E-readers, computer screens, or paper: Does reading comprehension change across media platforms?

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 512-519

  Margolin, Sara J ^a   Driscoll, Casey ^a   Toland, Michael J ^a   Kegler, Jennifer Little ^a  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPREHENSION; COMPUTER; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LINGUISTICS; LITERATURE; MALE; NARRATIVE; NORMAL HUMAN; PAPER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; READING; WORKING MEMORY;

EID: 84880782454     PISSN: 08884080     EISSN: 10990720     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/acp.2930     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Bevan, N. (1981). Is there an optimum speed for presenting text on a VDU? International Journal of Man-machine Studies, 14(1), 59-76.
2. Burton, C., & Daneman, M. (2007). Compensating for a limited working memory capacity during reading: Evidence from eye movements. Reading Psychology, 28, 163-186.
3. Coiro, J. (2011). Predicting reading comprehension on the internet: Contributions of offline reading skills, online reading skills, and prior knowledge. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(3), 352-392.
4. Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 214-257.
5. Connell, C., Bayliss, L., & Farmer, W. (2012). Effects of eBook readers and tablet computers on reading comprehension. International Journal Of Instructional Media, 39(2), 131-140.
6. DeBeni, R., Borella, E., & Carretti, B. (2007). Reading comprehension in aging: The role of working memory and metacomprehension. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 14, 189-212.
7. Dillon, A. (1992). Reading from paper versus screens: A critical review of the empirical literature. Ergonomics, 35(10), 1297-1326.
8. Dyson, M. C., & Haselgrove, M. (2000). The effects of reading speed and reading patterns on the understanding of text read from screen. Journal of Research in Reading, 23, 210-223.
9. Gil-Flores, J., Torres-Gordillo, J., & Perera-Rodriguez, V. (2012). The role of online reader experience in explaining students' performance in digital reading. Computers and Education, 59, 653-660.
10. Gould, J. D., & Grischkowsky, N. (1984). Doing the same work with hard copy and cathode ray tube (CRT) computer terminals. The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 26(3), 323-337.
11. Gould, J. D., & Grischkowsky, N. (1986). Does visual angle of a line of characters affect reading speed? The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 28(2), 165-173.
12. Gould, J. D., Alfaro, L. Barnes, V., Finn, R., Grischkowsky, N., & Minuto, A. (1987). Reading is slower from CRT displays than from paper: Attempts to isolate a single variable explanation. The Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 29(3), 269-299.
13. Graesser, A., & Lehman, B. (2011). Questions drive comprehension of text and multimedia. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.) Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 53-74). IAP Information Age Publishing: Charlotte, NC.
14. Green, T. D., Perera, R. A., Dance, L. A., & Meyers, E. A. (2010). Impact of presentation mode on recall of written text and numerical information: Hard copy versus electronic. North American Journal of Psychology, 12(2), 233-242.
15. Hartman, D. K., Morsink, P. M., & Zheng, J. (2010). From print to pixels: The evolution of cognitive conceptions of reading comprehension. In E. A. Baker (Ed.), The new literacies: Multiple perspectives on research and practice. New York: The Guilford Press.
16. Henry, L. A. (2006). SEARCHing for an answer: The critical role of new literacies while reading on the Internet. The Reading Teacher, 59, 614-627.
17. Huang, H.-M. (2006). Do print and web surveys provide the same results? Computers in Human Behavior, 22(3), 334-350.
18. Jeong, H. (2012). A comparison of the influence of electronic books and paper books on reading comprehension, eye fatigue, and perception. Electronic Library, 30(3), 390-408. doi:10.1108/02640471211241663.
19. Jones, T., & Brown, C. (2011). Reading engagement: A comparison between ebooks and traditional print books in an elementary classroom. International Journal of Instruction, 4(2), 5-22.
20. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122-149.
21. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
22. Kolers, P. A., Duchnicky, R. L., & Ferguson, D. C. (1981). Eye movement measurement of readability of CRT displays. Human Factors, 23(5), 517-527.
23. Leu, D. J., Jr., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., & Cammack, D. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies. In R. B. Ruddell & N. Unrau (Eds.) Theoretical models and processes of reading, Fifth Edition (pp. 1568-1611). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
24. Light, L. L. (1988). Language and aging: Competence versus performance. In J. E. Birren & V. L. Bengston (Eds.), Emergent theories of aging (pp. 177-213). New York: Springer Publishing.
25. Margolin, S. J., & Abrams, L. (2009). Not may not be too difficult: The effects of negation on older adults' sentence comprehension. Educational Gerontology, 35, 308-322.
26. Mayes, D. K., Sims, V. K., Koonce, J. M. (2001). Comprehension and workload differences for VDT and paper-based reading. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 28(6), 367-378.
27. McVay, J. C., & Kane, M. J. (2012). Why does working memory capacity predict variation in reading comprehension? On the influence of mind wandering and executive attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 302-320.
28. Mills, C. B., & Weldon, L. J., (1987). Reading text from computer screens. ACM Computing Surveys, 19(4), 329-358.
29. Miyake, A., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1994). A capacity approach to syntactic comprehension disorders: Making normal adults perform like aphasic patients. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 11, 671-717.
30. Moore, D., & Zabrucky, K. M. (1995). Adult age differences in comprehension and memory for computer-displayed and printed text. Educational Gerontology, 21(2), 139-150.
31. Muter, P., & Maurutto, P. (1991). Reading and skimming from computer screens: The paperless office revisited. Behaviour & Information Technology, 10(4), 257-266.
32. New Faculty FAQ (2012). Retrieved July 19, 2012, from http://www.brockport.edu/celt/newfacultyfaq.html
33. Reinking, D., & Schreiner, R. (1985). The effects of computer-mediated text on measures of reading comprehension and reading behavior. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(5), 536-552.
34. Rouet, J. F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to Web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
35. Santana, A. D., Livingstone, R., & Cho, Y. (2011). Medium matters: Newsreader's recall and engagement with online and print newspapers. Presented at annual meeting for Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, August 10, 2011, St. Louis, Missouri.
36. Schmar-Dobler, E. (2003). Reading on the Internet: The link between literacy and technology. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 47, 80-85.
37. Schugar, J. T., Schugar, H., & Penny, C. (2011). A nook or a book? Comparing college students' reading comprehension levels, critical reading, and study skills. International Journal Of Technology In Teaching & Learning, 7(2), 174-192.
38. Stites-Doe, S., Maxwell, P., & Kegler, J. (2013). Business students' learning engagement as a function of reading assigned e-Textbooks. In L. A. Wankel, P. Blessinger & C. L. Wankel (Eds.) Increasing student engagement and retention using mobile applications: Smartphones, Skype and Texting Technologies: Cutting-edge technologies in higher education, (Vol. 6D, pp. 241-273). Bingley, UK: Emerald Press.
39. The miracle technology: e-Ink display (2011). Retrieved July 18, 2011, from http://kinreader.com/hardware/the-miracle-technology-e-ink-display/
40. Waters, G. S., & Caplan, D. (1996). Processing resource capacity and the comprehension of garden path sentences. Memory & Cognition, 24, 342-355.
41. Waters, G. S., & Caplan, D. (2001). Age, working memory and on-line syntactic processing in sentence comprehension. Psychology and Aging, 16, 128-144.
42. Weaver, C. A. III, & Bryant, D. S. (1995). Monitoring of comprehension: The role of text difficulty in metamemory for narrative and expository text. Memory and Cognition, 23, 12-22.
43. Weisberg, M. (2011). Student attitudes and behaviors towards digital textbooks. Publishing Research Quarterly, 27(2), 188-196. doi: 10.1007/si2109-0JI-9217-4.
44. Williams, J. (2003). Teaching text structure to improve reading comprehension. In H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.) Handbook of Learning Disabilities (pp. 293-305). Guilford Press: New York, NY.
45. Wright, P., & Lickorish, A. (1983). Proof-reading texts on screen and paper. Behaviour & Information Technology, 2(3), 227-235.
46. Zumbach, J., & Mhoraz, M. (2008). Cognitive load in hypermedia reading comprehension: Influence of text type and linearity. Computers in Human Behavior 24, 875-887.
47. Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 162-185.