Reading on Paper and Digitally: What the Past Decades of Empirical Research Reveal

• In Event: Reading in the Digital Age: Affordances and Consequences for Learning, Judgment, and Performance

Abstract

Humans live in a society that is constantly plugged into the Internet whether by computer or handheld device. Although it goes without saying that the digital age has come with many benefits, including rapid and expanded access to information and untold networking capabilities (Usluel, 2016), questions remain about the implications of such digital access and the many digital devices that allow for that access for reading and learning from text (Underwood, Underwood, & Farrington-Flint, 2015). The goal of understanding reading online increases in urgency as high-stakes assessments move to digital formats.
Theoretical Framework
At present there are no evidence-based models of reading that sufficiently account for the potential effects of medium on comprehension. That is to say, there is limited understanding of how particular attributes of the learner, the text, or the context might interact with the medium to enhance or inhibit comprehension. What theoretical or empirical models currently inform research, including this inquiry, deal more with the nature of comprehension (Kintsch, 1988) or with the effects of multimedia within any given piece of text (Mayer, 1997). There are also well-articulated models of learning and performance when multiple texts are implicated (Bråten & Strømsø, 2011; Rouet & Britt, 2011).
Method
For this systematic review, all literature searches were conducted in the PsychInfo database using a title and abstract search and were limited to peer-reviewed publications that contained the terms “reading digitally” (n= 129), “reading online” (n= 111), “digital reading” (n= 221), “computer reading” (n= 101), “ereading” (n= 189), “learning on computer” (n= 58), and “learning digitally” (n= 58), which yielded a total of 859 documents. Studies were included in the final analysis if they:
1. Involved both print and digital reading;
2. Were empirical studies;
3. Entailed more than self-report measures; and,
4. Included a comprehension measure as an outcome.
Results
Of the 36 charted studies, only nine (25%) included any manner of definition of reading—be it explicit or implicit. Only five (13.89%) of the studies included a definition of digital reading. In regard to the operationalization of reading in general and reading online, there was noticeable variability in the measures and approaches that researchers employed to gauge outcomes. For example, 15 studies included multiple-choice reading comprehension questions (e.g., 10 multiple-choice questions; Noyes, Garland, & Robbins, 2004).
Significance
This is the only systematic review in the last 25 years that juxtaposes the contemporary field of reading digitally against the long-established and deeply-rooted research on print reading. The goal of understanding reading online increases in urgency as high-stakes assessments move to digital formats. For example, undergraduate and graduate entrance assessments such as the SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test, 2014) and GRE (Graduate Record Exam, 2014) are administered digitally. Further, national and international assessments, such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA, 2015) and NAEP (NAGB, 2008), are exploring digital administration as well as scenario-based tasks that incorporate digital literacy. However, we have a responsibility to understand what is happening when one reads digitally before assessing them in this medium.

Authors

• Lauren M Singer Trakhman, University of Maryland - College Park

• Patricia A. Alexander, University of Maryland - College Park