Abstract

Based on evidence that learning new characters through handwriting leads to better recognition than learning through typing, some authors proposed that the graphic motor plans acquired through handwriting contribute to recognition. More recently two alternative explanations have been put forward. First, the advantage of handwriting could be due to the perceptual variability that it provides during learning. Second, a recent study suggests that detailed visual analysis might be the source of the advantage of handwriting over typing. Indeed, in that study, handwriting and composition –a method requiring a detailed visual analysis but no specific graphomotor activity– led to equivalent recognition accuracy, both higher than typing. The aim of the present study was to assess whether the contribution of detailed visual analysis is observed in preschool children and to test the variability hypothesis. To that purpose, three groups of preschool children learned new symbols either by handwriting, typing, or composition. After learning, children performed first a four-alternative recognition task and then a categorization task. The same pattern of results as the one observed in adults emerged in the four-alternative recognition task, confirming the importance of the detailed visual analysis in letter-like shape learning. In addition, results failed to reveal any difference across learning methods in the categorization task. The latter results provide no evidence for the variability hypothesis which would predict better categorization after handwriting than after typing or composition.

Highlights

  • New technologies are pervasive in our everyday life and computers are increasingly used at school (Wollscheid et al, 2016)

  • The changing habits introduced by the increasing use of digital devices in everyday life and at school raises the question of their impact on literacy acquisition

  • One might wonder whether the reduced usage of handwriting at the very outset of reading acquisition has an impact on letter recognition, an essential step in word identification (McClelland and Rumelhart, 1981; Coltheart et al, 2001; Dehaene et al, 2005; Perry et al, 2007) generally considered as predictive of subsequent reading skills (Näslund and Schneider, 1996; Scanlon and Vellutino, 1996; O’Connor and Jenkins, 1999; Lonigan et al, 2000; Foulin, 2005)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

New technologies are pervasive in our everyday life and computers are increasingly used at school (Wollscheid et al, 2016). The possibility of typewriting replacing handwriting from the very outset of literacy acquisition raises the question of its impact on reading development and on written language perception. Handwriting requires to reproduce a visual form by the execution of a sequence of fine movements that completely define the shape of the letter. This activity incurs very precise processing in terms of both visual and motor activity. By contrast, typewriting consists in a simple keypress based on the visual matching between two graphic forms.

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call