Ebook reeaders make reading too easy - Page 4

Sydney's Mom · 01-19-2011, 04:07 PM

I too used to be able to recall information visually - if I couldn't remember an answer, I could ask where on the page it was, and I would be able to recall. I'm 54 now, and I can no longer do that, but probably because I no longer do that. I still read technical things on paper, with a highlighter and pencil to take notes. I could probably still recall that, if I needed to, but I haven't needed to for so long . . . But I read different kinds of books on my kindle. I have, since I was a little child, used different parts of my brain for information I had to retain, and information I did not have to retain. As I have gotten older, the information I do not have to retain pretty much gets dumped immediately. I have to look in Calibre to avoid buying a book a second time, even though I bought and read the first within the last year (exceptions for BIG books, like Stephen King). I agree with the article - if you do want to skim something, an ereader is much easier. For example, I hate most detailed discriptions of nature (I grew up on a farm, what can I say?). When the protaganist is looking at blue skis or an azur sunset, I can skip, and look for the next set of quotation marks.

eddiek · 01-20-2011, 01:23 PM

I don't buy this study for one moment. I would think that since it is easy on your eyes you would remember what you read even more so. No distractions and frustration of trying too hard to read the words.

danan · 01-20-2011, 01:50 PM

I don't think I've noticed any difference in the 'difficulty' of reading paper books and e-books. They are different reading experiences -- so far, I've only read leisure e-books on my Kindle, but I guess that if I were to read something academic on it, it would be certainly not the same. The article might have a point.

Kali Yuga · 01-20-2011, 02:05 PM

I know I'm late to the game

but some of the claims the article strikes me as patently absurd.

- It is no more or less difficult to read text on an ebook than on paper. So if ebooks are "bad," then paper books will be as well.
- Other studies have indicated that reading comprehension does not suffer based on ebook vs paper.
- The individual proposing the theory is a blogger, not a neurologist or researcher.
- At this time there's no evidence for his theory, namely that activating the dorsal stream increases reading comprehension and/or improves processing.
- Reading bad handwriting doesn't help you remember. (I certainly don't recall all the chicken-scratch of the prescriptions doctors have written for me.

) The act of writing something by hand helps reinforce recall and comprehension.

It shouldn't be a surprise that your brain recruits an additional region when reading difficult typography. But "more brain" != "better results."

Of course, he also goes into "larger anxieties" over the "sprawling influence of technology." Perhaps that made good copy in 1995, but by now that concept is a well-worn rut in journalistic writing. I'd go on, but that's more notice than such techno-babble punditry deserves.

Kali Yuga · 01-20-2011, 02:22 PM

And of course, the initial study in question is...

http://web.princeton.edu/sites/oppla...eimer_2010.pdf

It's loaded with caveats, by the way, including:
- The samples used were fairly short, e.g. 90s of reading and a multiple-choice test
- Novelty of a specific approach (e.g. using Comic Sans) will likely wear off after time
- They don't know yet how to quantify "disfluent" and "unintelligible"
- Some mechanisms may not work (e.g. small fonts)
- Other studies do not agree with the researchers, and it may well be material-dependent

However, there is one thing they propose, to which I for one would agree, namely the proposition that:

"the most effective disﬂuency manipulations would likely be those that are within the bounds of the normal variation of fonts and materials that could reasonably appear in a classroom."

I.e. putting a critical concept in italics or in a bolded font might help retain certain key concepts. Wow.

At any rate, while the study may one day bear fruit which does improve education, it certainly isn't strong enough to conclude that ereaders will somehow degrade comprehension because it's "too easy" to read them.

bookjunky · 01-20-2011, 10:53 PM

I learned how great books are at an early age when My Grandma read to be before I learned how to read for myself. I was the kid that set all the reading records.

After becoming a physically disabled adult with problems holding larger print and paper books I read in an electronic format for the first time On an old palm 3.5 os Palm VIIx with a whole 8mb of memory. The small device gave back to me the ability to read as much as I desired and it went everywhere with me.

Only drawback I have ever experienced with an ereading device is the great numbers of uninitiated that they they are just games. I retain every bit of what I read on my screen as I did from paper books.

lenseman · 01-21-2011, 09:03 AM

The study is somewhat flawed from the get-go. As I have always known it to be human beings retain far more information when they read light coloured text on a dark background than when reading dark text on a light background. The study is comparing two means of reading that are based on something less than ideal.

This is why chalkboards (at least originally) were black with white chalk being used. They did studies with all different shades and colours of chalkboards and chalk with children of different ages. The studies showed that the children learned better and retained more information when reading light text on a dark background. Photo-recall I think is a way of circumventing the obstacle of reading with the colours reversed. Basically you are allowing yourself you stair at the writing (in your head) for as long as you need to in order to get the information. The only reason books continued to be printed in black ink on white paper is because they were cheaper to produce. Now we have done it for so long that e-readers have been based off of this design.

I have proven it for myself before. There was a time in the early days of the net where I would save documents from the internet locally and switch the colours around and those docs stayed in my head after just one reading far longer than ones shown in the standard black on white.

Text in a paperback is pretty much the same as text in e-ink. As someone already said it is just fear of change. It could also just be some group trying to make a name for themselves using scare tactics marketed as 'scientific research'.

Anthem · 01-21-2011, 10:00 AM

Quote: