Skip to main content
Log in

How Much Mightier Is the Pen than the Keyboard for Note-Taking? A Replication and Extension of Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014)

Educational Psychology Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many students use laptops to take notes in classes, but does using them impact later test performance? In a high-profile investigation comparing note-taking writing on paper versus typing on a laptop keyboard, Mueller and Oppenheimer (Psychological Science, 25, 1159–1168, 2014) concluded that taking notes by longhand is superior. We conducted a direct replication of Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014) and extended their work by including groups who took notes using eWriters and who did not take notes. Some trends suggested longhand superiority; however, performance did not consistently differ between any groups (experiments 1 and 2), including a group who did not take notes (experiment 2). Group differences were further decreased after students studied their notes (experiment 2). A meta-analysis (combining direct replications) of test performance revealed small (nonsignificant) effects favoring longhand. Based on the present outcomes and other available evidence, concluding which method is superior for improving the functions of note-taking seems premature.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Although Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014) used a delayed test in experiment 3, the delayed test results from the present experiment do not constitute a direct replication of their experiment 3 because they used different materials.

  2. As stated in the Method section, we added questions to those used by Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014). To ensure that any different outcomes were not due to the new questions, we also conducted the planned comparisons based on performance for only test questions that were used in the original report. Conclusions were the same whether analyses were conducted on the entire question set (reported in the text) or the original questions (analyses available from the first author).

  3. Given that our initial aim was to replicate Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014), who did not include a no-notes group, we also did not include this group in experiment 1. We included it in experiment 2 because it could potentially offer insight into the overall encoding benefits of note-taking.

  4. Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014, experiment 3) allowed students 10 min to study their notes. Most participants in the present study took only one or two pages of notes; thus, we expected that 7 min would be plenty of time for study, and no participants reported needing more time.

References

Download references

Acknowledgments

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. The authors have no financial or non-financial interest in the materials discussed in this manuscript. Many thanks to Asad Khan, Annette Kratcoski, Duane Marhefka, Erica Montbach, and Todd Packer for support and encouragement with this project.

Funding

This research was supported by a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant, STTR Phase II: Digital e-Writer for the Classroom, Grant Number 413328.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kayla Morehead.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1. Correlation Tables Within Note-Taking Method Group for Experiment 1

Table 7 Longhand group correlations between test performance and secondary outcome measures for experiment 1
Table 8 Laptop group correlations between test performance and secondary outcome measures for experiment 1
Table 9 eWriter group correlations between test performance and secondary outcome measures for experiment 1

Appendix 2. Correlation Tables Within Note-Taking Method Group for Experiment 2

Table 10 Longhand group correlations between test performance and secondary outcome measures for experiment 2
Table 11 Laptop group correlations between test performance and secondary outcome measures for experiment 2
Table 12 eWriter correlations between test performance and secondary outcome measures for experiment 2

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Morehead, K., Dunlosky, J. & Rawson, K.A. How Much Mightier Is the Pen than the Keyboard for Note-Taking? A Replication and Extension of Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014). Educ Psychol Rev 31, 753–780 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09468-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09468-2

Keywords

Navigation