So tell me, why is the study wrong?
Let me give you an example where the study can be wrong. My son is an Aspergers. He is classified as gifted or near gifted (it's a fine line). However, he struggles to write. So, in his case, he has 2 options: (1) just listen [he has a great memory and this has proven to work well], or (2) type.
I take these types of advice with a grain of salt. Rather than the what, I focus on the why.
My own experiences reflect those of many commenters here: I wrote notes and either couldn't read them or didn't go back to them. I most probably should have listened rather than scribe myself.
I'm exaggerating of course, but I think that sums up the discussion here?
> Laptop users instead took notes by rote, taking down what they heard almost word for word.
That does sound like a bad idea. However, a student could also use a laptop to take more abstract notes (as I assume the pencil users did). On the other hand, a pencil user might be able to write shorthand, thus taking almost verbatim notes (which would probably be less useful).
So, instead of ditching your laptop, think about how to use it.
"In Yui Shosetsu’s military instructions, “The Way of the Three Ultimates,” there is a passage on the character of karma. He received an oral teaching of about eighteen chapters concerning the Greater Bravery and the Lesser Bravery. He neither wrote them down nor committed them to memory but rather forgot them completely. Then, in facing real situations, he acted on impulse and the things that he had learned became wisdom of his own. This is the character of karma."
Personally, I'm all for taking digital notes as they are searchable and can be backed up. I think either way, the process of taking notes is more important than the tools.
[1] https://github.com/hollanddd/hagakure/blob/master/chapter-10...