Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Paper vs. devices: Brain activation differences during memory retrieval (2021)

frontiersin.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 120 posts

Re: Paper vs. devices: Brain activation differences during memory retrieval (2021)

#81

Post by Multicomp »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #38
wodenokoto wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the kind of notes you can take with pen and paper beats what you can reasonably do with a keyboard. And I think some of the diagrams and annotated equations you can easily write on paper creates a much better learning experience. But computer notes are much easier to search. So for things like meeting minutes, and daily todos etc, write it in a .txt file. But when following along a deep learning course, write…

I use OneNote and do some scribbled handwriting and quite a lot of typing; mostly 'printed' in text from PDFs. I'm always amazed at how it can interpret my handwriting, a lot of people struggle with it (including me). It's not perfect, but it surprises me sometimes.

The ability to attach multimedia screenshots, videos, images, files, digital ink is what elevates OneNote to me beyond Joplin, DokuWiki, LogSeq, Obsidian (all tools I've tried and can see why they have such appeal) , and other markdown++ notetaking applications, at least for my own taste and usecases.

OneNote is not only a good notetaking capture tool, it's also a great clarifying tool for general reference/project support digital filing.

Whether the digital artifacts are text, handwritten doodles, embedded files like multimedia or WIP digital artifacts, screenshots of binary file hexdumps, the works can all be stored together with relevant context, all labelled and fitting into a 3-ring-binder skeuomorphism I'm used to from organizing projects back in school in the olden days.

Not the tool for everyone (especially those want to go fully Linux Desktop) but its very close to having something for everyone. Just gotta be able to do mobile and linux with local notebooks.

Re: Paper vs. devices: Brain activation differences during memory retrieval (2021)

#82

Post by dash2 »

chrisweekly wrote: post #44

One thing I love about my reMarkable tablet is that I get all the benefits of manual handwriting and sketches, enhanced by and combined with digital flexibility (copy/paste, resize, undo/redo, tags/metadata, search, retrieval, PKB integ and interop, etc).

I love my eink tablet, and it's definitely better and more comfortable than my laptop screen or phone. But for some reason, actual paper still seems even better. I'm an academic: if I really want to study a difficult paper hard, I print it out.

Re: Paper vs. devices: Brain activation differences during memory retrieval (2021)

#83

Post by nomel »

chrisweekly wrote: post #44

One thing I love about my reMarkable tablet is that I get all the benefits of manual handwriting and sketches, enhanced by and combined with digital flexibility (copy/paste, resize, undo/redo, tags/metadata, search, retrieval, PKB integ and interop, etc).

How does an iPad with an Apple Pencil compare?

Re: Paper vs. devices: Brain activation differences during memory retrieval (2021)

#84

Post by ragle »

nomel wrote: post #83
chrisweekly wrote: post #44

One thing I love about my reMarkable tablet is that I get all the benefits of manual handwriting and sketches, enhanced by and combined with digital flexibility (copy/paste, resize, undo/redo, tags/metadata, search, retrieval, PKB integ and interop, etc).

How does an iPad with an Apple Pencil compare?

I haven't used the remarkable but I bought a screen protector for my iPad that's intended to yield a paper-like writing and drawing experience when using the Apple pencil. It gets pretty close I think.

N.B. if you go this route you'd need to replace the Apple pencil tips a bit more regularly than you otherwise would given the rougher surface you're "writing" on.

Re: Paper vs. devices: Brain activation differences during memory retrieval (2021)

#85

Post by hn8305823 »

This correlates with my personal experience.

If I take paper notes, I rarely have to go back and look at them. Even then it's usually just to confirm my memory. If I take notes on an electronic device, I'm far more likely to have to go back and look at the device.

Re: Paper vs. devices: Brain activation differences during memory retrieval (2021)

#87

Post by jyunwai »

keiferski wrote: post #53
tgv wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One hour isn't really short-term memory, at least not in the usual sense, and short-term memory is definitely needed to form long-term memories. Spaced repetition is an entirely different dimension. It doesn't fit between the three mentioned modes. You don't get spaced repetition when e.g. attending class or reading a chapter. Instead, you make notes. That's what this study is for, and anything else is a distraction.

My point was more that if you’re trying to decide which method is better for remembering something (handwriting vs. digital), the introduction of a spaced repetition system (either software like Anki or a Leitner box for handwritten notes) will outcompete either one that is used alone. In other words, if your goal is to go fast: a bicycle will outcompete a tricycle. But adding a motor to either will be an order of ma…

I agree with your thoughts on digital notes providing an advantage with making flashcards, as they match with my personal experience with learning new subjects.

I used to learn with handwriting more than digital note-taking in the past, but I found it hard to convert the handwritten notes into a flashcard format (the best I could do was retype, or write the notes in a question-answer format, scan them, and use the screenshots as flashcards).

By starting with digital notes, however, the process became simpler for making flashcards for a spaced repetition system—it became much easier to reformat the text for digital flashcards. I then found it much easier to review my notes in the future in a way that actively tested me, versus passively re-reading my handwritten notes.

Re: Paper vs. devices: Brain activation differences during memory retrieval (2021)

#88

Post by digging »

xivzgrev wrote: post #79

I once wrote out a job hunting goal on a sheet of paper and read it 3x per day for a few months, with “crazy” salary and everything. And then, I got it. I did similar thing later with multiple goals in Google docs. Found that I’m not as consistent with it and haven’t achieved those same goals. Could be consistency, more goals vs fewer, or the paper vs digital There’s something about paper that feels more real. It als…

I find that any goals the exist inside my computer get downgraded subconsciously because, physically, it's like sliding them into a folder with everything else I do all day every day. I can open that folder and pull out my critical life goals or the doodles I did during a meeting or that cool article I want to learn something from, etc.

However, prioritizing physical space for a goal affects your real life. Maybe this doesn't apply if your written goal was just in a notebook that is also used for other things, but if it's on your desk, (and your desk isn't cluttered,) its physical important also signals the brain.

Re: Paper vs. devices: Brain activation differences during memory retrieval (2021)

#89

Post by ska »

intrepidlemon wrote: post #52
geniium wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only thing I miss is the ability to spread my papers in front of me to think with a global view and mix them and play with them with ease. This is something I never found in any digital product where paper is unbeatable.

This could be achieved with VR although I don’t know of anything product doing this now.

> I don’t know of anything product doing this now.

I suspect there is no technology really capable of doing this well yet, let alone product.

Re: Paper vs. devices: Brain activation differences during memory retrieval (2021)

#90

Post by gnicholas »

makeitdouble wrote: post #49

One side issue on these studies is there's currently no control group who spent their life solely on electronic devices. Even as tablets are distributed in school from the primary cycle, note taking and exams are all done on paper. This is not a value judgment on wether it's good or bad, just that any further study will be on subjects that spent their formative years writing on paper, they better learn to be good at…

> Even as tablets are distributed in school from the primary cycle, note taking and exams are all done on paper.

My kid takes tests on the computer. And when I was in law school almost 20 years ago, students mostly took notes on computers, and tests were computerized as well.

I will note that when I was studying for the bar I found it incredibly helpful to re-write my daily lecture notes by hand.

Post reply on HN