Cited by 55Writing and Handwriting EducationGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyUser Authentication and Security Systems

Understanding the keystroke log: the effect of writing task on keystroke features

Open access
Conijn, Rianne, Roeser, Jens, van Zaanen, Menno·2019·Reading and Writing

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.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11145-019-09953-8

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Writing behaviours derived from keystroke data provide meaningful insights into a writer's cognitive activities, offering a foundational basis for inferring cognitive processes through keystroke dynamics.

    “Writing behaviours derived from keystroke data have been empirically and theoretically shown in previous studies to provide meaningful insights into a writer's cognitive activities, offering a foundational basis for inferring cognitive processes through keystroke dynamics.”
  • Conijn et al.'s (2019) findings suggest that keystroke features such as word count and number of revisions are associated with cognitive load.

    “For example, Conijn et al.'s (2019) findings suggest that keystroke features such as word count and number of revisions are associated with cognitive load.”
  • Conijn et al. (2019) proposed the method of mapping features from the keystroke logs to higher level cognitive processes, such as planning and revising.

    “Conijn et al. (2019) proposed the method of mapping features from the keystroke logs to higher level cognitive processes, such as planning and revising.”
  • Keystroke data can offer valuable insights into how writers manage and distribute their cognitive resources while composing text.

    “Several studies have shown that keystroke data can offer valuable insights into how writers manage and distribute their cognitive resources while composing text (Conijn et al., 2019;Zhang et al., 2021).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Conijn, R., Roeser, J., & van Zaanen, M.
Affiliations
  • Tilburg University (NL)
  • Nottingham Trent University (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Conijn, Rianne
  • Roeser, Jens
Venue
Reading and Writing
Published
2019-05-15
Volume
32
Issue
9
Pages
2353-2374
ISSN
  • 0922-4777 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-0905
OpenAlex
W2945617977
Cited by
55
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 2
FWCI
14.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Reading and Writing (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Nottingham Trent University's Institutional Repository (Nottingham Trent Repository) (acceptedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Gaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › User Authentication and Security Systems
Keywords
keystroke logging, cognitive load, cognitive demand, writing process, revision, planning, email writing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review