How Much Mightier Is the Pen than the Keyboard for Note-Taking? A Replication and Extension of Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014)
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.
KeywordsNote-taking Laptop Longhand eWriter Encoding Storage
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.
This research was supported by a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant, STTR Phase II: Digital e-Writer for the Classroom, Grant Number 413328.
- Barrett, M. E., Swan, A. B., Mamikonian, A., Ghajoyan, I., Kramarova, O., & Youmans, R. J. (2014). Technology in note taking and assessment: the effects of congruence on student performance. International Journal of Instruction, 7, 49–58.Google Scholar
- Glass, A. L., & Kang, M. (2018). Dividing attention in the classroom reduces exam performance. Educational Psychology. 1–14. On-line first publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2018.1489046.
- Gurung, R. A. (2005). How do students really study (and does it matter)? Education, 39, 323–340.Google Scholar
- James, K. H., & Gauthier, I. (2006). Letter processing automatically recruits a sensory-motor brain network. Neuropsychologia, 44, 2937–2949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.06.026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Morehead, K., Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Blasiman, R., & Hollis, R. B. (2019). Note-taking habits of 21st century college students: implications for student learning, memory, and achievement. Memory. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2019.156969.
- Nandagopal, K., & Ericsson, K. A. (2012). An expert performance approach to the study of individual differences in self-regulated learning activities in upper-level college students. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 597–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.11.018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Palmatier, R. A., & Bennett, J. M. (1974). Notetaking habits of college students. Journal of Reading, 18, 215–218. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40009958. Accessed 12 April 2016.
- Peverly, S. T., & Wolf, A. D. (2019). Note-taking. To appear in J. Dunlosky & K. A. Rawson (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of cognition and education (pp. 320–355). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Peverly, S. T., Vekaria, P. C., Reddington, L. A., Sumowski, J. F., Johnson, K. R., & Ramsay, C. M. (2013). The relationship of handwriting speed, working memory, language comprehension and outlines to lecture note-taking and test-taking among college students. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27, 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Reddington, L. A., Peverly, S. T., & Block, C. J. (2015). An examination of some of the cognitive and motivation variables related to gender differences in lecture note-taking. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 28, 1155–1185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9566-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sibley, C. G. (2008). Utilities for examining simple meta-analytic avergages [computer software]. Auckland: University of Auckland.Google Scholar