ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2019
Differences in Brain Activity After Learning With the Use of a Digital Pen vs. an Ink Pen-An Electroencephalography Study.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A feasibility study of digital self-report measurement for brain injury patients utilizing an adapted version of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory - fourth edition.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2025Article
- Exploring the impact of note taking methods on cognitive function among university students.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Handwriting in primary school: comparing standardized tests and evaluating impact of grapho-motor parameters.Reading and writing · 2025Article
- Preliminary development and evaluation of a mechanical handwriting assistive device to support individuals with movement disorders.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2024Article
- Handwriting but not typewriting leads to widespread brain connectivity: a high-density EEG study with implications for the classroom.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Advantage of Handwriting Over Typing on Learning Words: Evidence From an N400 Event-Related Potential Index.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- The Importance of Cursive Handwriting Over Typewriting for Learning in the Classroom: A High-Density EEG Study of 12-Year-Old Children and Young Adults.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to clarify whether there is a learning effect on brain activity after writing with an ink pen vs. a digital pen. Previous studies have reported the superiority of handwriting to typing in terms of learning performance, but differences between the use of an ink pen vs. a digital pen remain unclear. In the present study, the participants learned to read difficult words by writing with an ink pen vs. a digital pen. After the learning period, electroencephalography (EEG) signals were measured, while the participants underwent a repetition priming paradigm with the use of the learned words. The repetition priming effect of the N400 event-related potential (ERP) was quantified as an index of the learning effect and the effects between pen types were compared. The groups were also subdivided according to whether a digital pen is frequently used (familiar vs. unfamiliar group). The number of writing repetitions for each word within 10 min during the learning activity and the post-learning test scores were not affected by the pen-type or familiarity with a digital pen. However, the repetition priming effect of the N400 was greater for words written with a digital pen in the learning session, as compared with an ink pen, in the familiar group, but not the unfamiliar group. These results suggest that for those familiar with its use, writing with a digital pen may improve learning relative to the use of an ink pen.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.