> On Wednesday 12 February 2003 16:39, Tripp, Bryan wrote: > > This is interesting. The author claims that "handwriting is > > such an automatic activity", which seems right to me in this > > context, in that handwriting interferes very little with > > listening. Why? > > I agree, what he says about that is pure bullshit.
I wouldn't say "pure". I agree with him that recording information requires some attention, that the amount of attention depends on how you record information, and that writing it by hand requires very little. I just don't agree with him that recording information by computer necessarily requires more. I think this depends on typing skill and interface design. My guess is that data entry into a form, or choosing an option from a list, requires more attention than typing free text (for someone who can type well) ... but that's just a guess. Does anyone know of any research along these lines? > I do draw one conclusion from the essay - which is that the main > use of the notes was seen to be adding to them, not recalling > information from them. > > I do think that typed notes tend to be quicker fo the whole > cycle of making and retrieiving, and ones decently computerised > are yet faster in that. Good point. Bryan This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by anyone other than the person for whom it was originally intended is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies. Opinions, conclusions or other information contained in this e-mail may not be that of the organization.
