It’s probably way too early to assess the impact of note-taking apps on listener comprehension and recall. So far, studies of the matter seem to have focused on the difference between manual note taking (long hand) and mechanical (typing) note taking.
That is perhaps a different comparison than either manual or mechanical notetaking and the use of note-taking apps, which is in the immediate sense the same as “not taking notes,” in terms of the effects on listening or comprehension.
To the extent that manual note taking enhances listening, automated note taking apps might conceivably lead to less-deep cognitive processing or less conceptual understanding. The reason is that studies on the relationship between manual (longhand) note taking and listening comprehension and memory generally suggest that the slower, manual process encourages deeper cognitive processing.
The physical act of writing is thought to force the listener to process and select important information rather than simply transcribing verbatim, which also is thought to encourage memory and understanding.
Since the notes are transcribed, verbatim, the impact on learning, long term, might be improved, it is possible to suggest.
Study (Year) | Medium/Context | Key Findings Related to Manual Note-taking | Source Link |
Mueller & Oppenheimer (2014) | Longhand vs. Laptop Note-taking in Lectures (College Students) | Longhand notes led to better performance on conceptual questions. Laptop note-takers took more notes with greater verbatim overlap, suggesting shallower processing (transcribing without synthesis) was detrimental to conceptual learning. | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24760141/ |
Flanigan et al. (Meta-Analysis, 2023) | Typed vs. Handwritten Lecture Notes (24 separate studies) | Handwritten notes led to higher academic achievement (Hedges' g = 0.248) despite typing notes resulting in higher volume. Concluded handwritten notes are more useful for studying and committing to memory. | https://scholars.georgiasouthern.edu/en/publications/typed-versus-handwritten-lecture-notes-and-college-student-achiev |
Özbay (2013) | Note-taking vs. No Note-taking while Listening (Higher Education) | Note-taking was found to have an impact on comprehension and recall in lectures, rendering listeners more active and engaging them in higher-order cognitive skills (evaluation, interpretation, summarizing). | https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271025457_The_impact_of_note-taking_while_listening_on_listening_comprehension_in_a_higher_education_context |
Kusumi, Mochizuki, & Van Der Meer (2024) | Handwriting vs. Typewriting (EEG Study) | Handwriting (manual) showed far more elaborate brain connectivity patterns (theta/alpha coherence) than typewriting, which is known to be crucial for memory formation and learning. | https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1219945/full |
Katims & Piolat (2023) | Handwritten Notes and Listening Comprehension (L2 English Learners) | Found that the quality of handwritten notes, specifically the number of 'information units' and a higher 'efficiency ratio' (relevant info/total words), positively correlated to listening comprehension test scores. Total word count was not a factor. | https://publications.coventry.ac.uk/index.php/joaw/article/download/838/983 |
Dunkel, Mishra, & Berliner (1989) | Note-taking and L1 vs. L2 Listening | For L1 (native language) listening, having notes available during the test was the most beneficial aspect, not the act of taking notes alone. For L2 (second language) listening, the impact of note-taking on overall performance was often non-significant. | https://www.govtilr.org/Publications/Notetaking.pdf |
It’s too early to assess the impact of automated note-taking apps, which will require virtually no effort on the part of the listener (either manual or mechanical notetaking). But one suspects the impact will be greater on listening attentiveness than on long-term memory.
If the core function of manual note-taking is the encoding effect (deep processing required for selection and paraphrasing), then automated apps bypass this active filtering process, leading to a shallower level of processing during the listening event, we might guess.
Since the mental effort required to transform a spoken idea into a concise, manually written note forces the listener to analyze and synthesize the information, the absence of a need to do so could, or should, lead to less thinking as a part of taking the notes.
No comments:
Post a Comment