"In 2011, Annette Taylor, a psychologist at the University of San Diego, similarly found that students performed equally well on a twenty-question multiple-choice comprehension test whether they had read a chapter on-screen or on paper. Given a second test one week later, the two groups’ performances were still indistinguishable. And it’s not just reading. Last year, Sigal Eden and Yoram Eshet-Alkalai found no difference in accuracy between students who edited a six-hundred-word paper on the screen and those who worked on paper. Those who edited on-screen did so faster, but their performance didn’t suffer."
Maria Konnikova, “Being A Better Online Reader”
This article is what sparked my post the other day about how you experience reading. I think this piece is way too dichotomous; it’s not just “paper or screen”. There’s a difference between a traditional hard cover and a magazine with columns, just like there’s a difference between longs lines surrounded by ads on a desktop and an e-ink e-reader. I was really surprised with the statistics about the Kindle vs. pbook readers, and wonder if the study was given to older people. I have an e-ink Kindle, and the actual reading experience is absolutely no different to me than reading in a book (“jumping” to another passage and turning pages is a whole ‘nother story, but the positives—being able to look up definitions, changing the text size based on my eyes’ tiredness, easily being able to mark passages, instantly being able to acquire a book when someone recommends it—definitely balance out the negatives).