THE COMPARISON BETWEENREADING ON SCREEN

&READING IN PRINT

(Cognition Perspective)KHAIRUNNADIAH BINTI MOHD

SAMUDDINUMMI NUR ASYIQEEN BINTI

ZULKEFLY

INTRODUCTION• As the technology develops, the reading preference is

anticipated to shift from the traditional reading habit to reading on screen.

• Studies indicated that people prefer to read in print over digital media platforms (Benedetto, 2013) and (Kretzschmar, 2013)

• According to Fidler (2004) and McPherson (2005) -“Reading on screen presents many advantages, such as

enhanced user experience through media rich content, efficiency, increased reading capacity, flexibility, cost effectiveness, and

comprehension”

LITERATURE REVIEW• Rosenwald (2015), Baron (2015), Myrberg and Wiberg

(2015), Tanner (2014) and Jabr (2013):“People prefer to read in print than on screen including the

digital natives regardless for pleasure or learning.”

• (Rosenwald, 2015)Highest readership rate for in print reading : 18 – 29 y/o

READING MEDIUM & COMPREHENSION LEVEL

Rosenwald (2015), Baron (2015), Niccoli (2015), Myrberg and Wiberg (2015), Tanner (2014) and Jabr (2013):

“People who read in print comprehend better than when

reading on screen.”

Text navigability• Ability to look at text as whole improve

comprehensibility. • People recall information by locating where it is

situated in their mind map.• Turning pages vs scrolling.

Reading habit• Intensive reading vs skimming, scanning and

searching for keywords.• On screen readers take a lot of shortcuts.

Vision • Eyestrain – fatigue, headache, blurred vision and light

sensitivity.

READING MEDIUM & CONCENTRATION LEVELRosenwald (2015), Baron (2015), Chatfield (2015) and Jabr (2013):

• It is harder to concentrate when reading on screen than reading in print.

• They approach the two types of medium with different attitude.

Multi-tasking (Rosenwald, 2015) and (Baron, 2015)• People tend to multi-tasking when reading on screen.• People cannot keep their place and tend to give in to temptation of

looking other stuffs.

Multi-purpose screen (Jabr, 2013)• Refers to various elements exist in the medium.• Print reading gets away from it.

THE PREFERRED MEDIUM• Reading comprehension is a matter of preferences (Picton, 2014)

• Those who prefer to read on screen perform as well as those who read in print in comprehension test (Myrberg & Wiberg, 2015).

• It is possible to overcome print superiority, but only those who prefer on screen medium. (Lauterman & Ackerman, 2014)

• There are times when students prefer to read on screen (Rosenwald, 2015)oWhen they need to look for information quicklyoWhen the reading material is free. (Baron, 2015)

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

To Compare Reading on Screen and In Print in terms of Comprehension and

Concentration

RESEARCH QUESTIONS1. What is the preferred medium of reading for

students in Malaysia?

2. What is the logic behind their preferences from the perspective of cognition?

3. How is it associated with the purpose?

METHODOLOGYThe sample study = Students of 20 – 23 years old

Instruments = Questionnaire

• The questionnaire was posted online and we distributed the link to our peers for responses

• They were asked to state their preference in regard to the medium of reading and clarify the reasons (comprehension and concentration)

• All collected data were analyzed using percentages

FINDINGS & DISCUSSIONA. RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHICSB. HOW DO THEY CONSIDER THEMSELVES AS A

READERC. PREFERRED MEDIUM OF READINGD. THE MEDIUM THEY COMPREHEND BESTE. THE MEDIUM THEY CONCENTRATE BESTF. THE ASSOCIATION OF PURPOSE AND MEDIUM

OF READING PREFERENCES

RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHICS

AGE RESPONDENTS

20 2

21 1

22 4

23 5

TOTAL 12

25%

75%

MALE FEMALE

HOW DO THEY CONSIDER THEMSELVES AS A READER

VERY MUCHENJOYABLEJUST OKAYNOT AT ALLONLY WHEN I LIKE THE CONTENT OF THE TEXT

33.3%

25%

33.3%

8.3%OPTIONS AMOUNT %

Very Much 1 8.3%

Enjoyable 4 33.3%

Just Okay 3 25%

Not At All 0 -

Only When I Like the

Content of the Text

4 33.3%

TOTAL 12 100%

PREFERRED MEDIUM OF READING

Series10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

ON SCREEN IN PRINT

75%

25%

OPTIONS AMOUNT %

IN PRINT 9 75%

ON SCREEN 3 25%

TOTAL 12 100%

THE MEDIUM THEY COMPREHEND BEST

IN PRINTON SCREEN

83.3%

16.7%

OPTIONS AMOUNT %

IN PRINT 10 83.3%

ON SCREEN 2 16.7%

TOTAL 12 100%

THE MEDIUM THEY CONCENTRATE BEST

IN PRINTON SCREEN

OPTIONS AMOUNT %

IN PRINT 12 100%

ON SCREEN 0 0

TOTAL 12 100%

THE ASSOCIATION OF PURPOSE AND MEDIUM OF READING PREFERENCES

Preferred medium for academic purpose

IN PRINT ON SCREEN

Preferred medium for reading for pleasure

IN PRINT ON SCREEN

58.3% (7)

41.7% (5)

50% (6)

50% (6)

CONCENTRATION WHILE READING

• Findings showcased a significant impression reading in print leaves to the level of concentration in the reading process.

• We are all at different stages on the journey of being comfortable with reading and learning online with on screen format as medium.

• It is with no solid basis to presume that all students are comfortable with technology.

• Val Hooper & Channa Herath (2014) explored the impact of reading online and reading offline in reading behaviour

• Their sample of study is participants who were over 18 years of age and who used the Internet and online materials frequently

• Many admitted to low levels of concentration and shifting focus, thereby missing out on many words during reading.

• While the benefits of reading on screen are putative: much more information being available and accessible (Liu, 2005), the consequences are disadvantageous to the concentration level and general reading comprehension.

• Skim reading, scanning, browsing and skipping certain parts of the text lead to –

a) Shorter attention spanb) Shifting focusc) Low levels of concentrationd) Overlooking important words or text

• Our respondents do not know the solid reasons as to why they prefer reading in print over on screen. Majority of them simply state they like the feeling of it.

• When describing why they feel this way, they refer not just to the visual sense, but also the way paper feels (physicality of the text) which facilitates their level of concentration.

• We read by connecting neural structures originally developed for vision, object recognition, and spoken language to the processes of letter and word recognition and the short-term memory storage necessary for unrelenting thought.

COMPREHENSION WHILE READING

• Based on the findings, a significant majority said they comprehend best when reading in print.

• Majority also chose in print medium when they read for academic purpose.

• The findings are questionable to the earlier studies of 2000’s but in line with recent past studies.

When asked respondents as to why they comprehend better in print:

• The satisfactory level of being able to touch, add something to the text (highlight and additional notes) and feasibility to locate the information

Chatfield (2015) – physical activities triggers more brain activities than doing stuffs on devices.

• Comfortabilityi. On screen reading are more cognitively taxing (Jabr, 2013).ii. Eyestrain (Tanner, 2014 and Myrberg & Wirberg, 2015).

• Readers attitude towards the medium plays a role. I. Readers approach on screen reading as less learning

conducive than in print: load information on screen – too large to allow deep reading.

II. Lack technique on how to deal with on screen reading: majority enter on screen reading with their in print reading techniques.

III. More studies on reading medium preferences emerges: those who prefer to read on screen learn less when read in print and vice versa.

CONCLUSION• Reading in print is highly favoured over reading on screen• They concentrate less when reading on screen due to the demand

of the reading process itself that needs them to speed the reading pace

• Hence, lower concentration level• They comprehend best when reading in print due to the navigability,

tactile features of the text material, reading habit and attitude• Therefore, the electronic text must be enhanced to overcome the

inferiority features from in print materials• Make it user friendly to compensate for the lack of spatial landmarks

as offered in traditional reading

THANK YOU