Recent research suggests that graphic motor programs acquired through writing are part of letter representations and contribute to their recognition. Indeed, learning new letter-like shapes through handwriting gave rise to better recognition than learning through typing on a keyboard. However, handwriting and typing do not differ solely by the nature of the motor activity. Handwriting requires a detailed visual analysis in order to reproduce all elements of the target shape. In contrast, typing relies on visual discrimination between graphic forms and does not require such detailed processing. The aim of the present study was to disentangle the respective contribution of visual analysis and graphomotor knowledge. We compared handwriting and typing to learning by composition, a new method which requires a detailed visual analysis of the target without the specific graphomotor activity. Participants composed the target symbols by selecting elementary features from the set displayed on the screen and dragging them in the appropriate position. In four experiments, adult participants learned sets of symbols through handwriting, typing or composition. Recognition tests were administered immediately after the learning phase and again two to three weeks later. Taken together, the results of the four experiments confirm the importance of the detailed visual analysis and provide no evidence for an influence of motor knowledge.

最近的研究表明，通过书写获得的图形运动程序是字母表示的一部分，并有助于识别它们。的确，通过手写学习新的类似字母的形状比通过键盘打字学习得到更好的识别。但是，手写和打字并没有仅因运动活动的性质而有所不同。手写要求进行详细的视觉分析，以便再现目标形状的所有元素。相反，键入依赖于图形形式之间的视觉辨别力，不需要这种详细的处理。本研究的目的是弄清视觉分析和Graphomotor知识各自的贡献。我们比较了手写和打字与按作文学习，一种新方法，需要对目标物进行详细的目视分析，而没有特定的拟运动能力。参与者通过从屏幕上显示的集合中选择基本特征并将其拖动到适当的位置来组成目标符号。在四个实验中，成年参与者通过手写，打字或构图学习了符号集。学习阶段后立即进行识别测试，两到三周后再次进行。综上所述，这四个实验的结果证实了详细的视觉分析的重要性，并且没有提供有关运动知识影响的证据。在四个实验中，成年参与者通过手写，打字或构图学习了符号集。学习阶段后立即进行识别测试，两到三周后再次进行。综上所述，这四个实验的结果证实了详细视觉分析的重要性，并且没有提供有关运动知识影响的证据。在四个实验中，成年参与者通过手写，打字或构图学习了符号集。学习阶段后立即进行识别测试，两到三周后再次进行。综上所述，这四个实验的结果证实了详细视觉分析的重要性，并且没有提供有关运动知识影响的证据。