LIDA 2014 – PhD Forum
Mate Juric
mjuric@unizd.hr
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.)
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
 People read 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)
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.
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
5. Research questions
to determine whether there are:
1. differences in the reading satisfaction and reading
comprehension with regard to the reading environment: on
paper and on the LCD computer screen?
2. 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)?
3. interactive effect of personal characteristics and reading
environment on these dependent variables: reading habits,
satisfaction and comprehension?
4. differences in reading habits among respondents who read
from the screen and those who do not read from the screen?
6. Hypotheses
1.
2.
3.
4.
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.
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.
7.2. Methods
 experimental design combined with a correlational study
7.3. Procedures
 In 2 stages:
reading habits survey, intelligence and personality tests
2. Reading from LCD screen / paper, reading satisfaction
questionaire and reading comprehension test
1.
 First group of participants is going to read from the paper 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
7.3. Instruments
1.
TDN - a culturally unbiased intelligence test (Vonkomer i
Miglierini, 1995.)
2.
BIG5 personality traits Questionnaire: 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)
4. Reading satisfaction qustionnaire (Likert scale)
5. Reading comprehension tests (based on Blooms taxonomy;
3.
PIRLS; PISA)
8. Significance of the Study
 a better understanding of the process of reading in print
and digital environment.
 new insights 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.
 findings will 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.
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.
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 (01-42014)
Vonkomer, J., Miglierini, B. (1995.): Test dinamičkih nizova – TDN. Jastrebarsko: Naklada slap