Search

Spelling difficulties are commonly associated primarily with spelling errors. However, it is not uncommon for spelling challenges to transform the whole writing process into a formidable struggle. This paper delves into the exploration of whether and to what extent analyses of children's writing processes can enhance our understanding of their difficulties, potentially contributing to the assessment of spelling challenges. We focused particularly on the degree of hesitation within words and the ability to detect and correct spelling errors among children with and without reading and spelling difficulties, as well as how these processes impact the quality and lexical diversity of their texts. Additionally, we sought to contribute to disentangling the influence of spelling and decoding abilities on these processes. A cohort of 47 children, aged 10–13, participated in the study, comprising 16 typically developing children, 16 with predominantly spelling difficulties, and 15 with both reading and spelling difficulties. Our analysis encompassed their spelling performance in both standardized tests and task-oriented writing samples, as well as an examination of their pausing and revision behaviour. As expected, we found robust correlations between the children's spelling test scores and the proportions of spelling errors in their texts. Furthermore, our findings indicated that children encountering spelling difficulties exhibited a reduced ability to detect and correct errors compared to their peers without such challenges. Additionally, they displayed a slightly higher tendency to experience word-internal interruptions, aligning with prior research. The children who also had reading difficulties produced fewer words and processed words more slowly compared to children in both the other groups. Intriguingly, process data did not reliably predict text characteristics, suggesting that dysfluent writing may not significantly detriment the overall quality of the text, contrary to our initial expectations based on prevailing writing development models. Nevertheless, the study revealed considerable individual variation, with some participants demonstrating a high degree of struggling and dysfluency, resulting in poorer text outcomes, but also others whose struggling processes led to better outcomes. We posit that the crucial aspect lies in identifying these individuals within a classroom context and gaining insights into their processes to provide them with appropriate, formative feedback and adequate writing tools to facilitate their writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Writing a synthesis text involves interacting reading and writing processes, serving the comprehension of source information, and its integration into a reader-friendly and accurate synthesis text. Mastering these processes requires insight into process' orchestrations. A way of achieving this is via process feedback in which students compare their process orchestration with examples. Access to such examples of enacted process orchestration models might have an additional learning effect. In the present study we replicated and extended the study of Vandermeulen et al. (Written Communication, 40(1), 90–144, 2023) on the effect of keystroke logging data-based process feedback with feed-forward exemplars when compared to national baseline performances. In addition, we report the effect of a brief extension in which learners had the opportunity to observe an enacted model of their choice, showing one of three orchestrations of the initial stage of writing a synthesis task. A total of 173 10th—grade students were randomly assigned to a process feedback condition with or without added models. A baseline, consisting of a nationally representative sample of upper-secondary students' texts and processes, served as an alternative control group. Results showed that the process feedback, both with and without observation, had a significant effect on text quality. Regarding the process data, students in the feedback condition had a more prominent focus on the sources as they spent more time in them and switched more often between text and sources, compared to the baseline. The observation task magnified this effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite recent research on the building blocks of language processing, the nature of the units involved in the production of written texts remains elusive: intonation units, which are evidenced by empirical results across a growing body of work, are not suitable for writing, where the sentence remains the common reference. Drawing on the analysis of the writing product and process, our study explores how children with and without dyslexia handle sentences. The children were asked to write a short story and the writing process was recorded using keystroke logging software (Inputlog 7 & 8). We measured the number of pauses, the nature of the language sequences segmented by pauses, and the revision operations performed throughout the process. We analyzed sentences both in product and process. Our results showed that both the written product and the writing process reflect the establishment of a syntactic schema during language processing in typical children, in line with the first functional step in processing. This was not clearly evidenced in the case of dyslexic children, due to their limited production: beyond spelling, syntactic elaboration was also affected. In contrast, it appeared that the units of language processing cannot be equated with sentences in writing: the information flow is produced through usually smaller bursts that each carry part of the meaning or correspond to a specific operation of text crafting and revision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Writing processes constitute a complex interplay of planning, formulation and revision. Ideas take shape through the activation of previous knowledge and, when permitted, also its synthesis with information from sources that help to complement it and resolve doubts and shortcomings arising during writing. The possibility to use external help can be especially useful to those writing in a foreign language, and questions about the nature of the sources consulted can contribute new insights into language processing in the multilingual mind, as well as expand our notion of fluency. While leaving the target text is often considered a distraction, a 'breakdown' in fluency, it is, in fact, a part of language processing and text creation. This article proposes a novel way to use keylogging data from Inputlog (Leijten and Van Waes 2013) to visualise the crosslinguistic nature of solving language and content problems in L3+ writing: creating process graphs to display the temporal dynamics of different types of sources used. The example data comes from a university-level course on Spanish linguistics, where Spanish was a third or subsequent language for the participants. Evidently, the vast majority of their external activity was language-related and brief, and, interestingly, a great part of it recurs to a lingua franca, English. Some social context and reasoning is offered to explain such an observation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aims to establish a methodological framework for investigating deception in both spoken and written language production. A foundational premise is that the production of deceitful narratives induces a heightened cognitive load that has a discernable influence on linguistic processes during real-time language production. This study includes meticulous analysis of spoken and written data from two participants who told truthful and deceitful narratives. Spoken processes were captured through audio recordings and subsequently transcribed, while written processes were recorded using keystroke logging, resulting in final texts and corresponding linear representations of the writing activity. By grounding our study in a linguistic approach for understanding cognitive load indicators in language production, we demonstrate how linguistic processes, such as text length, pauses, fluency, revisions, repetitions, and reformulations can be used to capture instances of deception in both speaking and writing. Additionally, our findings underscore that markers of cognitive load are likely to be more discernible and more automatically measured in the written modality. This suggests that the collection and examination of writing processes have substantial potential for forensic applications. By highlighting the efficacy of analyzing both spoken and written modalities, this study provides a versatile methodological framework for studying deception during language production, which significantly enriches the existing forensic toolkit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sentences are generally understood to be essential communicative units in writing that are built to express thoughts and meanings. Studying sentence production provides a valuable opportunity to shed new light on the writing process itself and on the underlying cognitive processes. Nevertheless, research on the production of sentences in writing remains scarce. We propose a theoretical framework and an open-source implementation that aim to facilitate the study of sentence production based on keystroke logs. We centre our approach around the notion of sentence history: all the versions of a given sentence during the production of a text. The implementation takes keystroke logs as input and extracts sentence versions, aggregates them into sentence histories and evaluates the sentencehood of each sentence version. We provide detailed evaluation of the implementation based on a manually annotated corpus of texts in French, German and English. The implementation yields strong results on the three processing aspects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The understanding of the cognitive processes that underlie written composition requires analysis of moment-by-moment fluctuation in the rate of output that go beyond traditional approaches to writing time-course analysis based on, for example, counting pauses. This special issue includes 10 papers that provide important new tools and methods for extracting and analyzing writing timecourse data that go beyond traditional approaches. The papers in this special issue divide into three groups: papers that describe methods for capturing and coding writing timecourse data from writers producing text either by hand or by keyboard, papers that describe new statistical approaches to describing and drawing inferences from these data, and papers that focus on analysis of how a text develops over time as the writer makes changes to what they have already written. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When (professional) authors work on their texts, they frequently 'jump' around their document to make textual changes and create new content at a wide range of locations. Currently, a range of linearity measures are available to capture this, some of which requiring time-intensive manual coding. Linearity metrics are commonly calculated based on the leading edge and are mostly used for short texts and single writing sessions. However, especially for longer, multi-session writing processes, text can often be created at various spaces, not necessarily including the leading edge. Accordingly, the leading edge is not enough to distinguish between linear production and non-linear text alterations. Therefore, in the current study, we propose a novel, more flexible, automatized non-linearity analysis, which does not solely rely on the leading edge. In this approach, all backwards and forwards cursor and mouse operations from the point of utterance are extracted from keystroke data, and characterized both based on duration and distance. This results in a detailed list of characteristics per writing episode, allowing us to compare and group episodes of writing at various scales. We illustrate this approach by analysing the writing process of a complete novel based on close to 400 writing sessions totalling 276 h of writing. The results show that the current non-linearity analysis allows us to successfully cluster writing sessions using the non-linearity characteristics. This analysis can be used to find patterns in non-linearity over time, allowing us to chart interactions with the text-produced-so-far and session management strategies in multi-session writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Investigating links between temporal features of the writing process (e.g., bursts and pauses during writing) and the linguistic features found in written products would help us better understand intersections between the writing process and product. However, research on this topic is rare. This article illustrates a method to examine associations between the writing process and linguistic features and provides an illustrative study that examines whether features of L2 writing fluency can be predicted by cohesive devices produced in argumentative essays. Seventy-five L2 undergraduate students at a U.S. university wrote two independent essays spaced about five months apart on two different prompts. Students' writing fluency was calculated using keystroke logging techniques and was analyzed using a multi-dimensional model that condensed processing into four process components (production, process variance, revision, and pause behavior). The cohesion features in students' essays were analyzed using natural language processing (NLP) approaches that measured three types of cohesive devices (reference, conjunction, lexical cohesion). Results from linear mixed effects models showed that writing fluency components were significantly predicted by a set of cohesive devices found in L2 writers' essays. The findings indicated links between certain cohesive devices and specific temporal features in L2 writers' text production (e.g., more unattended demonstratives related to more productivity). The proposed method affords opportunities for future research investigating links between the writing process and product using keystroke logging and NLP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Knowledge about writers' eye movements and their effects on the writing process, and its product—the finally edited text—is still limited. Previous research has demonstrated that there are differences between reading texts written by someone else and reading one's own emerging text and that writers frequently look back into their own texts (Torrance et al. in Psychol Res Psychologische Forschung 80(5):729–743, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-015-0683-8). For handwriting, Alamargot et al. (Writing and cognition: research and applications. Elsevier Science, pp 13–29, 2007) found support that these lookbacks could occur in parallel with transcription, but to our knowledge this type of parallel processing has not been explored further, and definitely not in the context of computer writing. Considering that language production models are moving away from previous sequential or serial models (e.g., Levelt in Speaking from intentions to articulation. MIT Press, 1989) towards models in which linguistic processes can operate in parallel (Olive in J Writ Res, 2014. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2014.06.02.4), this is slightly surprising. In the present paper, we introduce a methodological approach to examine writers' parallel processing in which we take our point of departure in visual attention rather than in the keystrokes. Capitalizing on New ScriptLog's feature to link gaze with typing across different functional units in the writing task, we introduce and describe a method to capture and examine sequences of typing during fixations, outline how these can be examined in relation to each other, and test our approach by exploring typing during fixations in a text composition task with 14 competent adult writers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Revision plays an important role in writing, and as revisions break down the linearity of the writing process, they are crucial in describing writing process dynamics. Keystroke logging and analysis have been used to identify revisions made during writing. Previous approaches include the manual annotation of revisions, building nonlinear S-notations, and the automated extraction of backspace keypresses. However, these approaches are time-intensive, vulnerable to construct, or restricted. Therefore, this article presents a computational approach to the automatic extraction of full revision events from keystroke logs, including both insertions and deletions, as well as the characters typed to replace the deleted text. Within this approach, revision candidates are first automatically extracted, which allows for a simplified manual annotation of revision events. Second, machine learning is used to automatically detect revision events. For this, 7120 revision events were manually annotated in a dataset of keystrokes obtained from 65 students conducting a writing task. The results showed that revision events could be automatically predicted with a relatively high accuracy. In addition, a case study proved that this approach could be easily applied to a new dataset. To conclude, computational approaches can be beneficial in providing automated insights into revisions in writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines associations between writing behaviors manifested by keystroke analytics and the formulation of argument elements in L2 undergraduate writers' writing processes. Ninety-nine persuasive essays written by L2 undergraduate writers were human annotated for Toulmin argument elements. The corresponding keystroke logs were segmented and analyzed to characterize the dynamics of writing processes for different categories of the elements. A multinomial mixed-effects logistic regression model was built to predict argument categories using the keystroke analytics. The study reported that L2 undergraduate writers' text production for final claims and primary claims featured P-bursts (execution processes delimited by pauses exceeding 2 seconds) of longer spans but lower production fluency compared to that for data. In addition, fewer revisions were observed when L2 writers were constructing final claims than when they were formulating data. These findings shed light on the varying cognitive loads and activities L2 undergraduate writers may experience when building different argument elements in written argumentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Writing is a crucial, interdisciplinary skill that incoming college students need to successfully complete many of the tasks assigned within their coursework. While teaching self-regulation skills for writing has become more commonplace in writing curricula, and research has investigated how students have been impacted by a writing-about-writing curriculum or how they write in the classroom and perceive their use of self-regulatory strategies, there is not as much research combining these approaches. We argue it is important to investigate the ways that students are impacted by this curriculum and how they perceive their own self-regulated writing behaviors—particularly as evidence by how students write in real-time using multimodal data channels. As such, one goal of this paper is to highlight our approach to investigating college students' (n = 62) writing processes as they responded to a written self-reflective prompt. Based on students' written responses, we discovered four student clusters and compared their keystroke-logging behavior using a one-way MANOVA, with post-hoc analyses revealing significant differences between production and revision behavior between some clusters, but no differences in pausing behavior. In addition, another goal of this paper is to derive recommendations for the design of scaffolding based on the results of this empirical study, which imply that scaffolded support should focus on particular phases of self-regulation for different groups of students. Future studies are needed to test the most beneficial ways to scaffold students to ensure they are engaging in effective writing strategies that promote higher levels of metacognitive awareness of one's writing to ensure students are effective writers throughout their years in college and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite recent research on the building blocks of language processing, the nature of the units involved in the production of written texts remains elusive: intonation units, which are evidenced by empirical results across a growing body of work, are not suitable for writing, where the sentence remains the common reference. Drawing on the analysis of the writing product and process, our study explores how children with and without dyslexia handle sentences. The children were asked to write a short story and the writing process was recorded using keystroke logging software (Inputlog 7 & 8). We measured the number of pauses, the nature of the language sequences segmented by pauses, and the revision operations performed throughout the process. We analyzed sentences both in product and process. Our results showed that both the written product and the writing process reflect the establishment of a syntactic schema during language processing in typical children, in line with the first functional step in processing. This was not clearly evidenced in the case of dyslexic children, due to their limited production: beyond spelling, syntactic elaboration was also affected. In contrast, it appeared that the units of language processing cannot be equated with sentences in writing: the information flow is produced through usually smaller bursts that each carry part of the meaning or correspond to a specific operation of text crafting and revision.

Artikkeli käsittelee monikielisten kirjoittajien kirjoittamisprosessien sujuvuutta. Oppijakorpuksen keräämiseen ja analysointiin käytimme graafiteoriaan perustuvaa näppäilyntallennusohjelmaa GenoGraphiX-Log (GGXLog), jonka visualisointityökalut tarjoavat uuden lähestymistavan kirjoitusprosessin sujuvuuden analysointiin. Koko aineisto koostuu 21 yliopistoopiskelijan kirjoittamasta suomenkielisestä (L1) ja ranskankielisestä (L2) mielipidekirjoituksesta. Tässä tapaustutkimuksessa keskitymme kuitenkin vain kolmen opiskelijan kirjoitusprosesseihin ja kirjoittajaprofiileihin. Tulokset osoittavat, että kirjoitusprosessien visualisoinnin avulla pystymme tunnistamaan ja havainnollistamaan sujuvaa kirjoittamista edustavia purskeita yksityiskohtaisemmin. Lisäksi kirjoittajan tuottamat purskeet ja sanastokeskittymät voivat paljastaa kirjoittajien yksilöllisiä kirjoittajaprofiileja niin L1- kuin L2-kirjoituksessa. Tulokset auttavat parantamaan pedagogisia käytäntöjä eri koulutusympäristöissä. Lisäksi kirjoitus prosessien analyysi antaa oppijoille mahdollisuuden tunnistaa oman kirjoittajaprofiilinsa. *** A case study of multilingual writers’ writing processes: Using keystroke logging to identify formulaic sequences *** This article deals with the fluency of multilingual writers’ writing processes. To collect and analyze the learner-corpus of our case study, we used the graph theory-based keystroke logging software GGXLog, whose visualization functions provide a new approach to the analysis of writing process fluency. The material consists of three writings in Finnish (L1) and French (L2) written by university students. In this article, we focus on the writing processes and profiles of these three students, especially regarding their bursts and formulaic sequences during the writing process. The results show that the statistics and visualization allow us to identify and illustrate bursts of fluent writing in a more detailed way. Furthermore, sequences of fluent writing can reveal the patterns of individual writer profiles, which increases the knowledge of L1 and L2 writing processes. The results in L2 writing are closely related to students’ proficiency level. These results can contribute to enhancing pedagogical practices in different educational settings.

The small body of research on writing and writing processes in the group of deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) children has shown that this group struggles more with writing than their hearing peers. This article aims to explore in what ways the DHH group differs from their peers regarding the written product and the writing processes. Participants are all in the age span 10-12 years old and include: (a) 12 DHH children with knowledge of Swedish sign language (Svenskt teckenspråk, STS) as well as spoken Swedish, (b) 10 age-matched hearing children of deaf adults (CODA) who know STS, (c) 14 age-matched hearing peers with no STS knowledge. More specifically we investigate how text length and lexical properties relate to writing processes such as planning (measured through pauses) and revision, and how the background factors of age, gender, hearing and knowledge of STS predict the outcome in product and process. The data consists of pictureelicited narratives collected with keystroke logging. The overall results show that age is a strong predictor for writing fluency, longer texts and more sophisticated lexicon for all the children. This confirms theories on writing development which stress that when children have automatized basic low-level processes such as transcription and spelling, this will free up cognitive space for engaging in highlevel processes, such as planning and revision--which in turn will result in more mature texts. What characterizes the DHH group is slower writing fluency, higher lexical density, due to omitted function words, and extensive revisions (both deletions and insertions) on word level and below. One explanation for the last finding is that limitations in the auditory input lead to more uncertainty regarding correct and appropriate lexical choices, as well as spelling. The article contributes with more specific knowledge on what is challenging during writing for DHH children with knowledge of STS and spoken Swedish in middle school, in the developmental stage when basic writing skills are established. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multiple factors simultaneously interact during the writing process. The effect of these interacting factors must be considered if writing is studied as a dynamic and complex process that constantly changes. Based on that premise, the study aims to determine how the interaction between the reading medium and the communicative purpose of a writing task affects the pauses during different stages of the writing process. At the same time, it seeks to determine how this interaction is related to the writer's competence. Using a 2-by-2 experimental design, undergraduate students (n = 66) read documents (print or digital format) and completed a computer-embedded writing task with different communicative purposes (to persuade or to inform). While writing, pauses-related keystrokes were recorded. The results show that neither the reading medium nor the task purpose or the interaction of these two variables affect pauses. However, communicative purpose interacts with the stages of the writing process, so regardless of participants' writing competence, they took longer at the end of the writing process when the purpose was to persuade. Other interactions indicated that the type of pause interacts differentially with the stage and communicative purpose. These interactions and main effects were systematically related to the writer's competence; because once it was statistically controlled, these interactions and main effects were no longer significant. The results are analysed in terms of the cognitive processes underlying pauses, considering evidence from studies on hybrid reading-writing and integrated writing studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sentences are generally understood to be essential communicative units in writing that are built to express thoughts and meanings. Studying sentence production provides a valuable opportunity to shed new light on the writing process itself and on the underlying cognitive processes. Nevertheless, research on the production of sentences in writing remains scarce. We propose a theoretical framework and an open-source implementation that aim to facilitate the study of sentence production based on keystroke logs. We centre our approach around the notion of sentence history: all the versions of a given sentence during the production of a text. The implementation takes keystroke logs as input and extracts sentence versions, aggregates them into sentence histories and evaluates the sentencehood of each sentence version. We provide detailed evaluation of the implementation based on a manually annotated corpus of texts in French, German and English. The implementation yields strong results on the three processing aspects.

This study aims to establish a methodological framework for investigating deception in both spoken and written language production. A foundational premise is that the production of deceitful narratives induces a heightened cognitive load that has a discernable influence on linguistic processes during real-time language production. This study includes meticulous analysis of spoken and written data from two participants who told truthful and deceitful narratives. Spoken processes were captured through audio recordings and subsequently transcribed, while written processes were recorded using keystroke logging, resulting in final texts and corresponding linear representations of the writing activity. By grounding our study in a linguistic approach for understanding cognitive load indicators in language production, we demonstrate how linguistic processes, such as text length, pauses, fluency, revisions, repetitions, and reformulations can be used to capture instances of deception in both speaking and writing. Additionally, our findings underscore that markers of cognitive load are likely to be more discernible and more automatically measured in the written modality. This suggests that the collection and examination of writing processes have substantial potential for forensic applications. By highlighting the efficacy of analyzing both spoken and written modalities, this study provides a versatile methodological framework for studying deception during language production, which significantly enriches the existing forensic toolkit.

The small body of research on writing and writing processes in the group of deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) children has shown that this group struggles more with writing than their hearing peers. This article aims to explore in what ways the DHH group differs from their peers regarding the written product and the writing processes. Participants are all in the age span 10–12 years old and include: (a) 12 DHH children with knowledge of Swedish sign language (Svenskt teckenspråk, STS) as well as spoken Swedish, (b) 10 age-matched hearing children of deaf adults (CODA) who know STS, (c) 14 age-matched hearing peers with no STS knowledge. More specifically we investigate how text length and lexical properties relate to writing processes such as planning (measured through pauses) and revision, and how the background factors of age, gender, hearing and knowledge of STS predict the outcome in product and process. The data consists of picture-elicited narratives collected with keystroke logging. The overall results show that age is a strong predictor for writing fluency, longer texts and more sophisticated lexicon for all the children. This confirms theories on writing development which stress that when children have automatized basic low-level processes such as transcription and spelling, this will free up cognitive space for engaging in high-level processes, such as planning and revision—which in turn will result in more mature texts. What characterizes the DHH group is slower writing fluency, higher lexical density, due to omitted function words, and extensive revisions (both deletions and insertions) on word level and below. One explanation for the last finding is that limitations in the auditory input lead to more uncertainty regarding correct and appropriate lexical choices, as well as spelling. The article contributes with more specific knowledge on what is challenging during writing for DHH children with knowledge of STS and spoken Swedish in middle school, in the developmental stage when basic writing skills are established.

This intervention study aimed to test the effect of writing process feedback. Sixty-five Grade 10 students received a personal report based on keystroke logging data, including information on several writing process aspects. Participants compared their writing process to exemplar processes of equally scoring (position-setting condition) or higher-scoring students (feed-forward condition). The effect of the feedback on writing performance and process was compared to a national baseline study. Results showed that feed-forward process feedback had an effect on text quality comparable to one grade of regular schooling. The feedback had an effect on production, pausing, revision, and source use, which indicates that it supported participants in self-regulating their writing process. Additionally, we explored the students' perception of the feedback to get an insight into its strengths and weaknesses. This study shows the potential of writing process feedback and discusses pedagogical implications and options for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Feedback is an essential component of learning environments. However, providing feedback in populated classes can be challenging for teachers. On the one hand, it is unlikely that a single kind of feedback works for all students considering the heterogeneous nature of their needs. On the other hand, delivering personalized feedback is infeasible and time-consuming. Available automated feedback systems have helped solve the problem to some extent. However, they can provide personalized feedback only after a draft is submitted. To help struggling students during the writing process, we can use machine learning to cluster students who benefit the same from feedback using keystroke logs. We can apply the results in automated feedback systems that provide process feedback. In this study, we aim to find homogeneous student profiles based on their writing process indicators. We use fourteen process indicators to find clusters in the data set. We used these measures in a four-stage analysis, including (a) data preprocessing, (b) dimensionality reduction, (c) clustering, and (d) the analysis of the writing quality. Clustering techniques identified five different profiles: Strategic planners, Rapid writers, Emerging planners, Average writers, and Low-performing writers. We further validated the emerged profiles by comparing them concerning students' writing quality. The present work broadens our knowledge of how students interact with writing tasks and addresses how variations in writing behaviors lead to qualitatively different products. We discuss the theoretical underpinnings and potentials of finding profiles of students during writing in higher education.

The ability to perform revisions targeting the content of the text is important for text quality improvement, and it is hypothesized that lower-level transcription processes need to be automatized in order to free up capacity for higher-level processes such as revision. However, for people with reading and writing difficulties due to underlying difficulties with decoding and spelling, the transcription process is rarely automatized because of their troubles with spelling. One possible way to circumvent spelling difficulties, and possibly gaining capacity for higher level processes such as revision, is to write using speech-to-text (STT). This study investigates the revisions performed when children with reading and writing difficulties (n = 16), and a reference group without such difficulties (n = 12), compose text using STT and using a keyboard. More specifically, the study investigates whether, and if so how, revisions at various levels, errors left in the final text product, and text quality differ between conditions and between groups. The compositions were logged using keystroke logging (keyboard) and audio- and screen-recording (STT). The level of revisions were manually coded. The results showed that children with reading and writing difficulties gain more from composing with STT compared to keyboard than the reference group. They leave fewer errors in their final text product when composing by means of STT, even though they need to engage more in the correction of surface errors because of the large number of STT errors. Despite the numerous STT errors, neither the proportion of meaning-related revisions nor text quality decreased in composing with STT (for either of the groups). Taken together, the results suggest, albeit not emphatically, that STT may be appropriate as a facilitatory tool for children with reading and writing difficulties. However, more research is needed to investigate instruction that addresses strategies for STT transcription and highlights the shortcomings of the tool in the target language, and also focuses specifically on higher-level aspects of composition such as planning or revising, in order to gain further knowledge about the feasibility of using STT as a means of composition for children who struggle with writing, and its possible effects over time.

This study explored how task complexity, writing behaviors (i.e., pausing and revision behaviors), and writing performance (i.e., task completion, coherence and cohesion, language use, and expression and tone) influence and relate to each other. Thirty advanced-level Korean EFL undergraduates completed writing tasks differing in complexity. A combination of keystroke logging and stimulated recall interview was employed. It was found that the simple task group showed a greater number of pauses and revisions related to lower-order writing processes, whereas the complex task group showed longer pauses related to higher-order writing processes. While task complexity had no influence on writing performance, writing behaviors revealed significant relationships with text quality. In the simple task group, pause length and revision were negatively related to writing scores, whereas pause frequency revealed mixed results. In the complex task group, consistent negative relations were found between pausing behaviors and text quality, and fewer revisions were related to better scores in expression and tone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Signos is the property of Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Valparaiso and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Feedback is important to improve writing quality; however, to provide timely and personalized feedback is a time-intensive task. Currently, most literature focuses on providing (human or machine) support on product characteristics, especially after a draft is submitted. However, this does not assist students who struggle during the writing process. Therefore, in this study, we investigate the use of keystroke analysis to predict writing quality throughout the writing process. Keystroke data were analyzed from 126 English as a second language learners performing a timed academic summarization task. Writing quality was measured using participants' final grade. Based on previous literature, 54 keystroke features were extracted. Correlational analyses were conducted to identify the relationship between keystroke features and writing quality. Next, machine learning models (regression and classification) were used to predict final grade and classify students who might need support at several points during the writing process. The results show that, in contrast to previous work, the relationship between writing quality and keystroke data was rather limited. None of the regression models outperformed the baseline, and the classification models were only slightly better than the majority class baseline (highest AUC = 0.57). In addition, the relationship between keystroke features and writing quality changed throughout the course of the writing process. To conclude, the relationship between keystroke data and writing quality might be less clear than previously posited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With more and more people interested in how sustainable and socially responsible companies are, the comprehensibility of content on corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become paramount. Producing easy-to-read business content – either by writing it from scratch or revising it – is a cognitively demanding undertaking, especially for second-language non-professional writers. Both formal training and sustained practice can help writers build expertise and, in turn, be considerate of their intended audience. In particular, research on the impact of training has usually yielded positive results when examining the texts produced following specific instruction. However, the extent to which training has a positive effect on the process of writing and revision is still under-researched, especially in second language. To address this gap, we report on an experimental study that examines the impact of reader-oriented training on the cognitive effort experienced by 47 second-language university students when revising CSR content. We adopted a pre-test post-test design, and we used keystroke logging and retrospective interviews to collect data on students' pausing behaviour, use of online sources, and strategies to approach the revision task. Our training seemed to reduce the cognitive effort linked with lexical choices. Furthermore, it provided some students with procedural knowledge on how to approach the revision task in a more efficient way. We also observed a general tendency to rewrite (rather than revise) CSR content despite the higher cognitive effort required by rewriting. We discuss implications for training, limitations, and future research avenues.

Writing quality is dependent upon the organization and sequencing of cognitive processes during writing. College students need writing-strategy advice that is tailored to their individual needs and is cognizant of their already-established writing processes. However, there is an obstacle to providing such advice: Both writing instructors and the writers lack awareness of the moment-by-moment actions by which text was produced. This is because switching between the processes of defining the task, coming up with ideas, outputting text, evaluating, and revising is largely regulated implicitly. To address this shortcoming, the present study uses a design-based research approach to develop and evaluate a minimally viable prototype of a system called “ProWrite” that uses novel biometric technology (concurrent keystroke logging and eye tracking) for providing real-time, individualized, automated, process-focused feedback to writers. This feedback is grounded in the analysis of each writer's individual needs and is presented in the context of a learning cycle consisting of an initial diagnostic, an intervention assignment, and a final follow-up. In two iterations, eight students used the system. Effects on student behavior were determined through direct analysis of biometric writing-process data before and after remediation and through changes in writing-process and written-product measures. Semi-structured interviews revealed that students generally considered the system useful, and they would try to use the newly learned strategies in their future writing experiences. The study demonstrated that individualized, real-time feedback informed by biometric technology can effectively modify writers' processes when writing takes place.

Researchers often decide on the number of trials included in an experiment without adhering to an empirical method or framework. This might compromise generalizability and unnecessarily increase participant burden. In this article we want to put forward generalizability theory as a guide for task reduction. We will use a sentence production task to demonstrate how a generalizability and a decision study can help researchers to estimate the minimum number of trials and of items per trial that are necessary to generalize over trials. We obtained writing process data for 116 participants. Each of them completed a sentence production task that had 40 trials. Pause times between and within all words, target nouns and target verbs were logged with the keystroke logging tool ScriptLog. Results demonstrate that generalizability theory can serve as an empirical framework to ensure generalizable measurements on the one hand, and reduce participant burden to a minimum on the other. This finding is particularly valuable for studies with vulnerable target groups, such as participants suffering from aphasia, dyslexia or Alzheimer's disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we explore if the observation of writing behavior can assist in the screening and follow-up of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (AD). To this end, we examined the extent to which overall writing process measures and pausing behavior during writing differed between 15 cognitively impaired patients and 15 age- and gender-matched healthy controls. Participants completed two typed picture description tasks that were registered with Inputlog, a keystroke logging program that captures keyboard activity during text production. The following variables were analyzed with mixed-effects models: time on task; number of characters, pauses and Pause-bursts per minute; proportion of pause time; duration of Pause-bursts; and pause time between words. For pause time between words, also the effect of pauses preceding specific word categories was analyzed. Results showed a main effect of group on all variables. In addition, for pause time between words a main effect of partof-speech was found as well. Results indicate that writing process analysis can possibly serve as a supplementary tool for the screening and follow-up of AD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article demonstrates how recent advances in technology allow fine-grained analyses of candidate-produced essays, thus providing a deeper insight on writing performance. We examined how essay features, automatically extracted using natural language processing and keystroke logging techniques, can predict various performance measures using data from a large-scale and high-stakes assessment for awarding high-school equivalency diploma. The features that are the most predictive of writing proficiency and broader academic success were identified and interpreted. The suggested methodology promises to be practically useful because it has the potential to point to specific writing skills that are important for improving essay writing and academic performance for educationally at-risk adult populations like the one considered in this article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Text simplification involves making texts easier to understand, usually for lay readers. Simplifying texts is a complex task, especially when conducted in a second language. The readability of the produced texts and the way in which authors manage the different phases of the text simplification process are influenced by their writing expertise and by their language proficiency. Training on audience awareness can be beneficial for writers, but most research so far has devoted attention to first-language writers who simplify their own texts. Therefore, this study investigated the impact of text simplification training on second-language writers (university students) who simplify already existing texts. Specifically, after identifying a first and a second phase in the text simplification process (namely, two distinct series of writing dynamics), we analyzed the impact of our training on pausing and revision behavior across phases, as well as levels of readability achieved by the students. Additionally, we examined correlations between pausing behavior and readability by using keystroke logging data and automated text analysis. We found that phases of text simplification differ along multiple dimensions, even though our training did not seem to influence pausing and revision dynamics. Our training led to texts with fewer and shorter words, and with syntactically simpler sentences. The correlation analysis showed that longer and more frequent pauses at specific text locations were linked with increased readability in the same or adjacent text locations. We conclude the paper by discussing theoretical, methodological, and pedagogical implications, alongside limitations and areas for future research.

This paper examines the linguistic realization of continuative and contrastive discourse relations (DRs) in English argumentative discourse, focusing on both discourse as product and discourse as process. Based on a corpus of 25 argumentative texts with corresponding experimental data stemming from an editing-based task, this study aims to answer the questions of (i) how continuative and contrastive DRs are linguistically realized (i.e., encoded in coherence strands or additionally signaled) in English argumentative discourse, and (ii) how their signaling unfolds during the real-time process of discourse editing. The quantitative analysis of the edited texts shows that contrastive DRs are signaled throughout (e.g., through contrastive discourse connectives), whereas continuative DRs are more frequently encoded only. In addition, the qualitative analysis of the experimental data (i.e., keystroke logging data and corresponding metadata) reveals that while the signaling of contrastive DRs is made manifest right from the start of the editing process across the data, continuative DRs tend to be signaled only at a later stage. This can be explained by the semantic overlap between different types of continuative DRs, which requires that the participants (re-)negotiate the exact nature (and thus the appropriate linguistic signal) of a particular continuative DR more frequently than contrastive DRs, which are clearly interpreted and thus readily signaled as contrastive throughout.

In this article, we explore if the observation of writing behavior can assist in the screening and follow-up of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and mild dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease (AD). To this end, we examined the extent to which overall writing process measures and pausing behavior during writing differed between 15 cognitively impaired patients and 15 age- and gender-matched healthy controls. Participants completed two typed picture description tasks that were registered with Inputlog, a keystroke logging program that captures keyboard activity during text production. The following variables were analyzed with mixed-effects models: time on task; number of characters, pauses and Pause-bursts per minute; proportion of pause time; duration of Pause-bursts; and pause time between words. For pause time between words, also the effect of pauses preceding specific word categories was analyzed. Results showed a main effect of group on all variables. In addition, for pause time between words a main effect of part-of-speech was found as well. Results indicate that writing process analysis can possibly serve as a supplementary tool for the screening and follow-up of AD.

Background: Intervention studies aimed to improve the written production of single words by persons with aphasia have yielded promising results and there is growing interest in interventions targeting text writing. The development of technical writing aids offers opportunities for persons with aphasia, and studies have shown that using them can have a positive impact on written output. Aims: The aim was to investigate what impact training to use a computerised spell checker had on text writing in persons with aphasia. Methods & Procedures: The study had a multiple‐baseline single‐case experimental design replicated across six male Swedish participants with mild‐to‐moderate post‐stroke aphasia. The participants received training twice a week during 8 weeks, learning how to use the spell checker. At baseline and before every session, the participants wrote two texts which were logged in a keystroke‐logging tool. Dependent variables were continuously measured in the texts, and the participants performed tests of language function and answered questionnaires on reading and writing habits and health‐related quality of life before and after the intervention. The participants were also interviewed about how they had experienced the training. The results were evaluated on individual and group level. Results: The study showed that systematic individual training involving a spell checker was experienced as positive by the participants and that they all described their writing ability in more positive terms after the intervention. Evaluation showed statistically significant improvements on group level for the dependent variables of spelling accuracy, rated syntax, writing speed and proportion of unedited text during text writing when using the spell checker. The intervention also had a generalising effect on writing speed and editing during text writing without the spell checker and on spelling accuracy in a dictation test. The participants who had the greatest spelling problems were the ones who showed the most progress, but participants with only minor writing difficulties at baseline also improved. Conclusions & Implications: The study shows that a digital spelling aid constitutes effective support for people with aphasia and may also affect levels other than spelling. The training had a generalising positive effect on text writing and spelling in a test. Although writing difficulties is a persisting symptom in aphasia, it can be supported and improved through use of digital spelling aids. Hence, treatment of writing ability should always be included in the rehabilitation of people with aphasia. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Use of a technical writing aid can have a positive impact on the written output of persons with aphasia. Using a digital spell checker may improve spelling as well as other levels of writing, but it has not been investigated using a keystroke‐logging tool in combination with language‐test scores and results from questionnaires. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: Through analyses on both individual and group level, this study shows that a digital spelling aid constitutes effective support for people with aphasia and also affects levels other than spelling. The training had a generalising positive effect on text writing and spelling in a test. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Digital spelling support, which is a relatively simple and inexpensive technology, can support and improve text writing in persons with post‐stroke aphasia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on writing that focuses on what writers do when they compose shows that processes such as planning, transfer to writing and editing are recursive and affect the writing process of first and second language writers differently. To our knowledge, what has yet to be explored in research is the writing process of young bilingual students. The present study focused on the revisions and spelling errors made by 9-year-old bilingual students during a writing activity in their L2. Details about the writing process (e.g., revisions) were taken from statistics registered in the keystroke logging program ScriptLog and were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. Results from the quantitative analysis show that the mean proportion of the students' revisions is relatively low compared to results in previous research. The qualitative analysis showed both surface and meaning changes; the latter were found at both the micro- and macrostructural levels. Bilingual students exhibit a creative writing process in which several meaning changes occur in a language (in this case Swedish) that they are particularly competent in. The spelling error analysis indicated that the bilingual students make the same type of spelling errors as monolingual students in their initial stages of learning to write. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Feedback is an essential component of learning environments. However, providing feedback in populated classes can be challenging for teachers. On the one hand, it is unlikely that a single kind of feedback works for all students considering the heterogeneous nature of their needs. On the other hand, delivering personalized feedback is infeasible and time-consuming. Available automated feedback systems have helped solve the problem to some extent. However, they can provide personalized feedback only after a draft is submitted. To help struggling students during the writing process, we can use machine learning to cluster students who benefit the same from feedback using keystroke logs. We can apply the results in automated feedback systems that provide process feedback. In this study, we aim to find homogeneous student profiles based on their writing process indicators. We use fourteen process indicators to find clusters in the data set. We used these measures in a four-stage analysis, including (a) data preprocessing, (b) dimensionality reduction, (c) clustering, and (d) the analysis of the writing quality. Clustering techniques identified five different profiles: Strategic planners, Rapid writers, Emerging planners, Average writers, and Low-performing writers. We further validated the emerged profiles by comparing them concerning students' writing quality. The present work broadens our knowledge of how students interact with writing tasks and addresses how variations in writing behaviors lead to qualitatively different products. We discuss the theoretical underpinnings and potentials of finding profiles of students during writing in higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study of revision has been a topic of interest in writing research over the past decades. Numerous studies have, for instance, shown that learning-to-revise is one of the key competences in writing development. Moreover, several models of revision have been developed, and a variety of taxonomies have been used to measure revision in empirical studies. Current advances in data collection and analysis have made it possible to study revision in increasingly precise detail. The present study aimed to combine previous models and current advances by providing a comprehensive product- and process-oriented tagset of revision. The presented tagset includes properties of external revisions: trigger, orientation, evaluation, action, linguistic domain, spatial location, temporal location, duration, and sequencing. We identified how keystroke logging, screen replays, and eye tracking can be used to extract both manually and automatically extract features related to these properties. As a proof of concept, we demonstrate how this tagset can be used to annotate revisions made by higher education students in various academic tasks. To conclude, we discuss how this tagset forms a scalable basis for studying revision in writing in depth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous translation process research has pointed to an increased cognitive load when translating metaphoric compared to literal language. Yet, studies conducted thus far have not examined the role of translation direction (i.e., L1–L2 vs. L2–L1) in novel metaphor translation and have not tested whether and how this process might be modulated by the linguistic form of a novel meaning. In the present study, Polish (L1) – English (L2) translation students translated novel nominal metaphors (A is B), novel similes (A is like B), and literal sentences, in either L1–L2 or L2–L1 translation directions, while their translation behavior was recorded using a keystroke logging method. The results revealed longer translation durations for both metaphors and similes relative to literal utterances. Furthermore, we found slower translation times for novel nominal metaphors compared to novel similes and literal sentences, yet only in the L2–L1 translation direction. Such results might indicate that novel meaning translation is more cognitively taxing in the case of novel nominal metaphors, which require a more robust activation of comparison mechanisms, relative to novel similes. Importantly, this effect might be stronger when translating in the direction in which access to semantic representations is potentially more automatic (i.e., L2–L1 translation). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]