Reading in print and digital environment

1. LIDA 2014 – PhD Forum Reading in print and digital environment Mate Juric mjuric@unizd.hr

2. 1. Conceptual Framework • „The medium is the message ” - changes the meaning of the content by changing our perception (McLuhan, 1964.) • Cognitivist approach: structural differences between print and digital text that impose cognitive challenges to readers (Eshet-Alkalai i Geri, 2007) • Sensory–motor experience is closely related to the cognitive processing of text (Morineau, Blanche, Tobin, & Guéguen, 2005) • Transactional theory of reading – interaction between the reader and the text. The readers actively constructs meaning through the lens of personal experience, affect and personality traits (Rosenblatt, according to Ross, 2006; 2009.)

3. 2. Literature Review • People on the Internet are "scanning", speed browsing the text to single out individual words and sentences (Morkes, J. Nielsen, J., 1997; Liu, Z., 2005.) • Linear reading of printed text, from the beggining to the end • Non-linear reading of digital text • Peopleread more slowly, with less accuracy and less understanding when reading from the screen (Dillon, 1992, prema Ferris, 2013.). • No differences or only minor differences in speed reading and reading comprehension between screen and paper (Lee 2004., Smither 2004., Huang 2006, according to Noyes & Garland, 2008.) • Self-regulation of learning is less effective when reading from screen (Ackerman, R. Lauterman, T., 2012.) • Students who read from the paper achieve better comprehension (Mangen et al 2013). • Phenomenology of Perception – subjective, sensory-motor (Merleau-Ponty, 1945.) • The Economy of Attention (Thorngate 1997)

4. 3. Starting points of the thesis • Differences in quality between reading in print and digital environment, primarily in reading comprehension and satisfaction can have far-reaching effects on the quality of learning, critical thinking and participating in society. • Previous studies have not fully clarified the differences between reading comprehension from paper versus screen. • Previous studies have not taken into consideration the interrelation of intelligence and personality traits of students with reading habits, satisfaction and comprehension in both print and digital environment.

5. 4. Objectives • to determine possible differences in reading comprehension and satisfaction with regard to : • reading environment: on screen (digital environment) and on paper (print environment) • some traits of respondents: gender, intelligence, personality • to determine the possible interdependence of factors that affect the process of reading in print and digital environment among a sample of students from the University of Zadar

6. 5. Research questions to determine whether there are: • differences in the reading satisfaction and reading comprehension with regard to the reading environment: on paper and on the LCD computer screen? • differences in reading habits, reading satisfaction and reading comprehension in two reading environments with regard to some personal characteristics of the respondents (gender, personality traits and intelligence)? • interactive effect of personal characteristics and reading environment on these dependent variables: reading habits, satisfaction and comprehension? • differences in reading habits among respondents who read from the screen and those who do not read from the screen?

7. 6. Hypotheses • Reading comprehension will be the same in the two environments because students have substantial experience in reading both from screen and paper. Reading satisfaction is going to be higher in print environment. • In the digital environment, correlations of some personality traits (openness to new experiences and intelligence) with higher satisfaction and reading comprehension are expected to be positive. • Intelligence, gender and / or certain personality traits are mediator variables between the reading habits and the reading environment, on the one hand, and reading comprehension and reading satisfaction on the other. • Respondents who more often read from the screen have developed the habit of superficial reading, and will have lower scores on tests of reading comprehension both from screen and paper. However, respondents who at least occasionally read e-books have a habit of thorough reading, and will have a better reading comprehension.

8. 7. Methodology 7.1. Participants • Undergraduate students at the University of Zadar (N≈ 300) • they have experience in reading from the screen • future cultural and economic development of a society largely depends on the student population. • experimental design combined with a correlational study 7.2. Methods

9. 7.3. Procedures • In 2 stages: • reading habits survey, intelligence and personality tests • Reading from LCD screen / paper, reading satisfaction questionaireand readingcomprehension test • First group of participants is going to read from thepaper the same text that the second group reads from screen, and vice versa • Two separate, but identical research procedures are planned for a scholarly text and a literary text

10. 7.3. Instruments • TDN - a culturally unbiased intelligence test (Vonkomer i Miglierini, 1995.) • BIG5 personality traitsQuestionnaire: openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism (Caprara, Barbaranelli i Borgogni, 2005.) • Reading habits survey(reading frequency, hours a day spent in reading, reading preferences, and attitudes about reading in print and digital environment) • Reading satisfactionqustionnaire (Likert scale) • Reading comprehensiontests (based on Blooms taxonomy; PIRLS; PISA)

11. 8. Significance of the Study • a better understanding of the process of reading in print and digital environment. • newinsights are expected regarding the interrelation of personality traits and intelligence with reading habits, satisfaction and comprehension in both print and digital environment in a student population. • findingswill upgrade existing theoretical point of view related to reading habits, which are a key element of lifelong learning and the development of a knowledge society.

12. References • Ackerman, R. Lauterman, T. (2012). Taking reading comprehension exams on screen or on paper? A metacognitive analysis of learning texts under time pressure, Computers in Human Behavior. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.04.023. • Burgess, S. R., Jones, K. K. (2010). Reading and media habits of college students varying by sex and remedial status.  College Student Journal. Str. 492-508 • Caprara, G., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L. (2005.). Big Five Upitnik – BFQ; Jastrebarsko: Naklada Slap. • Carr, N. (2011). Plitko: Što internet čini našem mozgu?.Zagreb: Naklada Jesenski i Turk • Clark, C, De Zoysa, S. (2011). Mapping the inter-relationships of reading enjoyment, attitudes, behaviour and attainment: An exploratory investigation. London: National Literacy Trust. • Clark, C; Foster, A. (2005.). Children’s and Young People’s Reading Habits and Preferences. London: National Literacy Trust. • Dervin, B. , Nilan, M. (1986). Information needs and uses: a conceptual and methodological review. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. 21: 3-33. • Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Geri, N. (2007). Does the medium affect the message? The influence of text representation format on critical thinking. Human Systems Management, 26, 269–279 • Ferris, J. The Reading Brain in the Digital Age: The Science of Paper versus Screens. URL: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=reading-paper-screens Objavljeno 11.4.2013 • Kirsch, I., et al. (2000). OECD Report: Reading For Change. www.oecd.org/dataoecd/43/54/33690904.pdf (20-3-2013) • Kuhlthau, Maniotes, Caspari (2007). Guided Inquiry: Learning in the 21st Century, Libraries Unlimited.

13. References • Liu, Z. (2005). “Reading behavior in the digital environment: Changes in reading behavior over the past ten years,” Journal of Documentation, 61, br. 6. Str. 700–712 • Mangen, A., Walgermo, B.R., Brønnick, K. (2013.) Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension, International Journal of Educational Research, 58, str. 61-68 • McLuhan, M., & Lapham, L. (1994). Understanding media: the extensions of man. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. • Morkes, J., Nielsen, J. (1997): Concise, SCANNABLE, and Objective: How to Write for the Web. URL: http://www.nngroup.com/articles/concise-scannable-and-objective-how-to-write-for-the-web/ (5-10-2013) • Mullis, I.V.S, Martin, M.O. , Sainsbury M. (2013). PIRLS 2016 Reading Framework. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College URL: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/pirls2016/downloads/P16_FW_Chap1.pdf • Noyes, J. M., & Garland, K. J. (2008). Computer- vs. paper-based tasks: are they equivalent? Ergonomics, 51(9), 1352–75. doi:10.1080/00140130802170387 • OECD (2010), PISA 2009 Results: What Students Know and Can Do – Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics and Science (Volume I). URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264091450-en (20-03-2014) • Ross, C.S. (1999) Finding without seeking: The information encounter in the context of reading for pleasure. Information Processing & Management, 35 (6) (1999), pp. 783–799 • Solomon, P. (2005). Discovering information in context. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36(1), 229–264. doi:10.1002/aris.1440360106 • Veenhof, B. (2006). The Internet: Is it changing the way Canadians spend their time? Ottawa: Statistics Canada. URL: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/Collection/Statcan/56F0004MIE/56F0004MIE2006013.pdf (01-4-2014) • Vonkomer, J., Miglierini, B. (1995.): Test dinamičkih nizova – TDN. Jastrebarsko: Naklada slap