The Effects of Handwriting Experience on Literacy Learning.

Robert W Wiley, Brenda Rapp
Author Information
  1. Robert W Wiley: Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina Greensboro. ORCID
  2. Brenda Rapp: Department of Cognitive Science, Johns Hopkins University.

Abstract

Previous research indicates that writing practice may be more beneficial than nonmotor practice for letter learning. Here, we report a training study comparing typing, visual, and writing learning conditions in adults ( = 42). We investigated the behavioral consequences of learning modality on literacy learning and evaluated the nature of the learned letter representations. Specifically, the study addressed three questions. First, are the benefits of handwriting practice due to motor learning per se or to other incidental factors? Second, do the benefits generalize to untrained tasks? And third, does handwriting practice lead to learning and strengthening only of motor representations or of other types of representations as well? Our results clearly show that handwriting compared with nonmotor practice produces faster learning and greater generalization to untrained tasks than previously reported. Furthermore, only handwriting practice leads to learning of both motor and amodal symbolic letter representations.

Keywords

References

  1. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2019 Jan;45(1):183-190 [PMID: 29683709]
  2. Cogn Neuropsychol. 2013;30(6):360-95 [PMID: 24512594]
  3. Percept Mot Skills. 2018 Feb;125(1):190-207 [PMID: 29161949]
  4. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Dec 11;109(50):20762-7 [PMID: 23184998]
  5. Psychol Sci. 2010 May;21(5):682-91 [PMID: 20483847]
  6. Child Dev. 1998 Dec;69(6):1524-40 [PMID: 9914638]
  7. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2016 Aug;42(8):1186-203 [PMID: 26913778]
  8. Annu Rev Psychol. 2008;59:617-45 [PMID: 17705682]
  9. Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Aug;23(4):941-58 [PMID: 27282991]
  10. Mem Cognit. 1998 Jul;26(4):804-9 [PMID: 9701971]
  11. Adv Cogn Psychol. 2015 Dec 31;11(4):136-46 [PMID: 26770286]
  12. Cortex. 2018 Jun;103:302-315 [PMID: 29684750]
  13. Adv Child Dev Behav. 2003;31:105-35 [PMID: 14528660]
  14. Can J Exp Psychol. 2015 Jun;69(2):172-8 [PMID: 26010025]
  15. Mem Cognit. 2018 Aug;46(6):1010-1021 [PMID: 29736757]
  16. Dev Neuropsychol. 2006;29(1):61-92 [PMID: 16390289]
  17. Psychon Bull Rev. 2006 Aug;13(4):674-81 [PMID: 17201369]
  18. Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Aug;23(4):991-1001 [PMID: 27294420]
  19. Hum Brain Mapp. 2016 Apr;37(4):1531-43 [PMID: 26813381]
  20. Neuroimage. 2014 Apr 1;89:331-44 [PMID: 24321558]
  21. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2017 Jul;43(7):1411-1429 [PMID: 28368166]
  22. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2012 May;74(4):716-29 [PMID: 22231606]
  23. Neuropsychologia. 2009 Mar;47(4):1193-9 [PMID: 19056407]
  24. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2019 Apr;45(4):724-731 [PMID: 29999402]
  25. Psychon Bull Rev. 2012 Aug;19(4):685-90 [PMID: 22569990]
  26. Hum Brain Mapp. 2013 Jul;34(7):1670-84 [PMID: 22378588]
  27. Front Psychol. 2013 Sep 23;4:567 [PMID: 24069007]
  28. Dev Sci. 2010 Mar;13(2):279-88 [PMID: 20136924]
  29. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2016 Mar;145(3):298-313 [PMID: 26726913]
  30. Hum Mov Sci. 2006 Oct;25(4-5):646-56 [PMID: 17011660]
  31. Behav Neurol. 2005;16(2-3):145-58 [PMID: 16410630]
  32. J Cogn Neurosci. 2008 May;20(5):802-15 [PMID: 18201124]
  33. Psychon Bull Rev. 1995 Sep;2(3):339-63 [PMID: 24203715]
  34. Front Psychol. 2015 Aug 07;6:1171 [PMID: 26300841]
  35. Psychon Bull Rev. 2019 Jun;26(3):974-984 [PMID: 30478777]
  36. Trends Cogn Sci. 2013 Dec;17(12):648-65 [PMID: 24210963]
  37. Psychol Sci. 2014 Jan;25(1):7-29 [PMID: 24220629]
  38. Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Aug;23(4):1096-108 [PMID: 27294428]
  39. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2005 May;119(1):67-79 [PMID: 15823243]
  40. Psychol Sci. 2004 May;15(5):307-13 [PMID: 15102139]

MeSH Term

Adult
Handwriting
Humans
Learning
Literacy
Psychomotor Performance

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0learningpracticehandwritingrepresentationslettermotorwritingnonmotorstudyliteracybenefitsuntrainedPreviousresearchindicatesmaybeneficialreporttrainingcomparingtypingvisualconditionsadults=42investigatedbehavioralconsequencesmodalityevaluatednaturelearnedSpecificallyaddressedthreequestionsFirstdueperseincidentalfactors?Secondgeneralizetasks?thirdleadstrengtheningtypeswell?resultsclearlyshowcomparedproducesfastergreatergeneralizationtaskspreviouslyreportedFurthermoreleadsamodalsymbolicEffectsHandwritingExperienceLiteracyLearningletters

Similar Articles

Cited By