Handwriting or Typewriting? The Influence of Pen- or Keyboard-Based Writing Training on Reading and Writing Performance in Preschool Children
Identifieur interne : 000556 ( Pmc/Checkpoint ); précédent : 000555; suivant : 000557Handwriting or Typewriting? The Influence of Pen- or Keyboard-Based Writing Training on Reading and Writing Performance in Preschool Children
Auteurs : Markus Kiefer [Allemagne] ; Stefanie Schuler [Allemagne] ; Carmen Mayer [Allemagne] ; Natalie M. Trumpp ; Katrin Hille [Allemagne] ; Steffi SachseSource :
- Advances in Cognitive Psychology [ 1895-1171 ] ; 2015.
Abstract
Digital writing devices associated with the use of computers, tablet PCs, or mobile phones are increasingly replacing writing by hand. It is, however, controversially discussed how writing modes influence reading and writing performance in children at the start of literacy. On the one hand, the easiness of typing on digital devices may accelerate reading and writing in young children, who have less developed sensory-motor skills. On the other hand, the meaningful coupling between action and perception during handwriting, which establishes sensory-motor memory traces, could facilitate written language acquisition. In order to decide between these theoretical alternatives, for the present study, we developed an intense training program for preschool children attending the German kindergarten with 16 training sessions. Using closely matched letter learning games, eight letters of the German alphabet were trained either by handwriting with a pen on a sheet of paper or by typing on a computer keyboard. Letter recognition, naming, and writing performance as well as word reading and writing performance were assessed. Results did not indicate a superiority of typing training over handwriting training in any of these tasks. In contrast, handwriting training was superior to typing training in word writing, and, as a tendency, in word reading. The results of our study, therefore, support theories of action-perception coupling assuming a facilitatory influence of sensory-motor representations established during handwriting on reading and writing.
Url:
DOI: 10.5709/acp-0178-7
PubMed: 26770286
PubMed Central: 4710970
Affiliations:
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
Links to Exploration step
PMC:4710970Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Handwriting or Typewriting? The Influence of Pen- or Keyboard-Based
Writing Training on Reading and Writing Performance in Preschool
Children</title>
<author><name sortKey="Kiefer, Markus" sort="Kiefer, Markus" uniqKey="Kiefer M" first="Markus" last="Kiefer">Markus Kiefer</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="3"><nlm:aff id="AU1"><addr-line>Department of Psychiatry, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany</addr-line>
</nlm:aff>
<country xml:lang="fr">Allemagne</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Department of Psychiatry, Ulm University, Ulm</wicri:regionArea>
<placeName><region type="land" nuts="1">Bade-Wurtemberg</region>
<region type="district" nuts="2">District de Tübingen</region>
<settlement type="city">Ulm</settlement>
</placeName>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Schuler, Stefanie" sort="Schuler, Stefanie" uniqKey="Schuler S" first="Stefanie" last="Schuler">Stefanie Schuler</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="3"><nlm:aff id="AU2"><addr-line>ZNL Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany</addr-line>
</nlm:aff>
<country xml:lang="fr">Allemagne</country>
<wicri:regionArea>ZNL Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Ulm</wicri:regionArea>
<placeName><region type="land" nuts="1">Bade-Wurtemberg</region>
<region type="district" nuts="2">District de Tübingen</region>
<settlement type="city">Ulm</settlement>
</placeName>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Mayer, Carmen" sort="Mayer, Carmen" uniqKey="Mayer C" first="Carmen" last="Mayer">Carmen Mayer</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="3"><nlm:aff id="AU2"><addr-line>ZNL Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany</addr-line>
</nlm:aff>
<country xml:lang="fr">Allemagne</country>
<wicri:regionArea>ZNL Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Ulm</wicri:regionArea>
<placeName><region type="land" nuts="1">Bade-Wurtemberg</region>
<region type="district" nuts="2">District de Tübingen</region>
<settlement type="city">Ulm</settlement>
</placeName>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Trumpp, Natalie M" sort="Trumpp, Natalie M" uniqKey="Trumpp N" first="Natalie M." last="Trumpp">Natalie M. Trumpp</name>
<affiliation><nlm:aff>NONE</nlm:aff>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Hille, Katrin" sort="Hille, Katrin" uniqKey="Hille K" first="Katrin" last="Hille">Katrin Hille</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="3"><nlm:aff id="AU2"><addr-line>ZNL Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany</addr-line>
</nlm:aff>
<country xml:lang="fr">Allemagne</country>
<wicri:regionArea>ZNL Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Ulm</wicri:regionArea>
<placeName><region type="land" nuts="1">Bade-Wurtemberg</region>
<region type="district" nuts="2">District de Tübingen</region>
<settlement type="city">Ulm</settlement>
</placeName>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Sachse, Steffi" sort="Sachse, Steffi" uniqKey="Sachse S" first="Steffi" last="Sachse">Steffi Sachse</name>
<affiliation><nlm:aff>NONE</nlm:aff>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PMC</idno>
<idno type="pmid">26770286</idno>
<idno type="pmc">4710970</idno>
<idno type="url">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4710970</idno>
<idno type="RBID">PMC:4710970</idno>
<idno type="doi">10.5709/acp-0178-7</idno>
<date when="2015">2015</date>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Corpus">000139</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Curation">000139</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Checkpoint">000556</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a" type="main">Handwriting or Typewriting? The Influence of Pen- or Keyboard-Based
Writing Training on Reading and Writing Performance in Preschool
Children</title>
<author><name sortKey="Kiefer, Markus" sort="Kiefer, Markus" uniqKey="Kiefer M" first="Markus" last="Kiefer">Markus Kiefer</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="3"><nlm:aff id="AU1"><addr-line>Department of Psychiatry, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany</addr-line>
</nlm:aff>
<country xml:lang="fr">Allemagne</country>
<wicri:regionArea>Department of Psychiatry, Ulm University, Ulm</wicri:regionArea>
<placeName><region type="land" nuts="1">Bade-Wurtemberg</region>
<region type="district" nuts="2">District de Tübingen</region>
<settlement type="city">Ulm</settlement>
</placeName>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Schuler, Stefanie" sort="Schuler, Stefanie" uniqKey="Schuler S" first="Stefanie" last="Schuler">Stefanie Schuler</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="3"><nlm:aff id="AU2"><addr-line>ZNL Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany</addr-line>
</nlm:aff>
<country xml:lang="fr">Allemagne</country>
<wicri:regionArea>ZNL Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Ulm</wicri:regionArea>
<placeName><region type="land" nuts="1">Bade-Wurtemberg</region>
<region type="district" nuts="2">District de Tübingen</region>
<settlement type="city">Ulm</settlement>
</placeName>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Mayer, Carmen" sort="Mayer, Carmen" uniqKey="Mayer C" first="Carmen" last="Mayer">Carmen Mayer</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="3"><nlm:aff id="AU2"><addr-line>ZNL Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany</addr-line>
</nlm:aff>
<country xml:lang="fr">Allemagne</country>
<wicri:regionArea>ZNL Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Ulm</wicri:regionArea>
<placeName><region type="land" nuts="1">Bade-Wurtemberg</region>
<region type="district" nuts="2">District de Tübingen</region>
<settlement type="city">Ulm</settlement>
</placeName>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Trumpp, Natalie M" sort="Trumpp, Natalie M" uniqKey="Trumpp N" first="Natalie M." last="Trumpp">Natalie M. Trumpp</name>
<affiliation><nlm:aff>NONE</nlm:aff>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Hille, Katrin" sort="Hille, Katrin" uniqKey="Hille K" first="Katrin" last="Hille">Katrin Hille</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="3"><nlm:aff id="AU2"><addr-line>ZNL Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany</addr-line>
</nlm:aff>
<country xml:lang="fr">Allemagne</country>
<wicri:regionArea>ZNL Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Ulm</wicri:regionArea>
<placeName><region type="land" nuts="1">Bade-Wurtemberg</region>
<region type="district" nuts="2">District de Tübingen</region>
<settlement type="city">Ulm</settlement>
</placeName>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Sachse, Steffi" sort="Sachse, Steffi" uniqKey="Sachse S" first="Steffi" last="Sachse">Steffi Sachse</name>
<affiliation><nlm:aff>NONE</nlm:aff>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<series><title level="j">Advances in Cognitive Psychology</title>
<idno type="eISSN">1895-1171</idno>
<imprint><date when="2015">2015</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass></textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><p>Digital writing devices associated with the use of computers, tablet PCs, or
mobile phones are increasingly replacing writing by hand. It is, however,
controversially discussed how writing modes influence reading and writing
performance in children at the start of literacy. On the one hand, the easiness
of typing on digital devices may accelerate reading and writing in young
children, who have less developed sensory-motor skills. On the other hand, the
meaningful coupling between action and perception during handwriting, which
establishes sensory-motor memory traces, could facilitate written language
acquisition. In order to decide between these theoretical alternatives, for the
present study, we developed an intense training program for preschool children
attending the German kindergarten with 16 training sessions. Using closely
matched letter learning games, eight letters of the German alphabet were trained
either by handwriting with a pen on a sheet of paper or by typing on a computer
keyboard. Letter recognition, naming, and writing performance as well as word
reading and writing performance were assessed. Results did not indicate a
superiority of typing training over handwriting training in any of these tasks.
In contrast, handwriting training was superior to typing training in word
writing, and, as a tendency, in word reading. The results of our study,
therefore, support theories of action-perception coupling assuming a
facilitatory influence of sensory-motor representations established during
handwriting on reading and writing.</p>
</div>
</front>
<back><div1 type="bibliography"><listBibl><biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Barsalou, L W" uniqKey="Barsalou L">L. W. Barsalou</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Simmons, W K" uniqKey="Simmons W">W. K. Simmons</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Barbey, A K" uniqKey="Barbey A">A. K. Barbey</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Wilson, C D" uniqKey="Wilson C">C. D. Wilson</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Bub, D N" uniqKey="Bub D">D. N. Bub</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Masson, M E J" uniqKey="Masson M">M. E. J. Masson</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Bub, D N" uniqKey="Bub D">D. N. Bub</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Masson, M E J" uniqKey="Masson M">M. E. J. Masson</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Bukach, C M" uniqKey="Bukach C">C. M. Bukach</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Buchegger, B" uniqKey="Buchegger B">B. Buchegger</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Calhoun, M L" uniqKey="Calhoun M">M. L. Calhoun</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Castles, A" uniqKey="Castles A">A. Castles</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Mclean, G M T" uniqKey="Mclean G">G. M. T. McLean</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Bavin, E" uniqKey="Bavin E">E. Bavin</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Bretherton, L" uniqKey="Bretherton L">L. Bretherton</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Carlin, J" uniqKey="Carlin J">J. Carlin</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Prior, M" uniqKey="Prior M">M. Prior</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey=" Reilly, S" uniqKey=" Reilly S">S. … Reilly</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Couse, L J" uniqKey="Couse L">L. J. Couse</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Chen, D W" uniqKey="Chen D">D. W. Chen</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Cunningham, A E" uniqKey="Cunningham A">A. E. Cunningham</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Stanovich, K E" uniqKey="Stanovich K">K. E. Stanovich</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Deutscher Lehrerverband" uniqKey="Deutscher Lehrerverband">Deutscher Lehrerverband</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Doughty, T T" uniqKey="Doughty T">T. T. Doughty</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Bouck, E C" uniqKey="Bouck E">E. C. Bouck</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Bassette, L" uniqKey="Bassette L">L. Bassette</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Szwed, K" uniqKey="Szwed K">K. Szwed</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Flanagan, S" uniqKey="Flanagan S">S. Flanagan</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Gallese, V" uniqKey="Gallese V">V. Gallese</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Lakoff, G" uniqKey="Lakoff G">G. Lakoff</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Gut, J" uniqKey="Gut J">J. Gut</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Reimann, G" uniqKey="Reimann G">G. Reimann</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Grob, A" uniqKey="Grob A">A. Grob</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Helbig, H B" uniqKey="Helbig H">H. B. Helbig</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Graf, M" uniqKey="Graf M">M. Graf</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Kiefer, M" uniqKey="Kiefer M">M. Kiefer</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Herzig, B" uniqKey="Herzig B">B. Herzig</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Grafe, S" uniqKey="Grafe S">S. Grafe</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Hommel, B" uniqKey="Hommel B">B. Hommel</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Muesseler, J" uniqKey="Muesseler J">J. Muesseler</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Aschersleben, G" uniqKey="Aschersleben G">G. Aschersleben</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Prinz, W" uniqKey="Prinz W">W. Prinz</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Jacoby, L L" uniqKey="Jacoby L">L. L. Jacoby</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="James, K H" uniqKey="James K">K. H. James</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Atwood, T P" uniqKey="Atwood T">T. P. Atwood</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="James, K H" uniqKey="James K">K. H. James</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Engelhardt, L" uniqKey="Engelhardt L">L. Engelhardt</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="James, K H" uniqKey="James K">K. H. James</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Gauthier, I" uniqKey="Gauthier I">I. Gauthier</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Jansen, H" uniqKey="Jansen H">H. Jansen</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Mannhaupt, G" uniqKey="Mannhaupt G">G. Mannhaupt</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Marx, H" uniqKey="Marx H">H. Marx</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Skowronek, H" uniqKey="Skowronek H">H. Skowronek</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Kiefer, M" uniqKey="Kiefer M">M. Kiefer</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Pulvermuller, F" uniqKey="Pulvermuller F">F. Pulvermüller</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Kiefer, M" uniqKey="Kiefer M">M. Kiefer</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Sim, E J" uniqKey="Sim E">E.-J. Sim</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Helbig, H B" uniqKey="Helbig H">H. B. Helbig</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Graf, M" uniqKey="Graf M">M. Graf</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Kiefer, M" uniqKey="Kiefer M">M. Kiefer</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Sim, E J" uniqKey="Sim E">E.-J. Sim</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Liebich, S" uniqKey="Liebich S">S. Liebich</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Hauk, O" uniqKey="Hauk O">O. Hauk</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Tanaka, J W" uniqKey="Tanaka J">J. W. Tanaka</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Kiefer, M" uniqKey="Kiefer M">M. Kiefer</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Trumpp, N M" uniqKey="Trumpp N">N. M. Trumpp</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Lakoff, G" uniqKey="Lakoff G">G. Lakoff</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Johnson, M" uniqKey="Johnson M">M. Johnson</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Longcamp, M" uniqKey="Longcamp M">M. Longcamp</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Anton, J L" uniqKey="Anton J">J. L. Anton</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Roth, M" uniqKey="Roth M">M. Roth</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Velay, J L" uniqKey="Velay J">J. L. Velay</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Longcamp, M" uniqKey="Longcamp M">M. Longcamp</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Boucard, C" uniqKey="Boucard C">C. Boucard</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Gilhodes, J C" uniqKey="Gilhodes J">J. C. Gilhodes</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Anton, J L" uniqKey="Anton J">J. L. Anton</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Roth, M" uniqKey="Roth M">M. Roth</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Nazarian, B" uniqKey="Nazarian B">B. Nazarian</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Velay, J L" uniqKey="Velay J">J. L. Velay</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Longcamp, M" uniqKey="Longcamp M">M. Longcamp</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Hlushchuk, Y" uniqKey="Hlushchuk Y">Y. Hlushchuk</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Hari, R" uniqKey="Hari R">R. Hari</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Longcamp, M" uniqKey="Longcamp M">M. Longcamp</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Zerbato Poudou, M T" uniqKey="Zerbato Poudou M">M. T. Zerbato-Poudou</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Velay, J L" uniqKey="Velay J">J. L. Velay</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Mangen, A" uniqKey="Mangen A">A. Mangen</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Velay, J L" uniqKey="Velay J">J.-L. Velay</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Musseler, J" uniqKey="Musseler J">J. Müsseler</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Wuhr, P" uniqKey="Wuhr P">P. Wühr</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Danielmeier, C" uniqKey="Danielmeier C">C. Danielmeier</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Zysset, S" uniqKey="Zysset S">S. Zysset</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Naka, M" uniqKey="Naka M">M. Naka</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Ouellette, G" uniqKey="Ouellette G">G. Ouellette</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Tims, T" uniqKey="Tims T">T. Tims</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Pulvermuller, F" uniqKey="Pulvermuller F">F. Pulvermüller</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Radesky, J S" uniqKey="Radesky J">J. S. Radesky</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Schumacher, J" uniqKey="Schumacher J">J. Schumacher</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Zuckerman, B" uniqKey="Zuckerman B">B. Zuckerman</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Reddig Korn, B" uniqKey="Reddig Korn B">B. Reddig-Korn</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Fritz, M" uniqKey="Fritz M">M. Fritz</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Mai, M" uniqKey="Mai M">M. Mai</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Schmitt, F" uniqKey="Schmitt F">F. Schmitt</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Sim, E J" uniqKey="Sim E">E. J. Sim</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Helbig, H B" uniqKey="Helbig H">H. B. Helbig</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Graf, M" uniqKey="Graf M">M. Graf</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Kiefer, M" uniqKey="Kiefer M">M. Kiefer</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Spitzer, M" uniqKey="Spitzer M">M. Spitzer</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Sulzenbruck, S" uniqKey="Sulzenbruck S">S. Sulzenbrück</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Hegele, M" uniqKey="Hegele M">M. Hegele</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Heuer, H" uniqKey="Heuer H">H. Heuer</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Rinkenauer, G" uniqKey="Rinkenauer G">G. Rinkenauer</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Sulzenbruck, S" uniqKey="Sulzenbruck S">S. Sulzenbrück</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Hegele, M" uniqKey="Hegele M">M. Hegele</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Rinkenauer, G" uniqKey="Rinkenauer G">G. Rinkenauer</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Heuer, H" uniqKey="Heuer H">H. Heuer</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="V Soden Fraunhofen, R" uniqKey="V Soden Fraunhofen R">R. v. Soden-Fraunhofen</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Sim, E J" uniqKey="Sim E">E.-J. Sim</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Liebich, S" uniqKey="Liebich S">S. Liebich</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Frank, K" uniqKey="Frank K">K. Frank</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Kiefer, M" uniqKey="Kiefer M">M. Kiefer</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Vaughn, S" uniqKey="Vaughn S">S. Vaughn</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Schumm, J S" uniqKey="Schumm J">J. S. Schumm</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Gordon, J" uniqKey="Gordon J">J. Gordon</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
<biblStruct><analytic><author><name sortKey="Zheng, B B" uniqKey="Zheng B">B. B. Zheng</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Warschauer, M" uniqKey="Warschauer M">M. Warschauer</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Farkas, G" uniqKey="Farkas G">G. Farkas</name>
</author>
</analytic>
</biblStruct>
</listBibl>
</div1>
</back>
</TEI>
<pmc article-type="research-article"><pmc-dir>properties open_access</pmc-dir>
<front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">Adv Cogn Psychol</journal-id>
<journal-id journal-id-type="iso-abbrev">Adv Cogn Psychol</journal-id>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">acp</journal-id>
<journal-title-group><journal-title>Advances in Cognitive Psychology</journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn pub-type="epub">1895-1171</issn>
<publisher><publisher-name>University of Finance and Management in Warsaw</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="pmid">26770286</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="pmc">4710970</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5709/acp-0178-7</article-id>
<article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group><article-title>Handwriting or Typewriting? The Influence of Pen- or Keyboard-Based
Writing Training on Reading and Writing Performance in Preschool
Children</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Kiefer</surname>
<given-names>Markus</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="AU1">1</xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Schuler</surname>
<given-names>Stefanie</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="AU2">2</xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Mayer</surname>
<given-names>Carmen</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="AU2">2</xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Trumpp</surname>
<given-names>Natalie M.</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="AU2">1,2</xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Hille</surname>
<given-names>Katrin</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="AU2">2</xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Sachse</surname>
<given-names>Steffi</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="AU2">2,3</xref>
</contrib>
<aff id="AU1"><label>1</label>
<addr-line>Department of Psychiatry, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany</addr-line>
</aff>
<aff id="AU2"><label>2</label>
<addr-line>ZNL Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany</addr-line>
</aff>
<aff id="AU3"><label>3</label>
<addr-line>Department of Developmental Psychology, University of Education Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany</addr-line>
</aff>
</contrib-group>
<author-notes><corresp id="Cor1">Corresponding author: Markus Kiefer, Department of Psychiatry,
Section for Cognitive Electrophysiology, Ulm University, Leimgrubenweg 12, 89075
Ulm, Germany. Phone: +49 731 500 61532. Fax: +49 731 500 61542. E -mail:
<email>Markus.Kiefer@uni-ulm.de</email>
.</corresp>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>31</day>
<month>12</month>
<year>2015</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2015</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>11</volume>
<issue>4</issue>
<fpage>136</fpage>
<lpage>146</lpage>
<history><date date-type="received"><day>16</day>
<month>6</month>
<year>2015</year>
</date>
<date date-type="accepted"><day>23</day>
<month>9</month>
<year>2015</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2015 University of Finance and Management
in Warsaw</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2015</copyright-year>
<license license-type="open-access" xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/"><license-p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution,
and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited.</license-p>
</license>
</permissions>
<abstract><p>Digital writing devices associated with the use of computers, tablet PCs, or
mobile phones are increasingly replacing writing by hand. It is, however,
controversially discussed how writing modes influence reading and writing
performance in children at the start of literacy. On the one hand, the easiness
of typing on digital devices may accelerate reading and writing in young
children, who have less developed sensory-motor skills. On the other hand, the
meaningful coupling between action and perception during handwriting, which
establishes sensory-motor memory traces, could facilitate written language
acquisition. In order to decide between these theoretical alternatives, for the
present study, we developed an intense training program for preschool children
attending the German kindergarten with 16 training sessions. Using closely
matched letter learning games, eight letters of the German alphabet were trained
either by handwriting with a pen on a sheet of paper or by typing on a computer
keyboard. Letter recognition, naming, and writing performance as well as word
reading and writing performance were assessed. Results did not indicate a
superiority of typing training over handwriting training in any of these tasks.
In contrast, handwriting training was superior to typing training in word
writing, and, as a tendency, in word reading. The results of our study,
therefore, support theories of action-perception coupling assuming a
facilitatory influence of sensory-motor representations established during
handwriting on reading and writing.</p>
</abstract>
<kwd-group><kwd>written language acquisition</kwd>
<kwd>literacy training</kwd>
<kwd>embodied cognition</kwd>
<kwd>digital media</kwd>
<kwd>preschool children</kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body><sec sec-type="intro" id="S1"><title>Introduction</title>
<p>Reading and writing are central cultural skills, which are typically acquired during
childhood in societies with a strong literacy tradition. Mastering literacy is a key
competence for success at school and in professional life (<xref rid="R11" ref-type="bibr">Gut, Reimann, & Grob, 2012</xref>
). During the last years, the
mode of writing in adults, but also in children has been subject of a dramatic
change: Digital writing devices associated with the use of computers, tablet PCs, or
mobile phones are increasingly replacing writing by hand (for overviews, see <xref rid="R29" ref-type="bibr">Mangen & Velay, 2010</xref>
; <xref rid="R34" ref-type="bibr">Radesky, Schumacher, & Zuckerman, 2015</xref>
). These changes of
writing habits have a clear impact on basic sensory-motor skills: Compared with a
high frequency of handwriting, in adults, a high frequency of keyboard use in
producing written text in everyday life has been shown to be related to a decrement
of the skill to produce precisely controlled arm-hand movements (<xref rid="R38" ref-type="bibr">Sulzenbrück, Hegele, Heuer, & Rinkenauer,
2010</xref>
; <xref rid="R39" ref-type="bibr">Sulzenbrück, Hegele,
Rinkenauer, & Heuer, 2011</xref>
). The modulatory influence of writing
habits on linguistic or cognitive performance, such as reading and writing, is less
obvious, but it may represent an important factor to consider for identifying the
optimal conditions for literacy training (<xref rid="R23" ref-type="bibr">Kiefer
& Trumpp, 2012</xref>
). In line with this reasoning, a recent survey among
German teachers indicated that during the last years sensory-motor skills required
for handwriting deteriorated among young children entering elementary school (<xref rid="R8a" ref-type="bibr">Deutscher Lehrerverband, 2015</xref>
). Given that
children in our present days may get the first everyday writing experiences by
typing on a computer or mobile phone much before they master handwriting (<xref rid="R29" ref-type="bibr">Mangen & Velay, 2010</xref>
), it is important to
know how this dramatic change in writing habits in the digital age affects written
language acquisition. Addressing this issue is highly important for education
because there is an increasing trend to introduce digital devices to kindergarten
and elementary school (<xref rid="R13" ref-type="bibr">Herzig & Grafe,
2006</xref>
). In some countries’ programs for elementary school education
typing on digital devices has already replaced handwriting (<xref rid="R37" ref-type="bibr">Spitzer, 2015</xref>
).</p>
<p>Regarding the influence of these modes of written language acquisition, handwriting
versus typing, two competing theoretical approaches are possible. The motor program
associated with typing is obviously easier than that associated with handwriting.
Even small children intuitively interact with digital devices by typing or touching
(<xref rid="R4" ref-type="bibr">Buchegger, 2013</xref>
; <xref rid="R7" ref-type="bibr">Couse & Chen, 2010</xref>
). This easiness of typing on digital
devices is taken as an argument in favor of writing training with typing to
accelerate writing in young children or in children with less developed
sensory-motor skills (<xref rid="R5" ref-type="bibr">Calhoun, 1985</xref>
; <xref rid="R6" ref-type="bibr">Castles et al., 2013</xref>
; <xref rid="R9" ref-type="bibr">Doughty, Bouck, Bassette, Szwed, & Flanagan, 2013</xref>
; <xref rid="R42" ref-type="bibr">Zheng, Warschauer, & Farkas, 2013</xref>
). Such a
view based on the easiness of motor programs associated with writing would predict
better reading and writing performance when writing letters and words is trained by
typing on a digital device. In support of this view, a small but positive
correlation between frequency of computer use and letter knowledge has been found in
a large cohort of four-year old children (<xref rid="R6" ref-type="bibr">Castles et
al., 2013</xref>
).</p>
<p>However, when comparing handwriting with typing, not only the easiness of the motor
programs, but also their quality and the associated sensory-motor experiences
(haptic, motor, visual etc.) must be considered. With respect to quality,
handwriting and typing have fundamentally different properties (<xref rid="R29" ref-type="bibr">Mangen & Velay, 2010</xref>
): Handwriting requires
carefully reproducing the shape of each letter, whereas in typewriting the motor
program is not related to the letter shape and, as a result, no such grapho-motor
component is present. Hence, motor programs associated with handwriting provide an
additional informative memory trace and may contribute to the representation of the
shape of a letter (<xref rid="R17" ref-type="bibr">James & Engelhardt,
2012</xref>
).</p>
<p>Such interactions between action and perception are important elements of embodied or
grounded cognition theories, which state that cognition is essentially grounded in
modality-specific sensory and motor systems (<xref rid="R1" ref-type="bibr">Barsalou, Simmons, Barbey, & Wilson, 2003</xref>
; <xref rid="R10" ref-type="bibr">Gallese & Lakoff, 2005</xref>
; <xref rid="R20" ref-type="bibr">Kiefer & Pulvermüller, 2012</xref>
; <xref rid="R24" ref-type="bibr">Lakoff & Johnson, 1999</xref>
; <xref rid="R33" ref-type="bibr">Pulvermüller, 2005</xref>
). These theories assume that depending on the
specific sensory-motor experience learning establishes memory traces, which are
partially reactivated during retrieval. Interactions between action and perception
are also predicted by the theory of event coding (<xref rid="R14" ref-type="bibr">Hommel, Muesseler, Aschersleben, & Prinz, 2001</xref>
). According to this
theory, perceptual contents and action plans are coded in a common representational
medium by feature codes with distal reference. Perceptions and actions are proposed
to be equally represented by integrated, task-tuned networks of feature codes,
called event codes. Hence, several theories in the field of cognition, perception
and action predict a superiority of handwriting over typing with regard to the
quality of visual processing subserving reading and writing.</p>
<p>In line with the notion of action-perception couplings, interactions between action
and perception have meanwhile been consistently observed in the field of visual
object recognition (<xref rid="R2" ref-type="bibr">Bub & Masson, 2010</xref>
;
<xref rid="R3" ref-type="bibr">Bub, Masson, & Bukach, 2003</xref>
; <xref rid="R14" ref-type="bibr">Hommel et al., 2001</xref>
; <xref rid="R30" ref-type="bibr">Müsseler, Wühr, Danielmeier, & Zysset, 2005</xref>
). For
instance, action representations have been shown to facilitate recognition of
objects with similar action affordances (<xref rid="R12" ref-type="bibr">Helbig,
Graf, & Kiefer, 2006</xref>
; <xref rid="R21" ref-type="bibr">Kiefer, Sim,
Helbig, & Graf, 2011</xref>
; <xref rid="R36" ref-type="bibr">Sim, Helbig,
Graf, & Kiefer, 2014</xref>
). Furthermore, when participants have to acquire
the names and the meaning of novel objects, performing a meaningful action towards
an object during training facilitates learning compared with a meaningless pointing
action (<xref rid="R40" ref-type="bibr">v. Soden-Fraunhofen, Sim, Liebich, Frank,
& Kiefer, 2008</xref>
; <xref rid="R22" ref-type="bibr">Kiefer, Sim, Liebich,
Hauk, & Tanaka, 2007</xref>
). These results suggest that sensory-motor
experiences during training must be meaningfully related to the learning target to
result in stronger sensory-motor memory traces that facilitate recognition
performance.</p>
<p>It is conceivable that similar mechanisms of action-perception coupling also
influence letter recognition, reading, and writing performance. In line with this
suggestion, several training studies in preschool children and adults showed that
handwriting training of new letters gave not only rise to better spelling accuracy
(<xref rid="R8" ref-type="bibr">Cunningham & Stanovich, 1990</xref>
), but
also improved letter recognition in a subsequent test compared with typing training
(<xref rid="R26" ref-type="bibr">Longcamp et al., 2008</xref>
; <xref rid="R28" ref-type="bibr">Longcamp, Zerbato-Poudou, & Velay, 2005</xref>
;
<xref rid="R31" ref-type="bibr">Naka, 1998</xref>
). This demonstrates that
handwriting, which links rich sensory-motor representations to perceptual letter
shapes, improves not only writing, but also reading performance compared with
typewriting. In line with this interpretation, neuroimaging studies showed that
visual recognition of familiar letters activated not only visual areas, but also
motor regions of the brain (<xref rid="R18" ref-type="bibr">James & Gauthier,
2006</xref>
; <xref rid="R25" ref-type="bibr">Longcamp, Anton, Roth, & Velay,
2003</xref>
; <xref rid="R27" ref-type="bibr">Longcamp, Hlushchuk, & Hari,
2011</xref>
). When novel letters were trained by handwriting, a similar
activation pattern was observed, which was absent when these novel letters were
trained by typing (<xref rid="R16" ref-type="bibr">James & Atwood, 2009</xref>
;
<xref rid="R26" ref-type="bibr">Longcamp et al., 2008</xref>
). Furthermore,
handwriting experience also seems to be necessary in children to develop the
adult-like neuronal circuit of letter processing encompassing visual and motor areas
of the brain (<xref rid="R17" ref-type="bibr">James & Engelhardt,
2012</xref>
).</p>
<p>Although several lines of evidence seem to suggest a superiority of handwriting
training over typing training on subsequent reading and writing performance in young
children, earlier studies mainly investigated recognition of individual letters and
not reading or writing (<xref rid="R28" ref-type="bibr">Longcamp et al.,
2005</xref>
; <xref rid="R31" ref-type="bibr">Naka, 1998</xref>
). Furthermore, the
few studies investigating differential effects at the word level observed mixed
results: While in one study a superiority of handwriting over typing training on
spelling performance was found (<xref rid="R8" ref-type="bibr">Cunningham &
Stanovich, 1990</xref>
), this effect was not replicated in two other studies
(<xref rid="R32" ref-type="bibr">Ouellette & Tims, 2014</xref>
; <xref rid="R41" ref-type="bibr">Vaughn, Schumm, & Gordon, 1992</xref>
). The mixed
results may arise from the relatively short training programs, with only a few
trials, from the inclusion of children of different age and literacy status
(preschool vs. elementary school children), and from different training materials
(words, pseudowords) and spelling tests (writing vs. recognition memory).</p>
<p>In order to contribute to this debate, for the present study, we developed an intense
training program for preschool children attending the German kindergarten, with 16
training sessions distributed over four weeks on four days per week. We trained
preschool children and not elementary schoolchildren, in order to assess training
effects without the influence of previous formal handwriting training as in
schoolchildren. Using closely matched letter learning games, eight letters of the
German alphabet were trained either by handwriting with a pen on a sheet of paper or
by typing on a computer keyboard. The handwriting and typing training programs were
administered to two separate samples of preschool children aged between 4 and 6
years (handwriting: <italic>n</italic>
= 12; typing: <italic>n</italic>
= 11)
matched for age, gender, and phonological awareness as possibly confounding
variables. Letter recognition, letter naming, and initial letter writing performance
were assessed before and after training. Reading and writing performance of
four-letter words, which could be formed from the trained eight letters, were tested
only post-training. Both handwriting and typing training were conducted by
experimenters in a separate and quiet room of the kindergarten, but as part of the
regular kindergarten schedule to obtain a naturalistic learning environment. If the
easiness of the motor program facilitates letter recognition, reading, and writing,
typing training should be superior to handwriting training. In contrast, we assumed
that a meaningful coupling between action and perception should facilitate literacy
training. We, therefore, expected that handwriting training should be superior to
typing training.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="methods" id="S2"><title>Method</title>
<sec id="S2a"><title>Participants</title>
<p>Participants were 23 children (12 female) aged between 4 years and 10 months, and
6 years and 3 months (<italic>M</italic>
= 5 years and 6 months,
<italic>SD</italic>
= 4 months) recruited from two kindergartens
(kindergarten 1: <italic>n</italic>
= 9; kindergarten 2: <italic>n</italic>
=
14) in the area of Ulm, Germany. All children were healthy according to the
parents’ reports. The entire sample was split in two matched groups,
which were assigned to the handwriting (<italic>n</italic>
= 12) and typing
(<italic>n</italic>
= 11) training conditions, respectively. In each
kindergarten, handwriting and typing training was conducted in a comparable
number of children assigned to small subgroups of four to seven children.
Depending on the specific training game, training occurred individually or in
the entire subgroup (see below). Demographic data for the handwriting and typing
training groups are shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">Table 1</xref>
.
Groups did not differ with regard to age, <italic>t</italic>
(21) = 0.056,
<italic>p</italic>
=.956, gender, χ<sup>2</sup>
(1) = 0.048.
<italic>p</italic>
= .827, and phonological awareness,
<italic>t</italic>
(21) = 0.330, <italic>p</italic>
=.745, according to Bielefeld
Screening for Early Detection of Difficulties in Reading and Writing (BISC)
(<xref rid="R19" ref-type="bibr">Jansen, Mannhaupt, Marx, & Skowronek,
2002</xref>
). The following BISC subscales contribute to the phonological
awareness score: Rhyming, segmenting syllables, associating sounds, and relating
sounds to words. Prior to the study, written informed consent was obtained from
the parents of the children. The study was carried out according to the tenets
of the Declaration of Helsinki.</p>
<table-wrap id="T1" position="float"><label>Table 1.</label>
<caption><title>Demographic Data of the Children in the Typing and Handwriting
Training Groups</title>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead align="center"><tr><th rowspan="1" colspan="1"></th>
<th colspan="4" rowspan="1">Training condition</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1"></th>
</tr>
<tr><th rowspan="1" colspan="1"></th>
<th colspan="2" rowspan="1">Typing (<italic>n</italic>
= 11)</th>
<th colspan="2" rowspan="1">Handwriting (<italic>n</italic>
= 12)</th>
<th rowspan="2" valign="middle" colspan="1">Differences between groups</th>
</tr>
<tr><th rowspan="1" colspan="1"></th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Mean (<italic>SD</italic>
)</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Min-Max</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Mean (<italic>SD</italic>
)</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Min-Max</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody><tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Age (in month)</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">66,1 (4,7)</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">58-75</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">66,0 (3,1)</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">61-72</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>t</italic>
(21) = 0,056, <italic>p</italic>
= .956</td>
</tr>
<tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Phonological awareness (BISC score)</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">30,8 (4,2)</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">23-38</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">30,3 (4,1)</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">23-37</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>t</italic>
(21) = 0,330, <italic>p</italic>
= .745</td>
</tr>
<tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Training attendance (in days)</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">12,9 (2,9)</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">8-16</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">14,1 (2,2)</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">9-16</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>t</italic>
(21) = 1,106, <italic>p</italic>
= .281</td>
</tr>
<tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1"></td>
<td colspan="2" rowspan="1">Number females</td>
<td colspan="2" rowspan="1">Number females</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"></td>
</tr>
<tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Gender</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" rowspan="1">6</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" rowspan="1">6</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">χ<sup>2</sup>
(1) = 0.048, <italic>p</italic>
= .827</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot><p><italic>Note</italic>
. <italic>SD</italic>
= standard deviation (values
in parentheses).</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="S2b"><title>Letter training</title>
<p>Across four weeks, eight letters of the German alphabet (<italic>L</italic>
,
<italic>I</italic>
, <italic>O</italic>
, <italic>A</italic>
,
<italic>M</italic>
, <italic>S</italic>
, <italic>T</italic>
, and
<italic>E</italic>
) were trained with letter games adopted from a German
school booklet on literacy training (<xref rid="R35" ref-type="bibr">Reddig-Korn, Fritz, Mai, & Schmitt, 2003</xref>
). Training procedure
was identical for both the handwriting and typing program, except for the
writing medium. In the handwriting training program, children wrote the letter
with a pen on a sheet of paper. In the typing program, children typed the letter
on a notebook keyboard, where only the keys with letters were visible (and
additionally one key for navigation from one task to another), while the other
keys were covered. Training sessions lasted about 25 min and took place on four
days in each week resulting in a total of 16 sessions. Each week, two new
letters were trained. On day one of each week, the first new letter was
introduced, on day two the second one. In both training groups, the new letters
were introduced to the children using a short story (adapted from <xref rid="R35" ref-type="bibr">Reddig-Korn et al., 2003</xref>
). Children were
told that two friends, Lili and Oli, are travelling to the Magic Letter Land,
where they encounter new letters. The experimenter demonstrated not only the
visual shape of the letter to the children, but also the corresponding sound and
the lip movements used to produce the sound. Furthermore, the experimenter
encouraged the children to search for words, which start with this letter. After
this general introduction, children were trained individually on days one and
two with the four letter learning games described below (see also <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figure 1</xref>
).</p>
<fig id="F1" position="float"><label>Figure 1.</label>
<caption><p>Overview of the training tasks used for written language training in
preschool children. The same tasks were applied for typing and
handwriting training. They differed only with regard to the writing mode
(typing on a laptop keyboard vs. handwriting on a sheet of paper) in
both training conditions. All texts were originally in German, shown are
comparable examples in English translations.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="acp-11-136-g001"></graphic>
</fig>
<sec id="S2b1"><title>Letter zoo</title>
<p>Children learned to associate animal pictures with the corresponding initial
letter of the animal names (e.g., <italic>elephant</italic>
, and the letter
<italic>E</italic>
). Children were then presented with three pictures of
animals and had to write or to type four times the initial letter of the
animal name on each picture (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figure
1A</xref>
). In the handwriting training program, pictures were printed on a
sheet of paper, and the children could write the initial letter with a pen
on the animal picture in four boxes within the picture. In the typing
training program, each picture was presented in the middle of the notebook
screen, and the initial letter of the animal name was typed in four boxes
within the picture.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2b2"><title>Puzzle</title>
<p>The children received a puzzle consisting of four parts, either on a sheet of
paper or on a notebook screen (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figure
1B</xref>
). The puzzle showed objects starting with one of the letters
to be trained. There were three different objects per letter. Initially, all
parts of the puzzle were shown with their backside up. Children were
instructed to write/type the letter to be trained on the backside of each
part (e.g., A). The experimenter assessed the correctness of the responses
by determining whether the children wrote the letter correctly (position and
relation of the lines correspond to the intended letter) or whether they
pressed the key corresponding to the letter to be trained. If the children
were correct, they were allowed to turn the puzzle part either physically in
the handwriting training program or digitally on the notebook screen in the
typing training program. If they were not correct, they had one more trial,
before the experimenter showed the correct answer. The children could then
repeat the correct response.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2b3"><title>Rhyme completion</title>
<p>The experimenter showed the children a sentence containing a pair of rhyming
words either on a sheet of paper or on the computer screen (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figure 1C</xref>
). The children were told that
the letter to be trained (e.g., <italic>M</italic>
) is missing once in each
word. A gap indicated the missing letter. Depending on the training group,
the children wrote/typed the missing letter in the gap. If the child
inserted the letter correctly, the experimenter read the sentence with the
rhyming words aloud. Each letter was trained once per session. The rhyme
only had the function to motivate the child, but the writing/typing task was
not related to the rhyme.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2b4"><title>Letter tracing</title>
<p>Children received sheets of paper with the letter clearly printed above and
printed with unconnected dots below (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">Figure
1D</xref>
). In both groups, the children were instructed to recognize
the letter printed in dots and to reproduce it either by handwriting or by
typing: In the handwriting group, children had to trace the shape of the
letter by connecting the dots using a pen. In the typing group, children had
to find and to type the letter on the keyboard, which then appeared on the
screen. Each letter was traced/typed twice.</p>
<p>Days three and four of each week served to repeat all trained letters with a
variation of letter learning games to render the training more interesting
for the children. In order to train reading and writing, on day three, the
children received the letter zoo and the puzzle games, and, as a novel
aspect, the letter recognition as well as the letter and word writing tasks
(for a task description, see below). Children were again trained
individually.</p>
<p>Training on day four of each week occurred within small groups of about four
children and was based on a new set of training games: All letters
introduced so far were trained on day four in a more informal play situation
using the following letter games.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2b5"><title>Gremlin</title>
<p>In the middle of the table, there was a deck with cards displaying objects
that started with the letters to be trained. The children of the group took
turns throwing a special dice, which had three possible outcomes: If the
dice showed a flower, the depicted object should be named and the initial
letter should be written on a paper/typed on the keyboard. As reward, the
child was allowed to place the card in a “collecting pot”. If
the dice showed the gremlin, the gremlin “took the card away”.
If the dice showed the fairy, the fairy took the card from the gremlin and
placed it back in the middle of the table. Children were instructed to
collect as many cards as possible in the pot for the group, otherwise the
gremlin would win.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2b6"><title>Letter ship</title>
<p>In the middle of the table, there was again a deck with cards displaying
objects that started with the letters to be trained. There were three cards
per letter. There was a letter ship, which was placed in the middle of the
table. The children were told that this ship only carries objects starting
with one specific letter. One child started and sequentially turned the
cards from the deck. She or he had to decide whether the object depicted on
each card started with the letter that is carried by the ship. If the
response was correct, the child was allowed to write/type the letter on a
small paper ship/empty text document and put the card in the big letter ship
in the middle of the table. Then the next child took the turn. The
laptop/paper was placed close to the cards and the letter ship in order to
keep switching of attention comparable across groups. In the typing group,
the typed letter appeared on the computer screen.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2b7"><title>Magic potion</title>
<p>In the middle of the table, there was again a deck with cards displaying
objects that started with the letters to be trained. There were two cards
per letter. One child started, turned two cards from the deck and read the
letters out loud. If the initial letters of the two depicted objects were
identical, the child wrote/typed the letter on a response card. In the
typing training group, the “response card” was an empty
computer screen. The letter could then be used as an
“ingredient” for the magic potion brewed by a witch.
Otherwise, the cards were placed back on the bottom of the deck. Then the
next child took the turn. If all matching cards were taken away, the
“magic potion” was ready.</p>
<p>An overview of the learning games used on training days one to four is given
in <xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">Table 2</xref>
. Training in weeks one to
four was comparable, except for the introduction of new letters and for the
repetition of an increasing number of letters (week 1: two letters, week 2:
four letters, week 3: six letters, week 4: eight letters). During training,
the children received feedback regarding the correctness of their response.
All training and testing tasks (for the latter, see below) were conducted by
one of the two experimenters. Both experimenters were responsible for
training and testing of a comparable number of participants in both the
handwriting and typewriting training groups (experimenter 1: 7/7,
experimenter 2: 5/4).</p>
<table-wrap id="T2" position="float"><label>Table 2.</label>
<caption><title>Assignment of Training Tasks to Training Days in Each
Week</title>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead align="center"><tr><th rowspan="1" colspan="1"></th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Letter tracing</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Letter zoo</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Rhyme completion</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Puzzle</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Letter writing</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Word writing</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Letter recognition</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody align="center"><tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Day 1</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">X</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">X</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">X</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">X</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"></td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"></td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"></td>
</tr>
<tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Day 2</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">X</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">X</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">X</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">X</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"></td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"></td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"></td>
</tr>
<tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Day 3</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"></td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">X</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"></td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">X</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">X</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">X</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">X</td>
</tr>
<tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Day 4</td>
<td colspan="7" rowspan="1">week 1 and 2: letter ship, gremlin week 3 and 4:
magic potion</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="S2c"><title>Test tasks on letter recognition, reading, and writing</title>
<sec id="S2c1"><title>Letter recognition</title>
<p>Each child was presented with a card showing one of the eight letters to be
learnt among three visually similar pseudoletters. The task was to select
the real letter among the distractors. The dependent measure in this task
was the number of correct recognition responses of the eight trained letters
(0-8 letters). This task was administered before and after the training as
test task as well as during the training sessions at day three within each
week as training task.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2c2"><title>Letter naming</title>
<p>Each child was sequentially shown all 26 letters of the alphabet on a card
ordered by difficulty (according to <xref rid="R35" ref-type="bibr">Reddig-Korn et al., 2003</xref>
). The child was instructed to say
“stop”, when the letter was familiar, and asked to name the
letter. The dependent measure in this task was number of correct reading
responses of the eight trained letters (0-8 letters). This task was
administered before and after training.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2c3"><title>Word reading</title>
<p>Each child received cards with the words <italic>OMI</italic>
(Eng.:
<italic>grandma</italic>
), <italic>TAL</italic>
(Eng.:
<italic>valley</italic>
), <italic>TESA</italic>
(Eng.:
<italic>tape</italic>
), which were formed from the trained letters. The
child was told to read each word aloud. Dependent measure was the number of
correctly read words (0-3 words). A word was considered to be correctly
read, when the pronounced phonemes corresponded to the target word. This
task was only administered after the training.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2c4"><title>Letter writing</title>
<p>The experimenter sequentially read the trained letters to the child aloud.
Each of the letters was read aloud twice in random order
(<italic>L</italic>
, <italic>T</italic>
, <italic>S</italic>
,
<italic>I</italic>
, <italic>A</italic>
, <italic>O</italic>
,
<italic>T</italic>
, <italic>M</italic>
, <italic>I</italic>
,
<italic>E</italic>
, <italic>O</italic>
, <italic>L</italic>
,
<italic>M</italic>
, <italic>S</italic>
, <italic>E</italic>
,
<italic>A</italic>
). The child was instructed to write down the letter
on a sheet of paper or to type it on the keyboard depending on the training
program. Dependent measure was number of correctly written/typed letters
(0-16 letters). The experimenter assessed the correctness of the responses
by determining whether the children wrote the letter correctly (position and
relation of the lines correspond to the intended letter) or pressed the key
corresponding to the target letter. This task was only administered after
the training. On day three of each training week, this task was also
presented to the children as training task. When used as training task, only
the two letters trained in the corresponding week were presented, while each
letter was read aloud four times in a random order.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2c5"><title>Free letter writing</title>
<p>Each child was instructed to write with a pen all familiar letters on a sheet
of paper. In this task, only the trained eight letters were analyzed.
Dependent measure was the number of correctly written letters (0-8 letters).
A letter was considered to be correctly written, when the position and
relation of the lines corresponded to the intended target letter. Children
received this task before and after training. This task was administered as
handwriting version only because it also served to assess letter writing
performance before training. Of course, possible differential training
effects between groups cannot be unequivocally interpreted in this task
because in the typing group writing mode at test differed from that at
training.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2c6"><title>Word writing</title>
<p>The experimenter read the four words <italic>LILI</italic>
(Eng.: the name
<italic>Lili</italic>
), <italic>OLI</italic>
(Eng.: the name
<italic>Oli</italic>
), <italic>SALAMI</italic>
(Eng.:
<italic>salami</italic>
), <italic>TASTE</italic>
(Eng.:
<italic>key</italic>
) aloud at a slow pace. The child was told to write
or to type the word depending on the training program. Depending variable
was percentage of correctly written/typed letters independent of their
position (0-100%). This task was administered after the training. During
training on day three, this task was also presented as training task to the
children, but only with words that could be formed from the letters trained
so far.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="results" id="S3"><title>Results</title>
<sec id="S3a"><title>Training attendance</title>
<p>The children attended on average 13.5 of the 16 training sessions
(<italic>SD</italic>
= 2.56; min: 8; max: 16). Children missed sessions due
to absence from kindergarten (e.g., vacation or illness). Handwriting and typing
training groups did not differ with regard to attendance, handwriting:
<italic>M</italic>
= 14.1, <italic>SD</italic>
= 2.2, range 9-16; typing:
<italic>M</italic>
= 12.9, <italic>SD</italic>
= 2.9, range 8-16;
<italic>t</italic>
(21) = 1.106, <italic>p</italic>
= .281. As the number of
attended sessions did not correlate with outcome measures of the training, all
children were included in the final analysis irrespective of frequency of
attendance.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S3b"><title>Letter recognition, reading, and writing performance</title>
<p>An overview of the test results as a function of training mode (typing vs.
handwriting) is given in <xref ref-type="table" rid="T3">Table 3</xref>
and
<xref ref-type="fig" rid="F2">Figure 2</xref>
. Please note that some tests
were only administered after training. When tests were administered before and
after the training, we first performed repeated-measures analyses of variance
(ANOVA) with the factor training (before and after training) as within-subject
factor and the factor group (typing vs. handwriting) as between-subjects factor.
Training effects within groups (performance after vs. before training) and
between groups (comparison of gain scores calculated as performance difference
after minus before training) were analyzed in more detail using one-tailed
<italic>t</italic>
-tests for dependent and independent samples,
respectively. Data of tests that were only administered after the training were
compared between groups using one-tailed <italic>t</italic>
-tests for
independent samples. In order to control for possible performance differences
between groups before training, two-tailed <italic>t</italic>
-tests for
independent samples were performed.</p>
<table-wrap id="T3" position="float"><label>Table 3.</label>
<caption><title>Overview of Letter Recognition, Reading, and Writing Performance of
the Children as a Function of Typing Versus Handwriting Training</title>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead align="center"><tr><th rowspan="1" colspan="1"></th>
<th colspan="6" rowspan="1">Training condition</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1"></th>
</tr>
<tr><th rowspan="1" colspan="1"></th>
<th colspan="3" rowspan="1">Typing (<italic>n</italic>
= 11)</th>
<th colspan="3" rowspan="1">Handwriting (<italic>n</italic>
= 12)</th>
<th rowspan="3" colspan="1">Differences between groups</th>
</tr>
<tr><th rowspan="1" colspan="1"></th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Pre</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Post</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Difference Pre - Post</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Pre</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Post</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Difference Pre - Post</th>
</tr>
<tr><th rowspan="1" colspan="1"></th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Mean (<italic>SD</italic>
)[Min-Max]</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Mean (<italic>SD</italic>
)[Min-Max]</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1"></th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Mean (<italic>SD</italic>
)[Min-Max]</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1">Mean (<italic>SD</italic>
)[Min-Max]</th>
<th rowspan="1" colspan="1"></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody align="center"><tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Letter recognition</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">6,00 (2,00) [1-8]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">7,82 (0,40) [7-8]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>p</italic>
= .006</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">6,08 (1,62) [4-8]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">7,67 (0,65) [6-8]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>p</italic>
= .006</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>p</italic>
= .384</td>
</tr>
<tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Letter naming</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">3,91 (2,70) [0-7]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">5,82 (2,60) [1-8]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>p</italic>
< .001</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">3,92 (2,61) [0-8]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">6,17 (2,62) [1-8]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>p</italic>
= .004</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>p</italic>
= .674</td>
</tr>
<tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Word reading</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">---</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0,27 (0,47) [0-1]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">---</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">---</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">0,83 (1,34) [0-3]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">---</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>p</italic>
= .097</td>
</tr>
<tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Letter writing</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">---</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">11,73 (4,54) [3-16]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">---</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">---</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">11,92 (4,83) [2-16]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">---</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>p</italic>
= .462</td>
</tr>
<tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Free letter writing</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">3,36 (1,57) [0-5]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">4,55 (1,81) [1-7]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>p</italic>
= .05</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">3,58 (1,88) [1-8]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">6,25 (1,42) [4-8]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>p</italic>
<.001</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>p</italic>
= .047, <italic>d</italic>
= 0,63</td>
</tr>
<tr><td rowspan="1" colspan="1">Word writing</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">---</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">52.84 (30.05) [18.25-100]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">---</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">---</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">74.17 (28.60) [10-100]</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1">---</td>
<td rowspan="1" colspan="1"><italic>p</italic>
= .048, <italic>d</italic>
= 0.76</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot><p><italic>Note</italic>
. <italic><italic>SD</italic>
</italic>
= standard
deviation (values in parentheses).</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<fig id="F2" position="float"><label>Figure 2.</label>
<caption><p>Letter recognition, reading, and writing performance of the preschool
children in the typing versus handwriting training conditions. Shown are
mean scores (number of correct responses) or mean percentage scores
(relative frequency of correct responses).</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="acp-11-136-g002"></graphic>
</fig>
<sec id="S3b1"><title>Letter recognition (Figure 2A)</title>
<p>The ANOVA only revealed a significant main effect of training,
<italic>F</italic>
(1, 21) = 18.7, <italic>p</italic>
< .0003.
Subsequent <italic>t</italic>
-tests confirmed that letter recognition did
not differ between handwriting and typing groups before training,
<italic>t</italic>
(21) = 0.110, <italic>p</italic>
= .913. Both groups
showed increased letter recognition performance after compared with before
training, writing group: <italic>t</italic>
(11) = 2.994, <italic>p</italic>
= .006; typing group: <italic>t</italic>
(10) = 3.108, <italic>p</italic>
=
.006, but this training effect did not differ between groups,
<italic>t</italic>
(21) = 0.299, <italic>p</italic>
= .384.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S3b2"><title>Letter naming (Figure 2B)</title>
<p>The ANOVA only yielded a significant main effect of training,
<italic>F</italic>
(1, 21) = 27.02, <italic>p</italic>
< .0001.
Subsequent <italic>t</italic>
-tests again confirmed that letter naming
performance did not differ between groups before training,
<italic>t</italic>
(21) = 0.007, <italic>p</italic>
=.995. Training
increased letter naming performance, writing group: <italic>t</italic>
(11) =
3.276, <italic>p</italic>
= .004; typing group: <italic>t</italic>
(10) =
5.186, <italic>p</italic>
< .001, in each group, but this increment did
not differ between groups, <italic>t</italic>
(21) = 0.426,
<italic>p</italic>
= .674.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S3b3"><title>Word reading (Figure 2C)</title>
<p>Word reading was only assessed after training. There was a tendency for
superior reading performance in the handwriting group compared with the
typing group, <italic>t</italic>
(14) = 1.364, <italic>p</italic>
= .097.
Note that accuracy distribution in the handwriting group ranged from zero to
perfect performance (all three words named correctly) and was much larger
than accuracy distribution in the typing group, which varied between zero
and one correct response. Due to this unequal variance in both groups,
degrees of freedoms had to be adjusted.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S3b4"><title>Letter writing (Figure 2D)</title>
<p>Letter writing carried out either by handwriting or typing did not differ
between groups, <italic>t</italic>
(21) = 0.097, <italic>p</italic>
= .462.
This test was only administered after training.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S3b5"><title>Free letter writing (Figure 2E)</title>
<p>The ANOVA yielded a significant main effect of training,
<italic>F</italic>
(1, 21) = 20.68, <italic>p</italic>
< .0002, as well as
a trend for an interaction between group and training, <italic>F</italic>
(1,
21) = 3.08, p < .09. Subsequent two-tailed <italic>t</italic>
-tests for
independent samples showed that before training handwriting and typing
groups did not differ in free letter writing, <italic>t</italic>
(21) =
0.303, <italic>p</italic>
= .765. Training increased free letter writing
performance in each group, <italic>t</italic>
(11) = 4.927,
<italic>p</italic>
<.001; <italic>t</italic>
(10) = 1.796,
<italic>p</italic>
= .05. Handwriting training resulted in a
significantly greater increment of performance compared with typing
training, <italic>t</italic>
(21) = 1.76, <italic>p</italic>
= .047,
<italic>d</italic>
= 0.63. Results obtained before training confirm that
initial letter writing knowledge was comparable for the handwriting and
typing groups. However, as differences between handwriting and typing
training groups cannot be interpreted after training due to a differential
match between training (handwriting vs. typing) and test mode (handwriting
only), we do not further discuss findings of this task.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S3b6"><title>Word writing (Figure 2F)</title>
<p>Word writing carried out by handwriting was superior to word writing carried
out by typing, <italic>t</italic>
(21) = 1.744, <italic>p</italic>
= .048,
<italic>d</italic>
= 0.76. This test was only administered after
training.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S3b7"><title>Age effects on reading and writing performance</title>
<p>The age range among the trained children was about one year and half (4 years
and 10 months, to 6 years and 3 months). In order to estimate how letter
knowledge and writing performance was related to age, we correlated
children’s age with test results assessed before training. As we
wanted to obtain a reasonable sample size, we performed this analysis for
all children pooled across training groups for the pre-training data only.
Using Spearman’s rank correlation, we found a significant positive
correlation between age and letter recognition performance (<italic>r</italic>
<sub>s</sub>
= .548;
<italic>p</italic>
= .025, <italic>N</italic>
= 23). However, age was
not related to word reading and writing performance. Hence, despite some
differences in single letter knowledge, initial reading and writing
performance was relatively comparable within the studied age range before
training.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="S4"><title>Discussion</title>
<p>The present study investigated the influence of two modes of written language
training on letter recognition, reading and writing performance in matched groups of
preschool children: In one group of children eight letters were trained by writing
them with a pen on a sheet of paper, whereas in the other group training involved
typing the same set of letters on a computer keyboard. In other respects, training
sessions and tasks for handwriting and typing training were designed as comparable
as possible. If the easiness of the motor program facilitates letter recognition,
reading and writing, a superiority of typing training over handwriting training
should be found (<xref rid="R5" ref-type="bibr">Calhoun, 1985</xref>
; <xref rid="R6" ref-type="bibr">Castles et al., 2013</xref>
; <xref rid="R9" ref-type="bibr">Doughty et al., 2013</xref>
; <xref rid="R42" ref-type="bibr">Zheng et
al., 2013</xref>
). In contrast, if a meaningful coupling between action and
perception facilitates literacy training (<xref rid="R1" ref-type="bibr">Barsalou et
al., 2003</xref>
; <xref rid="R10" ref-type="bibr">Gallese & Lakoff,
2005</xref>
; <xref rid="R14" ref-type="bibr">Hommel et al., 2001</xref>
; <xref rid="R20" ref-type="bibr">Kiefer & Pulvermüller, 2012</xref>
; <xref rid="R24" ref-type="bibr">Lakoff & Johnson, 1999</xref>
; <xref rid="R33" ref-type="bibr">Pulvermüller, 2005</xref>
), as we assumed,
handwriting training should be superior to typing training.</p>
<p>Overall, the results of this study were relatively clear-cut. In none of the test
tasks administered to the children after training, we found superior performance
after typing training compared with handwriting training. Even in tasks such as
single letter writing, in which the easier motor program associated with typing
could be most advantageous, accuracy was not higher in the typing than in the
handwriting training group. Instead, performance did not differ across groups. Thus,
our results are entirely inconsistent with the notion that the easiness of the motor
program associated with typing is beneficial for written language training, at least
in children without disabilities.</p>
<p>However, results of this study at least partially support theories of action and
perception coupling because superior accuracy for handwriting training was found in
several word reading and writing tasks. We found superior word writing accuracy
after handwriting training compared with typing training. This result replicates
earlier work (<xref rid="R8" ref-type="bibr">Cunningham & Stanovich,
1990</xref>
) and suggests that sensory-motor memory traces acquired during
handwriting training support spelling of words, presumably due to improved memory
for letters (<xref rid="R31" ref-type="bibr">Naka, 1998</xref>
). These findings are
particularly remarkable because children wrote the words using the trained writing
method—that is, handwriting versus typing letters on keyboard. Thus, our
findings in the word writing test cannot be explained by a change of the writing
mode between training and test in the typing training group. Unlike the present
findings and those by Cunningham and Stanovich (<xref rid="R8" ref-type="bibr">1990</xref>
), other studies found comparable writing performance after
handwriting and typing training (<xref rid="R32" ref-type="bibr">Ouellette &
Tims, 2014</xref>
; <xref rid="R41" ref-type="bibr">Vaughn et al., 1992</xref>
).
Presumably, the divergent results can be explained by the different length of the
training program (16 days as in our study vs. one or a few days), age and literacy
status of the children (largely preliterate preschool children as in our study vs.
elementary school children), training materials (words vs. pseudowords) or test
tasks (writing/typing as in our study or multiple choice recognition memory test).
We assume that in laboratory studies superior writing performance after handwriting
training can only be obtained when training is sufficiently long to establish
enduring sensory-motor memory traces. Furthermore, unlike in preschool children
differential training effects might be masked in schoolchildren, who have already
received a substantial amount of written language training using handwriting.
Finally, a multiple choice recognition memory test, in which performance is based on
stimulus familiarity to a large degree (<xref rid="R15" ref-type="bibr">Jacoby,
1991</xref>
), might be not sensitive enough to measure possibly beneficial
effects of sensory-motor memory traces established during handwriting. Word reading
accuracy tended to be higher in the handwriting group, although this difference was
not statistically significant, presumably due to the small sample size and the
relatively large variability in the handwriting group. Nevertheless, in line with
theories of perception-action coupling (<xref rid="R1" ref-type="bibr">Barsalou et
al., 2003</xref>
; <xref rid="R10" ref-type="bibr">Gallese & Lakoff,
2005</xref>
; <xref rid="R14" ref-type="bibr">Hommel et al., 2001</xref>
; <xref rid="R20" ref-type="bibr">Kiefer & Pulvermüller, 2012</xref>
; <xref rid="R24" ref-type="bibr">Lakoff & Johnson, 1999</xref>
; <xref rid="R33" ref-type="bibr">Pulvermüller, 2005</xref>
), this observation
suggests that the motor program associated with handwriting facilitates word
recognition compared with typewriting.</p>
<p>In contrast to our expectations and to previous findings (<xref rid="R28" ref-type="bibr">Longcamp et al., 2005</xref>
<xref rid="R26" ref-type="bibr">,
2008</xref>
; <xref rid="R31" ref-type="bibr">Naka, 1998</xref>
), handwriting
training did not improve letter recognition and letter naming performance compared
with typing training. Overall, letter recognition performance before training was
relatively high even in preschool children, presumably because children were already
familiarized with some letters earlier in their lives. Pre-experimental letter
knowledge was in particular high for the older children, as demonstrated by the
positive correlation between letter recognition performance before training and age.
After training, children in both groups performed close to ceiling in both letter
recognition and letter naming. This reduces the likelihood to observe differential
effects of the two training regimens.</p>
<p>Interpretation of the results is limited by the small sample size in both training
groups, which reduces the statistical power to detect effects. The small sample size
also precludes the assessment of age effects on training efficacy: It is possible
that older children (> 6 years) benefit more strongly from handwriting training
due to superior hand motor skills compared with younger children (< 5 years)
leading to stronger training effects on reading and writing performance in this age
group (cf. <xref rid="R28" ref-type="bibr">Longcamp et al., 2005</xref>
). However,
age effects on handwriting training remain to be addressed in future studies.
Furthermore, only eight letters where trained, which led to ceiling effects for
letter recognition and letter reading. Finally, performance for the word reading and
writing tasks was generally quite low indicating that even a training over six weeks
is not sufficient to obtain a high performance level in preschool children, who are
at the beginning of written language acquisition. Please note however that our
training regimen already involved many more training sessions compared with earlier
work, in which no differential effects of training modes were reported (<xref rid="R32" ref-type="bibr">Ouellette & Tims, 2014</xref>
; <xref rid="R41" ref-type="bibr">Vaughn et al., 1992</xref>
). Furthermore, potential
variation in the dependent measures of the word reading and writing task was quite
low (0-3 words) because only a few words could be formed from the small number of
trained letters. Future work should therefore replicate the present work with a
larger sample of children and more letter stimuli for a more extended time.</p>
<p>Despite these limitations, the present study demonstrates that training studies in
preschool children are a promising way to study modes of literacy training within
naturalistic kindergarten settings. Our work clearly demonstrates that the easiness
of the motor program associated with typing on digital devices does not facilitate
written language acquisition compared with handwriting training: In none of our test
tasks, children of the typing training group showed superior letter recognition,
reading, or writing performance compared with children who received writing training
based on handwriting. Of course, our results do not preclude the possibility that
typing on digital devices might be useful to support writing in children with motor
impairments that affect handwriting. Most importantly, we found that children of the
handwriting training group performed better than those of the typing group
particularly in tasks involving reading and writing at the word level. Our results,
therefore, support theories of action-perception coupling assuming a facilitatory
influence of sensory-motor representations established during handwriting on reading
and writing performance.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back><ref-list><title>References</title>
<ref id="R1"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Barsalou</surname>
<given-names>L. W.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Simmons</surname>
<given-names>W. K.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Barbey</surname>
<given-names>A. K.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Wilson</surname>
<given-names>C. D.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific
systems.</article-title>
<source>Trends in Cognitive Sciences</source>
<year>2003</year>
<volume>7</volume>
<fpage>84</fpage>
<lpage>91</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12584027</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R2"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bub</surname>
<given-names>D. N.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Masson</surname>
<given-names>M. E. J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Grasping beer mugs: On the dynamics of alignment effects induced
by handled objects.</article-title>
<source>Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance</source>
<year>2010</year>
<volume>36</volume>
<fpage>341</fpage>
<lpage>358</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20364923</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R3"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bub</surname>
<given-names>D. N.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Masson</surname>
<given-names>M. E. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Bukach</surname>
<given-names>C. M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Gesturing and naming: The use of functional knowledge in object
identification.</article-title>
<source>Psychological Science</source>
<year>2003</year>
<volume>14</volume>
<fpage>467</fpage>
<lpage>472</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12930478</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R4"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Buchegger</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source>Unterrichtsmaterial Safer Internet im Kindergarten [Education material
safer internet in kindergarten].</source>
<year>2013</year>
<publisher-loc> Wien, Austria </publisher-loc>
<publisher-name> ÖIAT Österreichisches Institut für angewandte
Telekommunikation 2013 </publisher-name>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R5"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Calhoun</surname>
<given-names>M. L.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Typing contrasted with handwriting in language arts instruction
for moderately mentally-retarded students.</article-title>
<source>Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental
Disabilities</source>
<year>1985</year>
<volume>20</volume>
<fpage>48</fpage>
<lpage>52</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R6"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Castles</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>McLean</surname>
<given-names>G. M. T.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Bavin</surname>
<given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Bretherton</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Carlin</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Prior</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>… Reilly</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Computer use and letter knowledge in pre-school children: A
population-based study.</article-title>
<source>Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health</source>
<year>2013</year>
<volume>49</volume>
<fpage>193</fpage>
<lpage>198</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23437778</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R7"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Couse</surname>
<given-names>L. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Chen</surname>
<given-names>D. W.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>A tablet computer for young children? Exploring its viability for
early childhood education.</article-title>
<source>Journal of Research on Technology in Education</source>
<year>2010</year>
<volume>43</volume>
<fpage>75</fpage>
<lpage>98</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R8"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cunningham</surname>
<given-names>A. E.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Stanovich</surname>
<given-names>K. E.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Early spelling acquisition: Writing beats the
computer.</article-title>
<source>Journal of Educational Psychology</source>
<year>1990</year>
<volume>82</volume>
<fpage>159</fpage>
<lpage>162</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R8a"><element-citation publication-type="webpage"><person-group><name><surname>Deutscher Lehrerverband</surname>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Umfrage unter Lehrern macht deutlich: Probleme mit dem
Handschreiben in der Schule nehmen zu</article-title>
<trans-title>Survey among teachers points out: Problems with handwriting in
schools increase</trans-title>
<year>2015</year>
<comment>Retrieved from
http://www.lehrerverband.de/presse_Bundespressekonf_Handschreiben_010415.html</comment>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R9"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Doughty</surname>
<given-names>T. T.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Bouck</surname>
<given-names>E. C.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Bassette</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Szwed</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Flanagan</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Spelling on the fly: Investigating a pentop computer to improve
the spelling skills of three elementary students with
disabilities.</article-title>
<source>Assistive Technology</source>
<year>2013</year>
<volume>25</volume>
<fpage>166</fpage>
<lpage>175</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24020155</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R10"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gallese</surname>
<given-names>V.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Lakoff</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system
in conceptual knowledge.</article-title>
<source>Cognitive Neuropsychology</source>
<year>2005</year>
<volume>22</volume>
<fpage>455</fpage>
<lpage>479</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21038261</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R11"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gut</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Reimann</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Grob</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Kognitive, sprachliche, mathematische und sozial-emotionale
Kompetenzen als Prädiktoren späterer schulischer Leistungen
[Cognitive, linguistic, mathematical, and social-emotional competencies as
predictors of later school achievements].</article-title>
<source>Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie</source>
<year>2012</year>
<volume>26</volume>
<fpage>213</fpage>
<lpage>220</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R12"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Helbig</surname>
<given-names>H. B.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Graf</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Kiefer</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>The role of action representations in visual object
recognition.</article-title>
<source>Experimental Brain Research</source>
<year>2006</year>
<volume>174</volume>
<fpage>221</fpage>
<lpage>228</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16636796</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R13"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Herzig</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Grafe</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source>Digitale Medien in der Schule: Standortbestimmung und
Handlungsempfehlungen für die Zukunft [Digital media in school:
Establishment and recommendations for future action].</source>
<year>2006</year>
<publisher-loc> Bonn, Germany </publisher-loc>
<publisher-name> Deutsche Telekom AG </publisher-name>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R14"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hommel</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Muesseler</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Aschersleben</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Prinz</surname>
<given-names>W.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and
action planning.</article-title>
<source>Behavioral & Brain Sciences</source>
<year>2001</year>
<volume>24</volume>
<fpage>849</fpage>
<lpage>937</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12239891</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R15"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jacoby</surname>
<given-names>L. L.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from
intentional uses of memory.</article-title>
<source>Journal of Memory & Language</source>
<year>1991</year>
<volume>30</volume>
<fpage>513</fpage>
<lpage>541</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R16"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>James</surname>
<given-names>K. H.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Atwood</surname>
<given-names>T. P.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>The role of sensorimotor learning in the perception of
letter-like forms: Tracking the causes of neural specialization for
letters.</article-title>
<source>Cognitive Neuropsychology</source>
<year>2009</year>
<volume>26</volume>
<fpage>91</fpage>
<lpage>110</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18830859</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R17"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>James</surname>
<given-names>K. H.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Engelhardt</surname>
<given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>The effects of handwriting experience on functional brain
development in pre-literate children.</article-title>
<source>Trends in Neuroscience and Education</source>
<year>2012</year>
<volume>1</volume>
<fpage>32</fpage>
<lpage>42</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25541600</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R18"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>James</surname>
<given-names>K. H.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Gauthier</surname>
<given-names>I.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Letter processing automatically recruits a sensory-motor brain
network.</article-title>
<source>Neuropsychologia</source>
<year>2006</year>
<volume>44</volume>
<fpage>2937</fpage>
<lpage>2949</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16920164</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R19"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jansen</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Mannhaupt</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Marx</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Skowronek</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source>BISC. Bielefelder Screening zur Früherkennung von
Lese-Rechtschreibschwierigkeiten [Bielefelder screening for early detection
of dyslexia].</source>
<year>2002</year>
<publisher-loc> Göttingen, Germany </publisher-loc>
<publisher-name> Hogrefe </publisher-name>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R20"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kiefer</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Pulvermüller</surname>
<given-names>F.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Conceptual representations in mind and brain: Theoretical
developments, current evidence and future directions.</article-title>
<source>Cortex</source>
<year>2012</year>
<volume>48</volume>
<fpage>805</fpage>
<lpage>825</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21621764</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R21"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kiefer</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Sim</surname>
<given-names>E.-J.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Helbig</surname>
<given-names>H. B.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Graf</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Tracking the time course of action priming on object recognition:
Evidence for fast and slow influences of action on
perception.</article-title>
<source>Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience</source>
<year>2011</year>
<volume>23</volume>
<fpage>1864</fpage>
<lpage>1874</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20617882</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R22"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kiefer</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Sim</surname>
<given-names>E.-J.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Liebich</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Hauk</surname>
<given-names>O.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Tanaka</surname>
<given-names>J. W.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Experience-dependent plasticity of conceptual representations in
human sensory-motor areas.</article-title>
<source>Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience</source>
<year>2007</year>
<volume>19</volume>
<fpage>525</fpage>
<lpage>542</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17335399</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R23"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kiefer</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Trumpp</surname>
<given-names>N. M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Embodiment theory and education: The foundations of cognition in
perception and action.</article-title>
<source>Trends in Neuroscience and Education</source>
<year>2012</year>
<volume>1</volume>
<fpage>15</fpage>
<lpage>20</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R24"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lakoff</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Johnson</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source>Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western
thought.</source>
<year>1999</year>
<publisher-loc> New York, USA </publisher-loc>
<publisher-name> Basic Books </publisher-name>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R25"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Longcamp</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Anton</surname>
<given-names>J. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Roth</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Velay</surname>
<given-names>J. L.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Visual presentation of single letters activates a premotor area
involved in writing.</article-title>
<source>Neuroimage</source>
<year>2003</year>
<volume>19</volume>
<fpage>1492</fpage>
<lpage>1500</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12948705</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R26"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Longcamp</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Boucard</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Gilhodes</surname>
<given-names>J. C.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Anton</surname>
<given-names>J. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Roth</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Nazarian</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Velay</surname>
<given-names>J. L.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Learning through hand- or typewriting influences visual
recognition of new graphic shapes: Behavioral and functional imaging
evidence.</article-title>
<source>Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience</source>
<year>2008</year>
<volume>20</volume>
<fpage>802</fpage>
<lpage>815</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18201124</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R27"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Longcamp</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Hlushchuk</surname>
<given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Hari</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>What differs in visual recognition of handwritten vs. printed
letters? An fMRI study.</article-title>
<source>Human Brain Mapping</source>
<year>2011</year>
<volume>32</volume>
<fpage>1250</fpage>
<lpage>1259</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20669164</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R28"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Longcamp</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Zerbato-Poudou</surname>
<given-names>M. T.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Velay</surname>
<given-names>J. L.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>The influence of writing practice on letter recognition in
preschool children: A comparison between handwriting and
typing.</article-title>
<source>Acta Psychologica</source>
<year>2005</year>
<volume>119</volume>
<fpage>67</fpage>
<lpage>79</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15823243</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R29"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mangen</surname>
<given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Velay</surname>
<given-names>J.-L.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Zadeh</surname>
<given-names>M. H.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Digitizing literacy: Reflections on the haptics of
writing.</article-title>
<source>Advances in haptics (pp. 385-402). : InTech.</source>
<year>2010</year>
<publisher-loc>Rijeka, Croatia</publisher-loc>
<publisher-name>InTech</publisher-name>
<fpage>385</fpage>
<lpage>402</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R30"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Müsseler</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Wühr</surname>
<given-names>P.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Danielmeier</surname>
<given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Zysset</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Action-induced blindness with lateralized stimuli and responses:
The role of the cerebral hemispheres.</article-title>
<source>Experimental Brain Research</source>
<year>2005</year>
<volume>160</volume>
<fpage>214</fpage>
<lpage>222</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15289962</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R31"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Naka</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Repeated writing facilitates children’s memory for
pseudocharacters and foreign letters.</article-title>
<source>Memory & Cognition</source>
<year>1998</year>
<volume>26</volume>
<fpage>804</fpage>
<lpage>809</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9701971</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R32"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ouellette</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Tims</surname>
<given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>The write way to spell: Printing vs. typing effects on
orthographic learning. </article-title>
<source>Frontiers in Psychology, 5:117.</source>
<year>2014</year>
<volume>5</volume>
<fpage>117</fpage>
<lpage>117</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R33"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pulvermüller</surname>
<given-names>F.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Brain mechanisms linking language and action.</article-title>
<source>Nature Reviews Neuroscience</source>
<year>2005</year>
<volume>6</volume>
<fpage>576</fpage>
<lpage>582</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15959465</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R34"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Radesky</surname>
<given-names>J. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Schumacher</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Zuckerman</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Mobile and interactive media use by young children: The good, the
bad, and the unknown.</article-title>
<source>Pediatrics Perspectives</source>
<year>2015</year>
<volume>135</volume>
<fpage>1</fpage>
<lpage>3</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R35"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Reddig-Korn</surname>
<given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Fritz</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Mai</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Schmitt</surname>
<given-names>F.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source>Das Zauberalphabet. Übungen [The magic alphabet.
Exercises].</source>
<year>2003</year>
<publisher-loc> Leipzig, Germany </publisher-loc>
<publisher-name> Ernst Klett Grundschulverlag GmbH </publisher-name>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R36"><element-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sim</surname>
<given-names>E. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Helbig</surname>
<given-names>H. B.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Graf</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Kiefer</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>When action observation facilitates visual perception: Activation
in visuo-motor areas contributes to object recognition.</article-title>
<source> Cerebral Cortex. </source>
<year>2014</year>
<comment>Advance online publication.</comment>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R37"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Spitzer</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Digital genial? Mit dem “Ende der Kreidezeit”
bleibt das Denken auf der Strecke [Digital genial? With the end of the
“cretacious period” thinking falls by the
wayside].</article-title>
<source>Nervenheilkunde</source>
<year>2015</year>
<volume>34</volume>
<fpage>9</fpage>
<lpage>16</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R38"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sulzenbrück</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Hegele</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Heuer</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Rinkenauer</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Generalized slowing is not that general in older adults: Evidence
from a tracing task.</article-title>
<source>Occupational Ergonomics</source>
<year>2010</year>
<volume>9</volume>
<fpage>111</fpage>
<lpage>117</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R39"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sulzenbrück</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Hegele</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Rinkenauer</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Heuer</surname>
<given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>The death of handwriting: Secondary effects of frequent computer
use on basic motor skills.</article-title>
<source>Journal of Motor Behavior</source>
<year>2011</year>
<volume>43</volume>
<fpage>247</fpage>
<lpage>251</lpage>
<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21598156</pub-id>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R40"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>v. Soden-Fraunhofen</surname>
<given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Sim</surname>
<given-names>E.-J.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Liebich</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Frank</surname>
<given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Kiefer</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Die Rolle der motorischen Interaktion beim Erwerb begrifflichen
Wissens: Eine Trainingsstudie mit künstlichen Objekten [The of motoric
interaction during acquisiton of conceptual knowledge: A training study with
artificial objects].</article-title>
<source>Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie</source>
<year>2008</year>
<volume>22</volume>
<fpage>47</fpage>
<lpage>58</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R41"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Vaughn</surname>
<given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Schumm</surname>
<given-names>J. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Gordon</surname>
<given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Early spelling acquisition: Does writing really beat the
computer?</article-title>
<source>Learning Disability Quarterly</source>
<year>1992</year>
<volume>15</volume>
<fpage>223</fpage>
<lpage>228</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="R42"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zheng</surname>
<given-names>B. B.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Warschauer</surname>
<given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name><surname>Farkas</surname>
<given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title>Digital writing and diversity: The effects of school laptop
programs on literacy processes and outcomes.</article-title>
<source>Journal of Educational Computing Research</source>
<year>2013</year>
<volume>48</volume>
<fpage>267</fpage>
<lpage>299</lpage>
</element-citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</pmc>
<affiliations><list><country><li>Allemagne</li>
</country>
<region><li>Bade-Wurtemberg</li>
<li>District de Tübingen</li>
</region>
<settlement><li>Ulm</li>
</settlement>
</list>
<tree><noCountry><name sortKey="Sachse, Steffi" sort="Sachse, Steffi" uniqKey="Sachse S" first="Steffi" last="Sachse">Steffi Sachse</name>
<name sortKey="Trumpp, Natalie M" sort="Trumpp, Natalie M" uniqKey="Trumpp N" first="Natalie M." last="Trumpp">Natalie M. Trumpp</name>
</noCountry>
<country name="Allemagne"><region name="Bade-Wurtemberg"><name sortKey="Kiefer, Markus" sort="Kiefer, Markus" uniqKey="Kiefer M" first="Markus" last="Kiefer">Markus Kiefer</name>
</region>
<name sortKey="Hille, Katrin" sort="Hille, Katrin" uniqKey="Hille K" first="Katrin" last="Hille">Katrin Hille</name>
<name sortKey="Mayer, Carmen" sort="Mayer, Carmen" uniqKey="Mayer C" first="Carmen" last="Mayer">Carmen Mayer</name>
<name sortKey="Schuler, Stefanie" sort="Schuler, Stefanie" uniqKey="Schuler S" first="Stefanie" last="Schuler">Stefanie Schuler</name>
</country>
</tree>
</affiliations>
</record>
Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Ticri/CIDE/explor/HapticV1/Data/Pmc/Checkpoint
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000556 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Checkpoint/biblio.hfd -nk 000556 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien |wiki= Ticri/CIDE |area= HapticV1 |flux= Pmc |étape= Checkpoint |type= RBID |clé= PMC:4710970 |texte= Handwriting or Typewriting? The Influence of Pen- or Keyboard-Based Writing Training on Reading and Writing Performance in Preschool Children }}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Checkpoint/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:26770286" \ | HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Checkpoint/biblio.hfd \ | NlmPubMed2Wicri -a HapticV1
![]() | This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.23. | ![]() |