Analysis of the preferred writing tool grip in Czech university students
Authors:
Vyskotová J.; Rybišárová M.; Aláčová Gaul P.; Svobodová A.; Konečný P.
Authors‘ workplace:
Ústav klinické rehabilitace, Fakulta zdravotnických věd, Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci, Olomouc
Published in:
Rehabil. fyz. Lék., 30, 2023, No. 1, pp. 24-33.
Category:
Original Papers
doi:
https://doi.org/10.48095/ccrhfl202324
Overview
Introduction: A pencil grip is considered as one of the indicators of graphomotoric maturity of an individual. The pencil grip and skills for its use develop gradually during the neuromaturation of the central nervous system as it is connected with cognitive functions, motivation and learning. A child uses initially a palmar grip only, but with age it evolves into one of its final forms. Aim: To analyse currently used types of pencil grips in university students. Methods: Videography was used to monitor the commonly used types of pencil grips depending on the writing speed in the cohort of 100 students of Palacký University in Olomouc aged 19–25 years. Results: The findings show that modifications of digital grips, modified dynamic tripod and open web space tripod are currently the most common pencil grips used in the Czech university students. The most frequently used writing tool is a roller pen. Several significant changes in a pencil grip occurred with changing the speed of handwriting. Conclusion: Currently the most frequently used types of pencil grips in Czech university students are modified tripod digital grips.
Keywords:
handwriting – graphomotorics – pencil grip – digital grip – tripod grip – quadruped grip – lateral grip
Sources
1. Cohen EJ, Bravi R, Minciacchi D. Assessing the development of fine motor control in elementary school children using drawing and tracing tasks. Percept Mot Skills 2021; 128(2): 605–624. doi: 10.1177/0031512521990358.
2. Palmis S, Danna J, Velay JL et al. Motor control of handwriting in the developing brain: a review. Cogn Neuropsychol 2017; 34(3–4): 187–204. doi: 10.1080/02643294.2017.1367654.
3. No B, Choi N. Differences in graphomotor skills by the writing medium and children’s gender. Educ Sci 2021; 11(4): 162. doi: 10.3390/educsci11040162.
4. Bazerman C, Graham S, Applebee AN et al.Taking the long view on writing development. Rea Teach Engl 2017; 51(3): 351–360.
5. Vyskotová J, Krejčí I, Macháčková K et al. Terapie ruky. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci 2021.
6. Griffin Occupational Therapy. 2020. Handwriting – looking beyond the tripod pencil grasp. [online]. Available from: https://www.griffinot.com/what-does-good-pencil-grasp-look-like/.
7. Vodička I. Boj o špetku..., aneb, soumrak spojitého písma. Ústí nad Labem: Imagine Media 2020.
8. Tseng MH, Murray ES. Differences in perceptual-motor measures in children with good and poor handwriting. Occup Ther J Res 1994; 14: 19–36. doi: 10.1177/153944929401400102.
9. Saida Y, Miyashita M. Development of fine motor skill in children: manipulation of a pencil in young children aged 2 to 6 years old. J Hum Mov Stud 1979; 5(2): 104–113. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279716515_Development_of_fine_motor_skill_in_children_Manipulation_of_a_pencil_in_young_children_aged_2_to_6_years_old.
10. Schneck CM, Henderson A. Descriptive analysis of the developmental progression of grip position for pencil and crayon control in nondysfunctional children. Am J Occup Ther 1990; 44(10): 893–900. doi: 10.5014/ajot.44.10.893.
11. Selin AS. Pencil grip: a descriptive model and four empirical studies. Abo: Abo Akademi University Press 2003.
12. Odokuma IE, Ojigho EJ. Pencil grip patterns among pupils. Sahel Med J 2019; 22(3): 121–126. doi: 10.4103/smj.smj_75_17.
13. Elliot JM, Connolly KJ. A classification of manipulative hand movements. Dev Med Child Neurol 1984; 26(3): 283–296. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.1984.tb04445.x.
14. Schwellnus H, Carnahan H, Kushki A et al. Writing forces associated with four pencil grasp patterns in grade 4 children. Am J Occup Ther 2013; 67(2): 218–227. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2013.005538.
15. Penc V. Metodika psaní: Pomocná kniha pro 3. ročník pedagogických škol pro vzdělání učitelů národních škol. Praha: SPN 1958.
16. Koziatek SM, Powell NJ. Pencil grips, legibility, and speed of fourth-graders’ writing in cursive. Am J Occup Ther 2003; 57(3): 284–288. doi: 10.5014/ajot.57.3.284.
17. Dennis JL, Swinth Y. Pencil grasp and children’s handwriting legibility during different-length writing tasks. Am J Occup Ther 2001; 55(2): 175–183. doi: 10.5014/ajot.55.2.175.
18. Schwellnus H, Carnahan H, Kushki A et al. Effect of pencil grasp on the speed and legibility of handwriting after a 10-minute copy task in Grade 4 children. Aust Occup Ther J 2012; 59(3): 180–187. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1630.2012.01014.x.
19. Opatřilová D. Grafomotorika. Jemná motorika. Hrubá motorika. In: Diagnostika a edukace dětí a žáků s těžkým zdravotním postižením. Praha: IPPP ČR 2005: 21–26. ISBN: 978-80-86856-89-6.
20. Benbow M. Neurokinesthetic approach to hand function and handwriting. 1997. [online]. Available from: https://www.clinicians-view.com/University/PDF/HF01/HF01TextPreview.pdf.
21. Ziviani J. The development of graphomotor skills. In: Henderson A, Pehoski C (eds). Hand function in the child: foundations for remediation. St. Louis, Missouri: Mosby-Year Book 1995: 184–193.
22. Farris KM, Fehrenbacher RE, Hayes EL et al. The relationship between muscle activation and handwriting quality with non-native grip styles. J Hand Ther 2021; 30: 894–1130. doi: 10.1016/j.jht.2021.03.004.
23. Soechting JF, Flanders M. Sensorimotor control of contact force. Curr Opin Neurobiol 2008; 18(6): 565–572. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2008.11.006.
45. Bara F, Gentaz E. Haptics in teaching handwriting: the role of perceptual and visuo-motor skills. Hum Mov Sci 2011; 30(4): 745–59. doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2010.05.015.
25. Feder KP, Majnemer A. Handwriting development, competency, and intervention. Dev Med Child Neurol 2007; 49(4): 312–317. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2007.00312.x.
26. Rigby P, Schwellnus H. Occupational therapy decision making guidelines for problems in written productivity. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr 1999; 19(1): 5–27. doi: 10.1080/J006v19n01_02.
27. Rosenblum S, Dvorkin AY, Weiss PL. Automatic segmentation as a tool for examining the handwriting process of children with dysgraphic and proficient handwriting. Hum Mov Sci 2006; 25(4–5): 608–621. doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2006.07.005.
28. Graham S, Harris KR, Mason L et al. How do primary grade teachers teach handwriting? A national survey. Reading and Writing 2008; 21: 49–69. doi: 10.1007/s11145- 007-9064-z.
29. Bergmann PK. Incidence of atypical pencil grasps among nondysfunctional adults. Am J Occup Ther 1990; 44(8): 736–740. doi: 10.5014/ajot.44.8.736.
30. Mlčáková R. Grafomotorika a počáteční psaní. Praha: Grada 2009.
31. Shah LJ, Gladson BL. The relationship of pencil grasp on college students’ handwriting speed and legibility. J Occup Ther Sch Early Interv 2015; 8(2): 180–191. doi: 10.1080/19411243.2015.1040673.
Labels
Physiotherapist, university degree Rehabilitation Sports medicineArticle was published in
Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine
2023 Issue 1
Most read in this issue
- The Franklin Method – body and movement in imagination
- Development of rehabilitation in the Czech Republic
- Physiotherapy in primary and lower-secondary school children with poor posture
- The effect of physiotherapy on the quality of motion patterns in impingement syndrome