Comparing Memory for Handwriting versus Typing
Open accessAbstract
This is an investigation into the possible links between psychomotor action, in the activities of handwriting, and memory. A comparison of recall and recognition for common words demonstrates that memory is better for words when they have been written down rather than when they are typed. This provides additional support for the hypothesis that the additional context provided by the complex task of writing results in better memory. With the recent trend towards electronic note taking, the educational and practical implications of these findings would suggest that performance may be improved by using traditional paper-and-pen notes.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Most studies on the relationship between handwriting and memory have shown that people remember information better when it is handwritten compared with when it is typed.
“Statistically, most studies on the relationship between handwriting and memory (including those conducted in Japan, Norway, and the United States) have shown that people remember information better when it is handwritten compared with when it is typed [50,53].”
From The Neuroscience Behind Writing: Handwriting vs. Typing—Who Wins the Battle? (2025) · cites this paper as [53]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Neuroscience Behind Writing: Handwriting vs. Typing—Who Wins the Battle?
Marano, G., Kotzalidis, G. D., Lisci, F. M., Anesini, M. B., Rossi, S., Barbonetti, S., Cangini, A., Ronsisvalle, A., Artuso, L., Falsini, C., et al. (2025) · Life · doi:10.3390/life15030345 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
- Authors
- Smoker, T. J., Murphy, C. E., & Rockwell, A. K.
- Affiliations
- University of Central Florida (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2009-10
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 22
- Pages
- 1744-1747
- ISSN
- 0163-5182 (ISSN-L)
- 1071-1813
- 2169-5067
- OpenAlex
- W2025342282
- Cited by
- 66
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (publishedVersion)
- Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
- Keywords
- handwriting, typing, memory, memory retrieval, recognition, word memory, note-taking
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
