Chalk up a win for the importance of learning handwriting. New research published in the Journal of Experimental Child Psychology suggests that developing handwriting skills helps children learn to read more effectively than typing on a keyboard.
A group of Spanish researchers wanted to learn how different writing modes (handwriting and typing) affect early reading development. Recent moves to digital learning and keyboard typing have raised concerns in parents and educators that these methods may negatively affect early literacy, specifically learning alphabetic (linking letter shapes with corresponding sounds) and orthographic (recognizing familiar letter patterns and sequences in words) knowledge.
The researchers devised an experiment using 50 five-year-olds in their final year of kindergarten. All were native Spanish speakers but had not yet learned to read. The students were randomly assigned to one of four training groups: two learned letters and words with handwriting, one group copying the letters freehand, and the other tracing those same letters. The other two groups used typing, either with a single font or with a variety of fonts representative of handwriting styles.
The children who practiced writing by hand — either by copying or tracing — consistently performed better than children who typed the same material on a keyboard across several tasks. The findings support the idea that the physical act of writing effectively strengthens children’s ability to learn letters and words.
The experiment took place in three sessions. In the first session, the researchers assessed the children’s general skills, including their knowledge of Spanish letters, memory, and fine motor skills. In the second and third sessions, they were trained using unfamiliar letters taken from Georgian and Armenian alphabets, along with nonsense two-syllable words formed from those letters.
During the training sessions, the children were shown each letter or word, heard how it was pronounced, and then reproduced it using the method they were assigned. Each training session was followed by tests that measured how well they could recognize, name, and write the material that was covered.
The results were clear. Children who trained using either hand-copying or tracing consistently performed better than those in either typing group. After training on the letters, the handwriting groups were significantly more accurate when naming and writing the letters, key indicators of alphabetic learning.
All the children could visually recognize the letters well, suggesting that identification alone isn’t the best indicator of alphabetic knowledge. The real difference emerged during tasks that required recalling sounds and producing written letters, skills critical for reading and spelling.
The handwriting advantage extended beyond identifying individual letters. Children in both handwriting groups were better at reading the nonsense words aloud, writing them from dictation, and identifying them among alternatives that were visually similar. However, children in both typing groups struggled with all these tasks, especially when it came to spelling the words.
These findings support what’s known as the graphomotor hypothesis, which suggests that physically forming letters enhances the mental representation of those letters. This may be because writing by hand involves coordinated movements, attention to shape, and sensorimotor feedback. Typing instead requires only pressing a key, which may not engage the same cognitive or neural processes.
These findings align with another recent study published in Frontiers in Psychology, which found that handwriting activates more extensive and interconnected brain networks than typing does. The researchers used brain imaging and found a stronger neural connectivity during handwriting, particularly in those areas tied to memory and sensory processing. This suggests that handwriting engages the brain in ways that support learning more effectively than typing.
The authors caution that their results don’t mean digital tools have no place in early education. What they suggest is that relying too heavily on typing-based programs during the early stages of reading acquisition may leave children with weaker foundations in letter–sound mapping and word recognition, foundational skills essential for reading fluency and academic success in later years.
There are some notable limitations. The sample size was small, with only 12-13 children per training condition, which could have affected the ability to detect smaller effects. Additionally, the study only measured short-term learning. Future research is needed to explore whether the benefits of handwriting persist over time and how they interact with the range of digital experiences children encounter in modern classrooms.
Despite these caveats, however, the researchers believe the results provide sufficient evidence that handwriting helps young children master both the building blocks of reading and the structure of written language. They recommend that handwriting remains an integral part of early literacy, even as digital devices become more common in classrooms.
Citation:
Dolan, Eric W. (May 1, 2025). “New study shows handwriting boosts early reading skills more than typing.” Psypost. Retrieved from https://www.psypost.org/new-study-shows-handwriting-boosts-early-reading-skills-more-than-typing/.
