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

11–20 of 120 posts

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

#11

Post by amelius »

wesleychen wrote: post #10
6stringmerc wrote: post #8

The amount of mental investment to write by hand versus type is significant. Technology assists are still rather primitive for English (you can’t argue with me on this it’s the hardest language due to amalgamations) but lazy gonna lazy. My thesis paper on file from 20 years ago already set forth a curriculum to address literary learning deficiency. Oh well. Point being is I’ve practiced the hard way and if you only k…

Except in this study they were comparing writing on a paper to writing on a tablet so it seems that somehow the fact that the writing happened to a piece of paper makes our memory better and its not just the act of writing itself.

Maybe because mistakes are less expensive on a tablet.

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

#12

Post by keiferski »

This study appears to focus on short term memory, but for my money, long-term memory is much more significant. As such, it would have been useful to add a third option: using a SRS system like Anki. I imagine it would significantly outcompete both hand-written notes and digital tablet notes. A bit like the famous Steve Jobs example comparing a human, a condor, and a human with a bicycle. The condor (hand-writing) may beat the human (tablet), but a human with a bicycle (SRS system) outcompetes both.

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

#13

Post by drbaba »

ngrilly wrote: post #7

Anyone here did see an improvement in memory retrieval after switching from taking notes by typing on their computer to taking notes on something like Remarkable?

I used to take some notes on paper (if it needed math and diagrams, or for meetings that require eye contact), and some notes on a computer (programming or pure text). My iPad replaced the paper but not the computer.

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

#14

Post by contravariant »

AshamedCaptain wrote: post #9
ngrilly wrote: post #7

Anyone here did see an improvement in memory retrieval after switching from taking notes by typing on their computer to taking notes on something like Remarkable?

No, and frankly, the increased search and lookup time when my colleagues can simply string grep them on their computers is a a handicap. That said, I have never been able to take notes on a keyboard. I also find that physical notebooks not only are in practice much easier to search, but I also have the impression that the fact all your note pages physically still exist (and not "disappear" after you change pages) hel…

Wouldn't surprise me if linking the notes to a physical location aids memory.

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

#16

Post by wodenokoto »

ngrilly wrote: post #7

Anyone here did see an improvement in memory retrieval after switching from taking notes by typing on their computer to taking notes on something like Remarkable?

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 the equations and diagrams on paper. Later you can write code examples in your personal cheat sheet for easy retrieval.

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

#17

Post by pringk02 »

ngrilly wrote: post #7

Anyone here did see an improvement in memory retrieval after switching from taking notes by typing on their computer to taking notes on something like Remarkable?

Anecdata, but I've never been able to switch to using a computer for note taking because I just get no long-term memory retrieval. Typing notes seem to be like never having learnt the thing. The search doesn't help because I don't even recall what I do or don't have to search through. When I take physical notes, I don't seem to need to look at them again, because I will recall what was written well enough that their purpose isn't as an archive, its for helping me retain something in my actual brain.

Another anecdata point, I have ADHD. It affects memory in all sorts of known and measured ways. I generally find if I can get something into long-term memory then I'm set. Working memory is terrible. Physically writing while working serves as a crutch there too.

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

#18

Post by vasco »

6stringmerc wrote: post #8

The amount of mental investment to write by hand versus type is significant. Technology assists are still rather primitive for English (you can’t argue with me on this it’s the hardest language due to amalgamations) but lazy gonna lazy. My thesis paper on file from 20 years ago already set forth a curriculum to address literary learning deficiency. Oh well. Point being is I’ve practiced the hard way and if you only k…

Right now you're using it to get downvoted on a random website comment section so perhaps take yourself a bit less seriously!

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

#19

Post by teamonkey »

contravariant wrote: post #14
AshamedCaptain wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, and frankly, the increased search and lookup time when my colleagues can simply string grep them on their computers is a a handicap. That said, I have never been able to take notes on a keyboard. I also find that physical notebooks not only are in practice much easier to search, but I also have the impression that the fact all your note pages physically still exist (and not "disappear" after you change pages) hel…

Wouldn't surprise me if linking the notes to a physical location aids memory.

That's the theory behind mind mapping.

As a side note, I feel mind mapping works differently on paper than with something like Xmind. Xmind is for organising and categorising thoughts by moving them around. Paper mind maps are for helping me remember the conversation when I wrote them; I can't seem to use software for that at all.

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

#20

Post by falling_myshkin »

contravariant wrote: post #14
AshamedCaptain wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, and frankly, the increased search and lookup time when my colleagues can simply string grep them on their computers is a a handicap. That said, I have never been able to take notes on a keyboard. I also find that physical notebooks not only are in practice much easier to search, but I also have the impression that the fact all your note pages physically still exist (and not "disappear" after you change pages) hel…

Wouldn't surprise me if linking the notes to a physical location aids memory.

Me neither. Memory palaces also show that this effect can be emulated (not sure if that's the right word) in the mind. I wonder if there is a way for computers to encourage developing a 'mind map'
Post reply on HN