Current cognitive and sociocognitive models of writing conceptualize writing processes as complex interactions between multidimensional mechanisms that activate a writer’s social motivations, psychomotor processes, and cognitive resources in order to engage in writing. These models have been developed through years of empirical research employing a variety of data channels, such as keystroke logging; however, research about mobile writing processes have been understudied. This paper presents a study of mobile writing processes that used keystroke-logging methods in order to expand scholarship of writing processes into the realm of mobile writing. By examining how participants (N = 10) wrote on mobile devices at the keystroke level, as well as combining textual and keystroke analysis to examine context text-message (SMS) composition, this study argues for theoretically framing mobile writing as an embodied performance.
AndreB. K.OrdingB.ChristieG. (2005). Activating virtual keys of a touch-screen virtual keyboard. US Patent 7,844.914 B2.
2.
BaaijenV. M.GalbraithD.de GlopperK. (2012). Keystroke analysis: Reflections on procedures and measures. Written Communication, 29(3), 246–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088312451108
3.
BayerJ. B.EllisonN. B.SchoenebeckS. Y.FalkE. B. (2016). Sharing the small moments: Ephemeral social interaction on snapchat. Information, Communication & Society, 19(7), 956–977.
4.
BowenN.Van WaesL. (2020). Exploring revisions in academic text: Closing the gap between process and product approaches in digital writing. Written Communication, 37(3), 322–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088320916508
5.
BremnerS. (2006). Politeness, power, and activity systems: Written requests and multiple audiences in an institutional setting. Written Communication, 23(4), 397–423. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0741088306293707
6.
BrownP.LevinsonS. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
7.
CampbellS. W. (2020). Cutting the cord: Social and scholarly revolutions as CMC goes mobile. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 25, 101–110.
8.
CareyJ. W. (2009). Communication as culture (Rev. ed.). Routledge.
9.
de Souza e SilvaA. (2006). From cyber to hybrid: Mobile technologies of interfaces of hybrid spaces. Space and Culture, 9(3), 261–278.
10.
de Souza e SilvaA.FrithJ. (2012). Mobile interfaces in public spaces: Locational privacy, control, and urban sociability. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
11.
DuffyA. (2019). Two-way street: How smartphones and the social web impact the traveler’s liminal gaze. Mobile Media & Communication, 7(1), 60–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157918772858
12.
EkmanU. (2015). Complexity of the ephemeral – Snap video chats. Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication, 5(1–2), 91–101.
13.
FarisM. J. (2018). How to be gay with locative media: The rhetorical work of grindr as a platform. Present Tense: A Journal of Rhetoric in Society, 6(3), 1–11. https://hdl.handle.net/2346/74548
14.
FarmanJ. (2012). Mobile interface theory: Embodied space and locative media. Routledge.
15.
FarmanJ. (2018). Delayed response: The art of waiting from the ancient to the instant world. Yale University Press.
16.
FlowerL.HayesJ. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387.
17.
FrithJ. (2014). Communicating through location: The understood meaning of the Foursquare check-in. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(4), 890–905.
18.
GalbraithD.BaaijenV. M. (2019). Aligning keystrokes with cognitive processes in writing. In LindgrenE.SullivanK. P. H. (Eds.), Observing writing: Insights from keystroke logging and handwriting (pp. 306–325). Brill.
GrahamS. (2018a). A writer(s)-within-community model of writing. In BazermanC.BerningerV. W.BrandtD.GrahamS.LangerJ.MurphyS.SchleppegrellM. (Eds.), The lifespan development of writing (pp. 272–325). National Council of English.
GrésillonA.PerrinD. (2015). Methodology: Investigating real-life writing processes. In CislaruG. (Ed.), Writing(s) at the crossroads (pp. 33–54). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
23.
HayesJ. R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In LevyC. M.RansdellS. (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications (pp. 1–27). International Reading Association.
24.
HayesJ. R. (2012). Modeling and remodeling writing. Written Communication, 29(3), 369–388.
25.
HjorthL.BurgessJ.RichardsonI. (Eds.) (2012). Studying mobile media: Cultural technologies, mobile communication, and the iPhone. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
26.
HumphreysL. (2010). Mobile social networks and urban public space. New Media & Society, 12(5), 763–778.
27.
HumphreysL. (2012). Connecting, coordinating, cataloguing: Communicative practices on mobile social networks. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(4), 494–510.
LaursenD. (2005). Please reply! The replying norm in adolescent SMS communication. In HarperR.PalenL.TaylorA. (Eds.), The inside text: Social, cultural and design perspectives on SMS (pp. 53–73). Springer.
30.
LeijtenM.Van WaesL. (2013). Keystroke logging in writing research: Using inputlog to analyze and visualize writing processes. Written Communication, 30(3), 358–392.
31.
LeijtenM.Van WaesL.SchriverK.HayesJ. R. (2014). Writing in the workplace: Constructing documents using multiple digital sources. Journal of Writing Research, 5(3), 285–337.
32.
LeijtenM.Van WaesL.Van HorenbeeckE. (2015). Analyzing writing process data: A linguistic perspective. In CislaruG. (Ed.), Writing(s) at the crossroads (pp. 277–302). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
33.
LindgrenE.KnospeY.SullivanK. (2019). Researching writing with observational logging tools from 2006 to the present. In LindgrenE.SullivanK. P. H. (Eds.), Observing writing: Insights from keystroke logging and handwriting (pp. 1–29). Brill.
34.
LingR. (2008). New tech, new ties. MIT Press.
35.
LingR.YttriB. (2001). Hyper-coordination via mobile phones in Norway. In KatzJ. E.AakhausM. A. (Eds.), Perpetual contact: Mobile communication, private talk, public performance (pp. 139–169). Cambridge University Press.
36.
LutzJ. A. (1987). A study of professional and experienced writers revising and editing at the computer and with pen and paper. Research in the Teaching of English, 21(4), 398–421.
37.
MangenA.AndaL. G.OxboroughG. H.BrønnickK. (2015). Handwriting versus keyboard writing: Effect on word recall. Journal of Writing Research, 7(2), 227–247.
ParisiD. (2018). Archaeologies of touch: Interfacing with haptics from electricity to computing. University of Minnesota Press.
40.
PihlajaB. (2020). Inventing others in digital written communication: Intercultural encounters on the U.S.-Mexico border. Written Communication, 37(2), 245–280.
41.
SchneierJ. (2021). Digital articulation: Examining text-based linguistic performances in mobile communication through keystroke-logging analysis. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frai.2020.539920
42.
SchneierJ.KudenovP. (2018). Texting in motion: Keystroke logging and observing synchronous mobile discourse. Mobile Media & Communication, 6(3), 309–330.
43.
SMeiTi. (2017). SMS to text. SMeiTi.
44.
SpiliotiT. (2011). Beyond genre: Closings and relational work in text messaging. In ThurlowC.MroczekK. (Eds.), Digital discourse: Language in the new media (pp. 67–85). Oxford University Press.
45.
SpinuzziC. (2000). Toward integrating our research scope: A sociocultural field methodology. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 16(1), 3–32.
46.
SpinuzziC. (2003). Tracing genres through organizations: A sociocultural approach to information design. MIT Press.
47.
SunH. (2012). Cross-cultural technology design: Creating culture-sensitive technology for local users. Oxford University Press.
48.
SullivanK. P. H.LindgrenE. (2006). Computer keystroke logging and writing: Methods and applications. Elsevier.
49.
SwartsJ. (2006). Coherent fragments: The problem of mobility and genred information. Written Communication, 23(2), 173–201.
50.
SwartsJ. (2016). Composing networks: Writing practices on mobile devices. Written Communication, 33(4), 385–417.
51.
TaggC. (2012). Discourse of text messaging: Analysis of SMS communication. Continuum.
52.
ThurlowC.BrownA. (2003). Generation txt? The sociolinguistics of young people’s text-messaging. Discourse Analysis Online, 1(1), 1.
53.
ThurlowC.LengelL.TomicA. (2008). Computer mediated communication: Social interaction and the internet. SAGE.
54.
UrryJ. (2007). Mobilities. Polity Press.
55.
van WaesL. (1992). The influence of the computer on writing profiles. In MaatH. P.SteehouderM. (Eds.), Studies of functional text quality (pp. 173–186). Rodopi.
56.
Van WaesL.LeijtenM.HorenbeeckE.PauwaertT. (2012, July). A generic XML-structure for logging human computer interaction [Paper presentation]. 13th International EARLI SIG Writing Conference, Porto, Portugal.
57.
Van WaesL.LeijtenM.LindgrenE.WengelinÅ. (2015). Keystroke logging in writing research: Analyzing online writing processes. In MacArthurC. A.GrahamS.FitzgeraldJ. (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (2nd ed., pp. 410–426). Guilford Press.
58.
WestermanW. C.EliasJ. G. (2006). In Apple Inc. (Ed.), Capacitive sensing arrangement. US Patent 7,764.274 B2.
