Free
Research Article  |   March 2003
Computerized Temporal Handwriting Characteristics of Proficient and Non-Proficient Handwriters
Author Affiliations
  • Sara Rosenblum, MSc, is Instructor, School of Occupational Therapy, The Hebrew University Faculty of Medicine, Jerusalem, Israel (Mailing address: Department of Occupational Therapy, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, Haifa, 31905 Israel; rosens@construct.haifa.ac.il)
  • Shula Parush, PhD, is Senior Lecturer, School of Occupational Therapy, The Hebrew University Faculty of Medicine, Jerusalem, Israel
  • Patrice L. Weiss, PhD, is Associate Professor, Department of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Social Welfare & Health Studies, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel
Article Information
Pediatric Evaluation and Intervention / School-Based Practice / Handwriting and Computer Skills in Children
Research Article   |   March 2003
Computerized Temporal Handwriting Characteristics of Proficient and Non-Proficient Handwriters
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, March/April 2003, Vol. 57, 129-138. doi:10.5014/ajot.57.2.129
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, March/April 2003, Vol. 57, 129-138. doi:10.5014/ajot.57.2.129
Abstract

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to use computerized temporal measures to examine and compare the writing process of proficient and non-proficient third-grade handwriters.

METHOD. A computerized digitizer system was used to compare the temporal handwriting measures of two groups of 8–9-year-old students. Classroom teachers used a questionnaire to identify 50 students who were non-proficient handwriters and 50 students who were proficient handwriters. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) analyses were used to test for the group differences across tasks for each dependent variable. Total time, “on paper” time, “in air” time, speed, and number of characters per minute were recorded as the participants performed graded writing tasks.

RESULTS. Non-proficient handwriters required significantly more time to perform handwriting tasks [F(4,91) = 14.83, p < .0001]; their “in air” time, was especially longer as compared to the proficient handwriters [F(4,91) = 13.63, p < .0001]. Their handwriting speed was slower [F(4,91) = 5.99, p < .0002], and they wrote fewer characters per minute (F(4,91) = 14.63, p < .0001).

CONCLUSION. The use of a computerized handwriting system provides objective temporal measures of handwriting performance, and may lead to the development of additional tools for the evaluation and treatment of handwriting difficulties.