Cited by 112Writing and Handwriting EducationMotor Control and AdaptationChildren's Physical and Motor Development

A Visuo-Haptic Device - Telemaque - Increases Kindergarten Children?s Handwriting Acquisition

Open access
Palluel-Germain, R., Bara, F., Boisferon, A. Hillairet de, Hennion, B., Gouagout, P., Gentaz, E.·2007·Second Joint EuroHaptics Conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems (WHC'07)

Abstract

The objective of the present research was to show that incorporating a visuo-haptic device 'Telemaque' may increase the fluency of handwriting production of cursive letters in kindergarten children i.e., before formal handwriting learning begins. Forty two 5 yearold children were assigned an intervention involving either Telemaque (experimental training; VH group) or not (control training; C group). The fluency of handwriting was tested before and after both interventions. Fluency was analysed by kinematic parameters: Average velocity, number of velocity peaks, and number of breaks during the production of six cursive letters (a,b,f,i,l,s). The results showed that the fluency of handwriting production for all letters was higher after the VH training than after the C training: The movements were faster, exhibited less velocity peaks and children lifted the pen less often during the letter production. These results showed that the Telemaque device may help kindergarten children to increase the proactive strategy to control handwriting movements.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/whc.2007.13

Cites

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?

  • Fluidity and speed were enhanced for handwriting after children trained with visuohaptic feedback compared with classical handwriting training.

    “Fluidity and speed were also enhanced for handwriting after children had trained with visuohaptic feedback, as compared with classical handwriting training (Palluel-Germain et al., 2007).”

    From Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review (2013) · cites this paper as Palluel-Germain et al., 2007

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Palluel-Germain, R., Bara, F., Boisferon, A. H. D., Hennion, B., Gouagout, P., & Gentaz, E.
Affiliations
  • Moss Rehabilitation Hospital (US)
  • Université de Sherbrooke (CA)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Orange (France) (FR)
Venue
Second Joint EuroHaptics Conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems (WHC'07)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2007-03
Pages
72-77
OpenAlex
W2098315017
Cited by
112
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 9
FWCI
50.87
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC) (publishedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Children's Physical and Motor Development
Keywords
Télémaque, handwriting acquisition, handwriting fluency, kindergarten children, movement speed, handwriting kinematics, motor control

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