Science for Education Today, 2022, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 163–182

The relationship between perception and assimilation of audio information depending on the methods of fixing writing in the era of digitalization

Eliseeva A. V. 1 (Moscow, Russian Federation), Strelchuk E. N. 2 (Moscow, Russian Federation)
1 Russian Combined Arms Academy
2 Peoples' Friendship University of Russia

Introduction. The article explores a significant problem of the relationship between writing and listening depending on the methods of symbolic text fixation in the digital age. The purpose of the study is to identify differences in the perception and assimilation of audio information, which is fixed in two different ways: by hand and typing on the keyboard of a computer (tablet).
Materials and Methods. The experimental study was conducted at the combined arms Academy in the «Standards of Speech" classroom using a specially developed author's inventory. The study sample consisted of 1st and 2nd year master’s students (n = 50) aged between 25 and 40 years, divided into two equal groups of 25 people. The first subgroup included those who chose to fix the text by hand, whereas the second subgroup included participants who chose to fix the text on a computer. The experiment consisted of two parts: it was necessary to record the auditable text in writing (by hand or on a computer) and answer questions after its perception. The total time was 90 minutes. The reliability of the data obtained was verified using the Student's t-test calculation method for two independent samples.
Results. In the course of the study, it was determined that for fixing the audited text, listeners (if desired) use two different methods: note-taking and computer shorthand. Analysis of the results of sign-symbolic fixation of the audited text showed significant differences in the structural organization of the written text. It was revealed that, in contrast to computer shorthand, the use of taking notes significantly increases the efficiency of assimilation of educational material.
Conclusions. The article concludes that methods of sign-symbolic fixation of a written text in different ways affect the perception of audio information and its further assimilation, which in turn has a significant impact on the development of thinking and memory.


Digital technologies; Sign-symbolic fixation of text; Writing; Audio information; Computer shorthand; Note-taking; Memory; Thinking.

For citation:
Eliseeva A. V., Strelchuk E. N. The relationship between perception and assimilation of audio information depending on the methods of fixing writing in the era of digitalization. Science for Education Today, 2022, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 163–182. DOI:
  1. Spitzer M. Cyberkrank!: Wie das digitalisierte Leben unsere Gesundheit ruiniert. Droemer eBook, 2015, 432 р. URL:
  2. Chernigovskaja T. V., Allahverdov V. M., Korotkov A. D., Gershkovich V. A., Kireev M. V., Prokopenya V. K. Human brain and ambiguity of cognitive information: A convergent approach. Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflictology, 2020, vol. 36 (4), pp. 675–686. (In Russian) DOI: URL:
  3. Chomsky N. New horizons in the study of language and mind. 2000, 230 р. DOI:
  4. Carr N. G. The shallows: What the internet is doing to our brains. 2010, 280 р. URL:
  5. McNamara, D.S., Kendeou, P. The early automated writing evaluation (eAWE) framework. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 2022, vol. 29 (2), pp. 150–182. DOI:
  6. Graham S., Tavsanli O. F., Kaldirim A. Improving writing skills of students in Turkey: A meta-analysis of writing interventions. Educational Psychology Review, 2022, vol. 34, pp. 889–934. DOI:
  7. Ralli A. M., Dimakos I. C., Dockrell J. E., Papoulidi A. Teacher practices for teaching writing in Greek primary schools. Reading and Writing, 2022, vol. 35, pp. 1599–1626. DOI: 
  8. Camacho A., Alves R. A., Boscolo P. Writing motivation in school: A systematic review of empirical research in the early twenty-first century. Educational Psychology Review, 2021, vol.  33  (1), pp. 213–247. DOI:
  9. Safdari M. Contributions of Edmodo social learning network to Iranian EFL learners’ writing accuracy. Computer Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 2021, vol. 22 (1), pp. 343–361. URL:
  10. Mueller S., Fiehler K. Effector movement triggers gaze-dependent spatial coding of tactile and proprioceptive-tactile reach targets. Neuropsychologia, 2014, vol. 62, pp. 184–193. DOI:
  11. Pattamadilok C., Ponz A., Planton S., Bonnard M. Contribution of writing to reading: Dissociation between cognitive and motor process in the left dorsal premotor cortex. Human Brain Mapping, 2016, vol. 37 (4), pp. 1531–1543. DOI:
  12. Mueller P., Oppenheimer D. M. The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychological Science, 2014, vol. 25 (6), pp. 1159–1168. DOI: URL:
  13. Marzullo R. Education and technology. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 2022, vol. 20 (1), pp. 163–173. DOI: 
  14. Kiefer M., Schuler S., Mayer C., Trumpp N.e M., Hille K., Sachse S. Handwriting or Typewriting? The Influence of Pen- or Keyboard-Based Writing Training on Reading and Writing Performance in Preschool Children. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 2015, vol. 11 (4), pp. 136–146. DOI:
Date of the publication 31.08.2022