Abstract
Keystroke logging is used to automatically record writers’ unfolding typing process and to get insight into moments when they struggle composing text. However, it is not clear which and how features from the keystroke log map to higher-level cognitive processes, such as planning and revision. This study aims to investigate the sensitivity of frequently used keystroke features across tasks with different cognitive demands. Two keystroke datasets were analyzed: one consisting of a copy task and an email writing task, and one with a larger difference in cognitive demand: a copy task and an academic summary task. The differences across tasks were modeled using Bayesian linear mixed effects models. Posterior distributions were used to compare the strength and direction of the task effects across features and datasets. The results showed that the average of all interkeystroke intervals were found to be stable across tasks. Features related to the time between words and (sub)sentences only differed between the copy and the academic task. Lastly, keystroke features related to the number of words, revisions, and total time, differed across tasks in both datasets. To conclude, our results indicate that the latter features are related to cognitive load or task complexity. In addition, our research shows that keystroke features are sensitive to small differences in the writing tasks at hand.
Highlights
Academic writing is an important skill in higher education and for the student’s further professional career
We extend on this work by analyzing the differences in keystrokes across multiple tasks, which are assumed to differ in the required cognitive load and affecting keystroke features related to the cognitive processes involved
Data were collected from two different datasets, both containing two different tasks: the Villani keystroke dataset, containing a copy task and an email writing task, and a dataset on academic writing recorded for the purpose of this research, containing a copy task and an academic summary task
Summary
Academic writing is an important skill in higher education and for the student’s further professional career. Several studies showed that students have difficulties with creating academic texts (e.g., Lea & Street, 1998; Mateos & Solé, 2009). Insight into students’ writing processes can provide evidence on where and when students struggle (Likens, Allen, McNamara, 2017) and could be used to improve their writing ability (Deane, 2013). Flower and Hayes (1980)’s model distinguishes three main cognitive processes that interact: planning, translating, and reviewing. Given this complexity, it is difficult to provide automatic methods that allow insight into students’ writing processes (Baaijen, Galbraith, & de Glopper, 2012; Leijten & Van Waes, 2013)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
