this is written. I much prefer a more ambiguous wording like, "our finding indicate that handwriting promotes learning."
Because the way it's written in the article, it sounds like that's the definitive truth, which it usually isn't. Life isn't black or white, it's a shade of gray.
But it is a really interesting article, because that's something that I always wonder when taking notes and such. But since I like the feel of the pen touching paper. I've leaned more towards that way. I have even bought ReMarkable 2 tablet for that reason (I don't own it any more though, as I was always slightly afraid to write on, just because of how expensive the device was - when compared to non-digital alternatives).
>In the present study, participants only used their right index finger for typing to prevent undesired crossover effects between the two hemispheres.
To me, this seems like quite an important factor, I hope that further studies will take typing with both hands into consideration as well.
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/259062-if-men-learn-this-it...
Just like in the other HN link on the supposed benefits of handwriting where the only benefit was it was too slow to follow the lecture, so students had to think more to staircase, and summarizing is beneficial
Also I find that because writing is slower than the brain it forces me to summarize my thoughts into less words, reducing the informational complexity… making it succinct and understandable
I wonder if the participants in the study spent more time hand writing or typing in their lives.
I also wonder if they spent more time engaged in deep though and learning while hand writing or while typing.
I spent far more time thinking and learning while typing. Therefore, my brain has wired itself to think and learn while typing.
There have been times when I was asked a difficult technical question, and had to make typing motions in the air and then check what I would have typed to be able to say the answer out loud.
It would be unfortunate for our society to study old people and misapply the results to young people.
I wonder if there are 3 groups in out society: The old learned by hand writing. The middle learned by typing. The young learned on touch screens.
i believe the effects of writing by hand are so maginal you would re-gain it by not having to re-type your notes. putting them into spaced repetition etc.
just make everything digital and then OCR the rest.
1. Is this knowledge for me? Write in a notepad. Upload a screenshot to my personal rambling google doc.
2. Is this knowledge for a group that includes me? Use markdown text files (READMEs, Google Doc etc.)
3. Resort to Wiki or a Rich Text Editor.Practicing handwriting as a child is certainly useful for developing fine control of hand movements, but practicing other similar activities, like drawing, carving etc. might be the same or even better.
I believe that since the beginning it may be better to use typewriting for doing useful work, but practicing in parallel calligraphy may be as useful as practicing various sports, for developing the ability of doing delicate manual work, like reworking a prototype electronic device.
I'm a good typist so, I type everything else. If I'm doing meeting notes for others even, I type those. But I definitely remember way, way less.
I’m curious about accessing data in notes. Typed notes are useful for fast lookup (text search). Handwritten notes have an interesting aspect where you find things quickly based on the irregularities of your notes—layout, notes on notes-which create visual differences. In the same way, my artistic sketches from old sketchbooks bring to mind the circumstances of my having made the drawing.
Typed docs might be ephemeral to the brain, but the presentation is clearer and more malleable
I don't think it's fair to compare it with handwriting. Usually when you are handwriting, you hardly use both hands. So it's like a natural way to do it.
However, I don't know anyone that typewrite using just their right index finger.
I think it would generate more compatible with reality results if the participants had used both hands.
It isn't exactly 'unknown' - every teacher I've ever met has said 'if you write it down you'll remember it better' and Tom Clancy made 'if you didn't write it down, it didn't happen' a major plot point in one of his novels.
Perhaps 'unexplained' would be a better word.
My vague hypothesis then is this: the body has finite energy. Energy that goes into one thing has an opportunity cost. If handwriting takes more energy than typing, it is taking away from something else.
And as we consider which recording method to use, it might make sense to use the one that lights up not the motor areas controlling the hand but instead the regions of the brain where discursive knowledge lives. We want stronger connections between ideas, not between ideas and hand motions.
Incidentally for the past year or so I’ve been recording many voice memos to myself. It’s kind of fun even. I can just talk while I’m walking. The trouble with recordings is consuming them is not as easy.
They can keep their "brain connectivity!" I'm sticking with block caps.
I take notes in a journal when I have client meetings. I retain a lot because of that, even if I never look at the notes again.
I recently bought an android tablet with proper wacom stylus support and active stylus for my 4 year old kid to practice writing (...they want to do it with the tablet, but don't want to on paper...I figure any practice is better than nothing). The active stylus is very good, but I can't imagine using it for any serious amount of writing - it just feels too weird.
Uniballs on unicycles?
Lance Armstrong just came out of retirement
Part of this relied on the professors distributing lecture slides afterwards, which they always did. Helped jog my memory later and remind me of what to study for the final.
The strategy of only writing down the important details that everyone advocates does not work very well in math. I can't know what the important details are until days or even weeks after the lecture, when I've had enough time to digest and work through the material while completing the assigned problems. Of course, this is much more true at the beginning of a course (when I've had no prior exposure to the topic) than it is at the end.
The poor student followed him all the way out of the room and down the hall, begging not to be reported to the associate dean's office!
I went back and forth between pencil and paper and LaTeX for assignment work. For some courses the proofs were fairly short so it was easy enough to work on paper. For others, the proofs could get several pages long and small mistakes could lead to lots of erasing. It doesn't take very much erasing/rewriting to annoy me enough to switch over to LaTeX. I can't think of a bigger waste of time than erasing and/or rewriting half a page of material because of some mistake.
They found activity in desirable parts of the brain. Being chased by a lion would trigger panic responses and parts of your brain would be shut down. So no, any increase in complication will not work. I certainly doubt texting while driving will work to improve connectivity in the parts of your brain required for safe driving.
Somewhat related, I recall a study on how we find it easier to perform complex mechanical tasks while moving our tongues or sticking them out. Which seems to be how our brains use of language gets tied to physical activity when we need to really concentrate and engage higher thought. I can grasp how writing could well improve memory formation, forcing us to codify thought into language, engaging those parts of the brain that use language for reasoning. But interesting if typing does it worse.
Well the more you do it, the better you'd get at it. The problem isn't that doing it makes you unsafe, it's that most people are not actually capable of doing it safely and we don't necessarily want people to risk other peoples' lives learning how to do it better.
Even if that were somehow ok, they should have seen greater visual engagement for hunt and peck one finger typing (exclusively right index finger).
No mention in their methodology if they allowed students to practice the one word they gave them to write five times either, which further pollutes the data.
Bottom line - poorly designed study produces predictable results and researchers use that soapbox to suggest educational policy.