Paper versus Screen: Impact on Reading Comprehension and Speed
-
(1) * Ely Shuhadah Tajuddin
Faculty of Cognitive Science & Human Development, University Malaysia Sarawak
Malaysia
(2) Fitri Suraya Mohamad Faculty of Cognitive Science & Human Development, University Malaysia Sarawak
Malaysia
(*) Corresponding Author
Abstract
Choosing the appropriate reading format is important for students to achieve effective reading. This quasi-experimental study investigates the effects of paper versus screen on reading comprehension and speed among undergraduate students who are currently enrolled in a public university in Sarawak. The general objective of this study is to investigate the formats for effective reading and comprehension among undergraduates. Instruments that have been used in this study were a set of questionnaires, a set of general interest articles, corresponding comprehension questions, and an online timer. Findings revealed that students tended to have better reading comprehension when reading on the screen. Conversely, students were able to read faster using the paper format. Data also revealed that there is significant difference between paper and screen formats for both reading comprehension and reading speed.
References
[1] Adams, L. J., & Cummins, M. (2012). The NMC horizon report: 2012 higher education edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
[2] Adlof, S. M., Catts, H. W., & Little, T. D. (2006). Should the simple view of reading include a fluency component? Reading and Writing. An Interdisciplinary Journal, 933–958.
[3] Anuradha, K., & Usha, H. (2006). Use of e-books in an academic and research environment: A case study from the Indian Institute of Science. Program: electronic library and information systems, 48-62.
[4] Baker, L. (1985). Differences in the Standards Used by College Students to Evaluate Their Comprehension ofExpository Prose. Reading Research Quarterly,, 297-313.
[5] Barnett, M. A. (1992). More Than Meets the Eye: Foreign Language Reading Theory in Practice. A Journal of Research in Language Study, 113–119.
[6] Barth, A. E., Catts, H. W., & Anthony, J. L. (2009). The component skills underlying reading fluency in adolescent readers: A latent variable analysis. . Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary , 567–590.
[7] Bell, T. (2001). Extensive Reading: Speed and Comprehension. The Reading Matrix.
[8] Bell, T. (2001). Extensive Reading: Speed and Comprehension. The Reading Matrix, 1-13.
[9] Belmore, S. M. (1985). Reading computer-presented text. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society , 12-14
[10] Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980). Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity. New York: Wiley.
[11] Berg, S. A., Hoffmann, K., & Dawson, D. (2010). Not on the Same Page: Undergraduates' Information Retrieval in Electronic and Print Books. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 518–525.
[12] Berkoff, N. A. (1979). Reading skills in extended discourse in English as a Foreign Language. Journal of Reasearch in Reading, 95-107.
[13] Boulay, D. d. (1999). Argument in Reading: what does it involve and how. Teaching in Higher Education, 147-162.
[14] Broek, P. v., Espin, C., & Deno, S. L. (2003). Sources of Individual Differences in Reading Comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 719-729.
[15] Carr, N. (2010). The shallows: How the internet is changing the way we think, read and remember. Atlantic Books Ltd.
[16] Carroll, A. J., Corlett-Rivera, K., Hackman, T., & Zou, J. (2016). E-Book Perceptions and Use in STEM and Non-STEM Disciplines: A Comparative Follow-Up Study. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 131-162 .
[17] Chen, G., Cheng, W., Chang, T.-W., Zheng, X., & Huang, R. (2014). A comparison of reading comprehension across paper, computer screens, and tablets: Does tablet familiarity matter? Journal of Computers in Education, 213–225.
[18] Chou, I.-C. (2012). Understanding on-screen reading behaviors in academic contexts: a case study of five graduate English-as-a-second-language students. Computer Assisted, 411-433.
[19] Church, J. W. (2002). Relationship between text display method and college student short term knowledge retention during self-study. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, 1-98.
[20] Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007 ). Research Method in Education (6th edition) . Routledge: Abingdon.
[21] Cuddihy, E., & Spyridakis, J. H. (2012). The effect of visual design and placement of intra-article navigation schemes on reading comprehension and website user perceptions . Computers in Human Behavior 28 , 1399–1409.
[22] Dahlstrom, E., & Bichsel, J. (2014). ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2014. Louisville: Blackboard Gold Partner and MBS Direct.
[23] Daniel, D. B., & Woody, W. D. (2013). E-textbooks at what cost? Performance and use of electronic v. print texts. Computers & Education 62, 18–23.
[24] Dee-Lucas, D., & Larkin, J. H. (1995). Learning from electronic texts: Effects of Interactive Overviews for Information Access. Cognition and Instruction, 431-468.
[25] DeStefano, D., & LeFevre, J.-A. (2007). Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 1616–1641.
[26] Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: New York : Academic Press.
[27] Dillon, A. (1992). Reading from paper versus screens: a critical review of the empirical literature. Ergonomics, 1297-1326.
[28] Duran, E. (2013). Investigation on Views and Attitudes of Students in Faculty of Education about Reading and Writing on Screen. Educational Research and Reviews, 203-211.
[29] Durant, D. M., & Horava, T. (2015). The Future of Reading and Academic Libraries. Libraries and the Academy, 5-27.
[30] Dyson, M. C., & Haselgrove, M. (2001). The influence of reading speed and line length on the effectiveness of reading from screen. International Journal Human-Computer Studies, 585-612.
[31] Eden, S., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2013). The effect of format on performance: Editing text in print versusdigital formats. British Journal of Educational Technology , 846–856.
[32] Fry, E. (1963). Teaching faster reading: a manual. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[33] Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction Is Not Enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 133-148.
[34] Gilbert, J., & Fister, B. (2015). The Perceived Impact of E-books on Student Reading Practices: A Local Study. College and Research Libraries, 469–489.
[35] Gould, N. G. (1986). Does Visual Angle Affect Reading Speed? Human Factors, 165-173.
[36] Horney, M. A., & Anderson-Inman, L. (1999). Supported Text in Electronic Reading Environments. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 127-168.
[37] Hsua, Y.-c., & Schwenb, T. M. (2003). The effects of structural cues from multiple metaphors on computer users’ information search performance. International Journal Human-Computer Studies 58, 39–55.
[38] Huey, E. (1908). The psychology and pedagogy of reading. Cambridge: MA: MIT Press.
[39] Kang, Y.-Y., Wang, M.-J. J., & Lin, R. (2009). Usability evaluation of E-books. Displays, 49–52.
[40] Kerr, M. A., & Symons, S. E. (2006). Computerized Presentation of Text: Effects on Children's Reading of Informational Material. Special Issue on Reading Comprehension ? Part II. Reading and Writing, 1–19.
[41] Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Bronnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 61–68.
[42] Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive Constraints on Multimedia Learning: When Presenting More Material Results in Less Understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 187-198.
[43] McClelland, M. D. (1979). Processing Determinants of Reading Speed. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 151-181.
[44] McLure, M., & Hoseth, A. (2012). Patron‐driven e‐book use and users' e‐book perceptions: a snapshot. Collection Building, 136-147.
[45] Mercer, N., & Swann., J. (1996). Learning English : development and diversity . Abingdon: London : Routledge.
[46] Morineau, T., Blanche, C., & Tobin, L. (2005). The emergence of the contextual role of the e-book in cognitive processes through an ecological and functional analysis. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 329-348.
[47] Noyes, J. M., & Garland, K. J. (2003). VDT versus paper-based text: reply to Mayes, Sims and Koonce. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 411–423.
[48] Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: Oxford University Press.
[49] Poulton, E. C. (1958). Time for Reading and Memory. The British Journal of Psychology, 230-245.
[50] Reinking, D., & Schreiner, R. (1985). The effects of computer-mediated text on measures of reading comprehension and reading behavior. Computers and reading comprehension, 536-552.
[51] Rice, G. E. (1994). Examining Constructs in Reading Comprehension Using Two Presentation Modes: Paper vs. Computer. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 153-178.
[52] Rose, E. (2011). The phenomenology of on-screen reading: Universitystudents’ lived experience of digitised text. British Journal of Educational Technology, 515–526.
[53] Rothkopf, E. Z. (1971). Incidental memory for location of information in text. . Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 608–613.
[54] Shepperd, J. A., Grace, J. L., & Koch, E. J. (2008). Evaluating the Electronic Textbook: Is It Time to Dispense With the Paper Text? Teaching of Psychology, 2-5.
[55] Staiger, J. (2012). How E-books Are Used: A Literature Review of the E-book Studies Conducted from 2006 to 2011. American Library Association, 355-365.
[56] Stoop, J., Kreutzer, P., & Kircz, J. G. (2013). Reading and learning from screens versus print: a study in changing habits Part- New Library World. New Library World, 371-383.
[57] Stoop, J., Kreutzer, P., & Kircz, J. G. (2013). Reading and learning from screens versus print: a study in changing habits: Part 2 – comparing different text structures on paper and on screen. New Library World, 371-383.
[58] Sun, S.-Y., Shieh, C.-J., & Huang, K.-P. (2013). A Research on Comprehension Differences Between Print and Screen Reading. SAJEMS Special Issue, 87-101.
[59] Szapkiw, A. J., Courduff, J., Carter, K., & Bennett, D. (2013). Electronic versus traditional print textbooks: A comparison study on the influence of university students’ learning. Computers & Education, 259
[2] Adlof, S. M., Catts, H. W., & Little, T. D. (2006). Should the simple view of reading include a fluency component? Reading and Writing. An Interdisciplinary Journal, 933–958.
[3] Anuradha, K., & Usha, H. (2006). Use of e-books in an academic and research environment: A case study from the Indian Institute of Science. Program: electronic library and information systems, 48-62.
[4] Baker, L. (1985). Differences in the Standards Used by College Students to Evaluate Their Comprehension ofExpository Prose. Reading Research Quarterly,, 297-313.
[5] Barnett, M. A. (1992). More Than Meets the Eye: Foreign Language Reading Theory in Practice. A Journal of Research in Language Study, 113–119.
[6] Barth, A. E., Catts, H. W., & Anthony, J. L. (2009). The component skills underlying reading fluency in adolescent readers: A latent variable analysis. . Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary , 567–590.
[7] Bell, T. (2001). Extensive Reading: Speed and Comprehension. The Reading Matrix.
[8] Bell, T. (2001). Extensive Reading: Speed and Comprehension. The Reading Matrix, 1-13.
[9] Belmore, S. M. (1985). Reading computer-presented text. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society , 12-14
[10] Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980). Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity. New York: Wiley.
[11] Berg, S. A., Hoffmann, K., & Dawson, D. (2010). Not on the Same Page: Undergraduates' Information Retrieval in Electronic and Print Books. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 518–525.
[12] Berkoff, N. A. (1979). Reading skills in extended discourse in English as a Foreign Language. Journal of Reasearch in Reading, 95-107.
[13] Boulay, D. d. (1999). Argument in Reading: what does it involve and how. Teaching in Higher Education, 147-162.
[14] Broek, P. v., Espin, C., & Deno, S. L. (2003). Sources of Individual Differences in Reading Comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 719-729.
[15] Carr, N. (2010). The shallows: How the internet is changing the way we think, read and remember. Atlantic Books Ltd.
[16] Carroll, A. J., Corlett-Rivera, K., Hackman, T., & Zou, J. (2016). E-Book Perceptions and Use in STEM and Non-STEM Disciplines: A Comparative Follow-Up Study. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 131-162 .
[17] Chen, G., Cheng, W., Chang, T.-W., Zheng, X., & Huang, R. (2014). A comparison of reading comprehension across paper, computer screens, and tablets: Does tablet familiarity matter? Journal of Computers in Education, 213–225.
[18] Chou, I.-C. (2012). Understanding on-screen reading behaviors in academic contexts: a case study of five graduate English-as-a-second-language students. Computer Assisted, 411-433.
[19] Church, J. W. (2002). Relationship between text display method and college student short term knowledge retention during self-study. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, 1-98.
[20] Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007 ). Research Method in Education (6th edition) . Routledge: Abingdon.
[21] Cuddihy, E., & Spyridakis, J. H. (2012). The effect of visual design and placement of intra-article navigation schemes on reading comprehension and website user perceptions . Computers in Human Behavior 28 , 1399–1409.
[22] Dahlstrom, E., & Bichsel, J. (2014). ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2014. Louisville: Blackboard Gold Partner and MBS Direct.
[23] Daniel, D. B., & Woody, W. D. (2013). E-textbooks at what cost? Performance and use of electronic v. print texts. Computers & Education 62, 18–23.
[24] Dee-Lucas, D., & Larkin, J. H. (1995). Learning from electronic texts: Effects of Interactive Overviews for Information Access. Cognition and Instruction, 431-468.
[25] DeStefano, D., & LeFevre, J.-A. (2007). Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 1616–1641.
[26] Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: New York : Academic Press.
[27] Dillon, A. (1992). Reading from paper versus screens: a critical review of the empirical literature. Ergonomics, 1297-1326.
[28] Duran, E. (2013). Investigation on Views and Attitudes of Students in Faculty of Education about Reading and Writing on Screen. Educational Research and Reviews, 203-211.
[29] Durant, D. M., & Horava, T. (2015). The Future of Reading and Academic Libraries. Libraries and the Academy, 5-27.
[30] Dyson, M. C., & Haselgrove, M. (2001). The influence of reading speed and line length on the effectiveness of reading from screen. International Journal Human-Computer Studies, 585-612.
[31] Eden, S., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2013). The effect of format on performance: Editing text in print versusdigital formats. British Journal of Educational Technology , 846–856.
[32] Fry, E. (1963). Teaching faster reading: a manual. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[33] Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction Is Not Enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 133-148.
[34] Gilbert, J., & Fister, B. (2015). The Perceived Impact of E-books on Student Reading Practices: A Local Study. College and Research Libraries, 469–489.
[35] Gould, N. G. (1986). Does Visual Angle Affect Reading Speed? Human Factors, 165-173.
[36] Horney, M. A., & Anderson-Inman, L. (1999). Supported Text in Electronic Reading Environments. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 127-168.
[37] Hsua, Y.-c., & Schwenb, T. M. (2003). The effects of structural cues from multiple metaphors on computer users’ information search performance. International Journal Human-Computer Studies 58, 39–55.
[38] Huey, E. (1908). The psychology and pedagogy of reading. Cambridge: MA: MIT Press.
[39] Kang, Y.-Y., Wang, M.-J. J., & Lin, R. (2009). Usability evaluation of E-books. Displays, 49–52.
[40] Kerr, M. A., & Symons, S. E. (2006). Computerized Presentation of Text: Effects on Children's Reading of Informational Material. Special Issue on Reading Comprehension ? Part II. Reading and Writing, 1–19.
[41] Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Bronnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 61–68.
[42] Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn, S. (2001). Cognitive Constraints on Multimedia Learning: When Presenting More Material Results in Less Understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 187-198.
[43] McClelland, M. D. (1979). Processing Determinants of Reading Speed. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 151-181.
[44] McLure, M., & Hoseth, A. (2012). Patron‐driven e‐book use and users' e‐book perceptions: a snapshot. Collection Building, 136-147.
[45] Mercer, N., & Swann., J. (1996). Learning English : development and diversity . Abingdon: London : Routledge.
[46] Morineau, T., Blanche, C., & Tobin, L. (2005). The emergence of the contextual role of the e-book in cognitive processes through an ecological and functional analysis. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 329-348.
[47] Noyes, J. M., & Garland, K. J. (2003). VDT versus paper-based text: reply to Mayes, Sims and Koonce. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 411–423.
[48] Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: Oxford University Press.
[49] Poulton, E. C. (1958). Time for Reading and Memory. The British Journal of Psychology, 230-245.
[50] Reinking, D., & Schreiner, R. (1985). The effects of computer-mediated text on measures of reading comprehension and reading behavior. Computers and reading comprehension, 536-552.
[51] Rice, G. E. (1994). Examining Constructs in Reading Comprehension Using Two Presentation Modes: Paper vs. Computer. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 153-178.
[52] Rose, E. (2011). The phenomenology of on-screen reading: Universitystudents’ lived experience of digitised text. British Journal of Educational Technology, 515–526.
[53] Rothkopf, E. Z. (1971). Incidental memory for location of information in text. . Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 608–613.
[54] Shepperd, J. A., Grace, J. L., & Koch, E. J. (2008). Evaluating the Electronic Textbook: Is It Time to Dispense With the Paper Text? Teaching of Psychology, 2-5.
[55] Staiger, J. (2012). How E-books Are Used: A Literature Review of the E-book Studies Conducted from 2006 to 2011. American Library Association, 355-365.
[56] Stoop, J., Kreutzer, P., & Kircz, J. G. (2013). Reading and learning from screens versus print: a study in changing habits Part- New Library World. New Library World, 371-383.
[57] Stoop, J., Kreutzer, P., & Kircz, J. G. (2013). Reading and learning from screens versus print: a study in changing habits: Part 2 – comparing different text structures on paper and on screen. New Library World, 371-383.
[58] Sun, S.-Y., Shieh, C.-J., & Huang, K.-P. (2013). A Research on Comprehension Differences Between Print and Screen Reading. SAJEMS Special Issue, 87-101.
[59] Szapkiw, A. J., Courduff, J., Carter, K., & Bennett, D. (2013). Electronic versus traditional print textbooks: A comparison study on the influence of university students’ learning. Computers & Education, 259
Picture in here are illustration from public domain image (License) or provided by the author, as part of their works
Published
2019-02-18
How to Cite
Ely Shuhadah Tajuddin, & Fitri Suraya Mohamad. (2019). Paper versus Screen: Impact on Reading Comprehension and Speed. Indonesian Journal of Education Methods Development, 5, 10.21070/ijemd.v3i2.20. https://doi.org/10.21070/ijemd.v3i2.20
Issue
Section
Elementary Education Method
Copyright (c) 2019 Ely Shuhadah Tajuddin, Fitri Suraya Mohamad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
