So far, in all the "research" I've seen, the common claim seems to be that the physical and tactile experience of reading physical books is something that ereading fails to recreate for many people. To which I say: didn't we already know that? Those are the people who still prefer physical books--and aren't going to be deprived of them.
And from the third article you linked:
Quote:
|
Before 1992 most studies concluded that people read slower, less accurately and less comprehensively on screens than on paper. Studies published since the early 1990s, however, have produced more inconsistent results: a slight majority has confirmed earlier conclusions, but almost as many have found few significant differences in reading speed or comprehension between paper and screens. And recent surveys suggest that although most people still prefer paper—especially when reading intensively—attitudes are changing as tablets and e-reading technology improve and reading digital books for facts and fun becomes more common.
|
Why the conflation of preference and science in most of these studies/articles that I encounter? "Science is torn, but surveys suggest..."