The Bottom Line
- Typing can drift into verbatim transcription (low learning).
- Handwriting often forces summarisation (higher processing).
- The best approach: design constraints that force generative processing in any medium.
Medium is not destiny
Handwriting isn’t magic and typing isn’t evil. The critical mechanism is whether your method forces you to <strong>think and compress</strong> in your own words.
The evidence base on note medium is nuanced: some work suggests advantages for longhand in conceptual learning (often attributed to deeper processing), while meta-analytic work shows effects depend heavily on context (distraction control, review behaviour, and what outcomes you measure). The practical takeaway: engineer the process, not the stationery.
1
Rule 1: Ban verbatim notes
If you can copy without thinking, you will. Use constraints: max 5 bullets per topic; max 1 sentence per rule.
2
Rule 2: Always include a retrieval prompt
Every note ends with: ‘If I saw this vignette again, what would I do first—and why?’
3
Rule 3: Choose medium based on task
Handwrite for synthesis and discriminators. Type for organisation, search, and version control.
4
Rule 4: Review as testing, not rereading
If your ‘review’ is reading your own notes, you’re back in passive mode. Convert notes into prompts and test.
My note medium decision
1
2
3
4
5
Practice
Test your knowledge
Apply this concept immediately with a high-yield question block from the iatroX Q-Bank.
SourceMueller & Oppenheimer: longhand vs laptop note-taking (conceptual questions)
Open Link SourceMeta-analysis: typed vs handwritten lecture notes (Educational Psychology Review)
Open Link SourceSystematic review/meta-analysis: note-taking method and performance (Contemporary Educational Psychology)
Open Link