Au niveau cérébral, écrire en utilisant un stylo ou un clavier, ne serait pas tout à fait identique, mais cela semble assez normal.

L’utilisation de papier et de stylo ou du clavier d’un ordinateur pour écrire et prendre des notes pose pas mal question. Mais existe-t-il des différences, au niveau cérébral, lorsque nous écrivons avec un stylo ou un clavier ? Et si c’est le cas, laquelle de ces formes d’écriture serait à privilégier ?

Chronique diffusée le 21 mars 2024. L’ensemble des chroniques est accessible sur une playlist dédiée.

---

Pour aller plus loin :

« L’écriture manuscrite favorise l’apprentissage », par Pauline Gravel. Publié sur Le devoir, le 06/02/2024. Consulté le 12/03/2024. Lien : https://www.ledevoir.com/societe/science/806717/science-ecriture-manuscrite-favorise-apprentissage?.

---

Un autre épisode du podcast en lien :

« La Tête Dans Le Cerveau #175 – Le controversant apprentissage manuscrit et numérique ».

---

Sources :

Allen M. et al. (2020). Is the pencil mightier than the keyboard ? A meta-analysis comparing the method of notetaking outcomes. Southern communication journal, 85 (3) : 143-154.

Alonso M.A.P. (2015). Metacognition and sensorimotor components underlying the process of handwriting and keyboarding and their impact on learning: an analysis from the perspective of embodied psychology. Procedia – Social and behavioral sciences, 176 : 263-269.

Arnold K.M. et al. (2017). Understanding the cognitive processes involved in writing to learn. Journal of experimental psychology : applied. 23 (2) : 115-127.

Askvik E.O. et al. (2020). The importance of cursive handwriting over typewriting for learning in the classroom. Frontiers in psychology, 11 (1810) : 1-16.

Barak M. et al. (2006). Wireless laptops as means for promoting active learning in large lecture halls. Journal of research on technology in education, 38 : 245-263.

Benedek M. et al. (2014). Alpha power increases in right parietal cortex reflects focused internal attention. Neuropsychologia, 56 : 393-400.

Berens S.C. et Horner A.J. (2017). Theta rhythm : temporal glue for episodic memory. Current biology, 27 (20) : 1110-1112.

Bland B.H. et Oddie S.D. (2001). Theta band oscillations and synchrony in the hippocampal formation and associated structures : the case for its role in sensorimotor integration. Behavioural brain research, 127 (1-2) : 119-136.

Brownsett S.L. et Wise R.J. (2010). The contribution of the parietal lobes to speaking and writing. Cerebral cortex, 20 (3) : 517-523.

Bullmore E. et Sporns O. (2009). Complex brain networks : graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems. Nature review neuroscience, 10 : 186-198.

Clouter A. et al. (2017). Theta phase synchronization is the glue that binds human associative memory. Current biology, 27 (20) : 3143-3148.

Cunningham A.E. et Stanovich K. E. (1990). Early spelling acquisition : writing beats the computer. Journal of educational psychology, 82 (1) : 159-162.

Di Vesta F.J. et Gray G.S. (1972). Listening and note taking. Journal of educational psychology, 63 (1) : 8-14.

Fears N.E. et Lockman J.J. (2018). How beginning handwriting is influenced by letter knowledge : visual-motor coordination during children’s form copying. Journal of experimental child psychology, 171 : 55-70.

Hall C. et al. (2021). A laptop for every child ? The impact of technology on human capital formation. Labour economics, 69 (101957) : 1-50.

Jansen R.S. et al. (2017). An integrative review of the cognitive costs and benefits of note-taking. Educational research review, 22 : 223-233.

Kay R. et Lauricella S. (2011). Exploring the benefits and challenges of using laptop computers in higher education classrooms : a formative analysis. Canadian journal of learning and technology, 37 (1) : 1-18.

Kiefer M. et al. (2015). Handwriting or typewriting ? The influence of pen- or keyboard-based writing training on reading and writing performance in preschool children. Advances in cognitive psychology, 11 (4) : 136-146.

Klimesch W. (1999). EEG alpha and theta oscillations reflect cognitive and memory performance: a review and analysis. Brain research reviews, 29 (2-3) : 169–195.

Li J.X. et James K. H. (2016). Handwriting generates variable visual output to facilitate symbol learning. Journal of experimental psychology : general, 145 (3) : 298-313.

Longcamp M. et al. (2005). The influence of writing practice on letter recognition in preschool children : a comparison between handwriting and typing. Acta psychologica, 119 (1) : 67-79.

Longcamp M. et al. (2006). Remembering the orientation of newly learned characters depends on the associated writing knowledge : a comparison between handwriting and typing. Human movement science, 25 (4-5) : 646-656.

Longcamp M. et al. (2008). Learning through hand- or typewriting influences visual recognition of new graphic shapes : behavioral and functional imaging evidence. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 20 (5) : 802-815.

Luo L. et al. (2018). Laptop versus longhand note taking : effects on lecture notes and achievement. Instructional science, 46 : 947-971.

Mangen A. et Balsvik L. (2016). Pen or keyboard in beginning writing instruction ? Some perspectives from embodied cognition. Trends in neuroscience and education, 5 (3) : 99-106.

Mitra A. et Steffensmeier T. (2000). Changes in student attitudes and student computer use in a computer-enriched environment. Journal of research on computing in education, 32 : 417-432.

Morehead K. et al. (2019). How much mightier is the pen than the keyboard for note-taking ? A replication and extension of Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014). Educational psychology review, 31 : 753-780.

Mueller P.A. et Oppenheimer D.M. (2014). The pen is mightier than the keyboard : advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychological science, 25 (6) : 1159-1168.

Osugi K. et al. (2019). Differences in brain activity after learning with the use of a digital pen vs. an ink pen : an electroencephalography study. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 13 (275) : 1-9.

Patterson R.W. et Patterson R.M. (2017). Computers and productivity : evidence from laptop use in the college classroom. Economics of education review, 57 : 66-79.

Pei L. et al. (2021). Temporally resolved neural dynamics underlying handwriting. Neuroimage, 244 (118578) : 1-14.

Raghavachari S. et al. (2001). Gating of human theta oscillations by a working memory task. The journal of neuroscience, 21 (9) : 3175-3183.

Singer W. (1993). Synchronization of cortical activity and its putative role in information processing and learning. Annual review of physiology, 55 : 349-374.

Skolnick R. et Puzo M. (2008). Utilization of laptop computers in the school of business classroom. Academy of educational leadership journal, 12 : 1-10.

Smoker T.J. et al. (2009). Comparing memory for handwriting versus typing. Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, 53 (22) : 1744-1747.

Van der Meer A.L.H. et Van der Weel F.R. (2017). Only three fingers write, but the whole brain works : a high-density EEG study showing advantages of drawing over typing for learning. Frontiers in psychology, 8 (706) : 1-9.

Van der Weel F.R. et al. (2019). Infants’ brain responses to looming danger: degeneracy of neural connectivity patterns. Ecological psychology,  31 (3) : 182-197.

Van der Weel R.F. et Van der Meer A.L.H. (2024). Handwriting but not typewriting leads to widespread brain connectivity : a high-density EEG study with implications for the classroom. Frontiers in psychology, 14 (1219945) : 1-9.

Vinci-Booher S. et al. (2016). Visual-motor functional connectivity in preschool children emerges after handwriting experience. Trends in neuroscience and education, 5 (3) : 107-120.

Yamamoto K. (2007). Banning laptops in the classroom : is it worth the hassle ? Journal of legal education, 57 : 477-520.

---

Source image :

Lum3n – Silver apple keyboard et Magic Mouse sur une surface rose (2017). https://www.pexels.com/fr-fr/photo/silver-apple-keyboard-et-magic-mouse-sur-une-surface-rose-399161/

---

---

---