Research adds credibility to print over screen

Anne Mangen, associate professor, the National Centre for Reading Education and Research, University of Stavanger, Norway, recently presented a paper on ‘Reading on paper and Screens’, at the World Print & Communication Forum, held at Barcelona, Spain. The report was provided to PrintWeek India by Kamal Chopra, owner of Foil Printers and co-chairman, international relations, AIFMP. The objective of the research, Mangen said, was to explore effects of the technological interface on reading comprehension in a Norwegian school context.

The study assumes significance in the Indian context, especially when many state governments have started distributing tabs/laptop to the students, ostensibly to make students more inclined towards reading. Despite the electronic media claiming its utilities, it is not yet conclusively evident that reading in print and on screen is the same. A case in point is China where the government has withdrawn tabs from primary students after nine years.

The study by Ann Mangen was an academic endeavour, yet the result is a proverbial shot on the arm for the print industry, which, in the recent times, have struggled with the onslaught of digital media, what with Amazon’s e-publishing ventures making news the world over.

As part of the study to understand reading comprehension on paper and computer screen, 72 students of 10th grade in two Norwegian schools were given a particular task. They were asked to read two four-page texts (one narrative, one expository) on either paper or computer screen, and then answer comprehension questions on computer. The hypothesis of the study was that on-paper readers would perform significantly better on the comprehension assessment than on-screen readers.

Mangen found that those students, who read in print, as opposed to on screen, had a better comprehension on the subjects. They also had more emotional response to the materials in question.

According to Mangen, who conducted the study with Bente R Walgermo and Kolbjorn Bronnick in 2013, the theoretical and pedagogical implications of the ongoing digitisation for reading and reading comprehension are complex and multifaceted, and a number of fundamental research questions remain at best partially addressed. These include how and to what extent might comprehension texts differ when they are displayed on a screen as compared to being printed on paper? Does it impact students’ reading comprehension and learning to read geography, science and history texts as PDFs on computer screen instead of in a printed textbook? 

In the study, the students were divided into two groups, where the first group read two texts comprising 1,400 and 2,000 words each, in print and the other group read the same texts as PDF on a computer screen. In addition pre-tests in reading comprehension, word reading and vocabulary were administered.

Mangen said the main findings of the study show that students who read texts in print scored significantly better in the reading comprehension test than students who read the texts digitally.

Mangen offered a possible explanation for the students who scored poorly. It may be because of multitasking during the reading, like shifting between windows and scrolling. There also may be visual fatigue for the students owning to the screen glare and lack of fixity on screen.

The study also attempted to understand an integrative model of reading. This includes ergonomic dimension (reading is physical engagement with a device), attentional/perceptual dimension (allocation of attention; audiovisual processing), cognitive dimension (comprehension; linguistic processing), phenomenological dimension (individually meaningful activity) and socio-cultural dimension (socially meaningful activity).

According to findings of the study, students reading the text as a news story on paper reported highest level of empathy with the characters of the story. They also said that they were ‘transported’ to the story. They revealed that the medium – paper – did not interfere with their immersive experience. 

Mangen said while the study is no way conclusive, it raises several questions in the context of the ongoing debate over print vs digital. The major areas to concentrate are text-related (what kind of texts is suitable for what medium, in terms of length, complexity, genre and layout of the texts), reader-related (whether the reader is an expert in using a screen-medium), and most importantly, the purpose of reading (study, contemplation, entertainment, news).