本研究旨在探討筆記工具的形式與使用習慣對學生課堂演講學習表現的影響。研究一對Mueller與Oppenheimer（2014）的實驗一進行重製，欲確認台灣學生在課堂演講的學習成效上，是否也存在紙筆筆記的學習表現優於筆電筆記之研究結果，同時並進一步探討筆記工具的使用習慣是否與學生之課堂演講學習表現有關。研究一的獨變項為筆記工具的形式與使用習慣，採2（筆記工具形式：紙筆、筆電）×2（筆記工具使用習慣：習慣紙筆、習慣筆電）之雙因子完全參與者間設計，依變項為學生的課堂演講學習表現。研究一的結果指出，筆記工具的形式及使用習慣對學生課堂演講學習表現沒有顯著的交互作用及個別主效果。

研究二以Mueller與Oppenheimer（2014），以及Morehead等人（2019）、Urry等人（2021）2篇同是以Mueller與Oppenheimer（2014）為依據進行的重製研究之開放資料再次檢視筆記工具的形式及使用習慣對學生課堂演講學習表現的交互作用及個別主效果，以確認研究一當中交互作用與個別主效果不顯著的研究結果是否穩定。研究者將此3篇文獻共5個實驗之研究參與者資料合併在一起以求擴大樣本數進行分析，發現筆記工具的形式與使用習慣對學生課堂演講學習表現存在一顯著之交互作用，當研究參與者使用的筆記工具形式為紙筆時，習慣使用紙筆者其學習表現會優於習慣使用筆電者。此外，筆記工具的形式及使用習慣對學生課堂演講學習表現分別依然皆無顯著主效果。[本研究之實驗材料、原始資料等，皆可於開放科學平台（Open Science Framework）取得：https://osf.io/4h7aw/。]

The main purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of the types and the usage habits of note-taking tools on students' learning performances of classroom lectures. The first study conceptually replicated Experiment 1 of Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014) to confirm whether Taiwanese students also exhibit better learning performances with paper-and-pen notes than with laptop notes, and further explore whether the usage habits of note-taking tools are related to students' learning performances. The independent variables of Study 1 are the types and the usage habits of note-taking tools, using a 2 (the types of note-taking tools: papers and pens, laptops) ×2 (the usage habits of note-taking tools: papers and pens, laptops) factorial between-subjects quasi-experimental design, and the dependent variable is students’ learning performances. The results of Study 1 indicate that neither the types nor the usage habits of note-taking tools have significant main effects on students’ learning performances, and there is no significant interaction effect between the types and the usage habits of note-taking tools on students’ learning performances as well.

Study 2 adopted the same research design as Study 1, using open data from Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014) and two replications of Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014) by Morehead et al. (2019) and Urry et al. (2021) to re-examine the main effects and interaction effects of the types and the usage habits of note-taking tools on students' learning performances, aiming to confirm whether the insignificant main effects and the interaction effects in Study 1 are stable. We combined the participant’s data from these three kinds of literature, which include five experiments to expand the sample size for analysis, and found a significant interaction effect between the types and the usage habits of note-taking tools. When the types of tools used by participants are papers and pens, those who habitually use papers and pens have better learning performances than those who habitually use laptops.

王妤（2020）。筆記媒介與使用習慣對記憶表現的影響（未出版碩士論文）。國立成功大學，臺南市。
Barak, M., Lipson, A., & Lerman, S. (2006). Wireless laptops as means for promoting active learning in large lecture halls. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(3), 245–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2006.10782459
Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64(1), 417–444. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823
Bui, D. C., Myerson, J., & Hale, S. (2013). Note-taking with computers: Exploring alternative strategies for improved recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 299–309. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030367
Chen, P.-H. (2021). In-class and after-class lecture note-taking strategies. Active Learning in Higher Education, 22(3), 245–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787419893490
Chen, P.-H., Teo, T., & Zhou, M. (2017). Effects of guided notes on enhancing college students’ lecture note-taking quality and learning performance. Current Psychology, 36(4), 719–732. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-016-9459-6
Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge. http://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587
Day, A. J., Fenn, K. M., & Ravizza, S. M. (2021). Is it worth it? The costs and benefits of bringing a laptop to a university class. PLOS ONE, 16(5), e0251792. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251792
Di Vesta, F. J., & Gray, G. S. (1972). Listening and note taking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(1), 8–14. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0032243
F. Mang, C., & J. Wardley, L. (2012). Effective adoption of tablets in post-secondary education: Recommendations based on a trial of iPads in university classes. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 11, 301–317. https://doi.org/10.28945/1720
Feldon, D. F. (2007). Cognitive load and classroom teaching: The double-edged sword of automaticity. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 123–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701416173
Flanigan, A. E., & Titsworth, S. (2020). The impact of digital distraction on lecture note taking and student learning. Instructional Science, 48(5), 495–524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-020-09517-2
Haith, A. M., & Krakauer, J. W. (2018). The multiple effects of practice: Skill, habit and reduced cognitive load. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 20, 196–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.01.015
Jansen, R. S., Lakens, D., & IJsselsteijn, W. A. (2017). An integrative review of the cognitive costs and benefits of note-taking. Educational Research Review, 22, 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.10.001
Kennedy, D. R. (2019). The effect of banning computers on examination performance in a first-year pathophysiology class. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 83(10). https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe7535
Kiewra, K. A. (1989). A review of note-taking: The encoding-storage paradigm and beyond. Educational Psychology Review, 1(2), 147–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01326640
Kiewra, K. A. (2002). How classroom teachers can help students learn and teach them how to learn. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 71–80.
Kraushaar, J. M., & Novak, D. C. (2010). Examining the Effects of Student Multitasking with Laptops During the Lecture. Journal of Information Systems Education, 21(2), 241-252. https://aisel.aisnet.org/jise/vol21/iss2/11
Lin, L., & Bigenho, C. (2011). Note-taking and memory in different media environments. Computers in the Schools, 28(3), 200–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2011.594989
Luo, L., Kiewra, K. A., Flanigan, A. E., & Peteranetz, M. S. (2018). Laptop versus longhand note taking: Effects on lecture notes and achievement. Instructional Science, 46(6), 947–971. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9458-0
Mitchell, A., & Zheng, L. (2019). Examining Longhand vs. Laptop Debate: A Replication Study. AIS Transactions on Replication Research, 5, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.17705/1atrr.00041
Morehead, K., Dunlosky, J., & Rawson, K. (2019). How much mightier is the pen than the keyboard for note-taking? A replication and extension of Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014). Educational Psychology Review, 31(3), 753–780. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09468-2
Mueller, P. A., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2014). The pen Is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychological Science, 25(6), 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614524581
Ragan, E. D., Jennings, S. R., Massey, J. D., & Doolittle, P. E. (2014). Unregulated use of laptops over time in large lecture classes. Computers & Education, 78, 78–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.002
Ravizza, S. M., Hambrick, D. Z., & Fenn, K. M. (2014). Non-academic Internet use in the classroom is negatively related to classroom learning regardless of intellectual ability. Computers & Education, 78, 109–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.007
Ravizza, S. M., Uitvlugt, M. G., & Fenn, K. M. (2017). Logged in and zoned out: How laptop Internet use relates to classroom learning. Psychological Science, 28(2), 171–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616677314
Sana, F., Weston, T., & Cepeda, N. J. (2013). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Computers & Education, 62, 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.003
Schoen, I. (2012). Effects of method and context of note-taking on memory: Handwriting versus typing in lecture and textbook-reading contexts. Pitzer Senior Theses. 20. https://scholarship.claremont.edu/pitzer_theses/20
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296.
Urry, H. L., Crittle, C. S., Floerke, V. A., Leonard, M. Z., Perry, C. S. 3rd, Akdilek, N., Albert, E. R., Block, A. J., Bollinger, C. A., Bowers, E. M., Brody, R. S., Burk, K. C., Burnstein, A., Chan, A. K., Chan, P. C., Chang, L. J., Chen, E., Chiarawongse, C. P., Chin, G., Chin, K., …, Zarrow, J. E. (2021). Don't Ditch the Laptop Just Yet: A Direct Replication of Mueller and Oppenheimer's (2014) Study 1 Plus Mini Meta-Analyses Across Similar Studies. Psychological Science, 32(3), 326-339. doi: 10.1177/0956797620965541.
Verplanken, B. (2006). Beyond frequency: Habit as mental construct. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(3), 639–656. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466605X49122
Verplanken, B., & Orbell, S. (2003). Reflections on past behavior: A self‐report Index of habit strength. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 1313–1330. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01951.x
Wood, W., & Neal, D. T. (2009). The habitual consumer. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(4), 579-592. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCPS.2009.08.003