Quote:
Originally Posted by JSWolf
The problem with the study is that they didn't switch what each group was reading from. It's quite possible that the people reading from paper are just better able to retain what they've read then the people reading from a Kindle and it actually has nothing to do with Kindle vs. paper.
You can go out and poll 100 people and get one result, go out and poll a different 100 people and get a different result.
Also, one thing I see as a problem is that the default font on a Kindle is bad enough to take you out of the book and look at the device and the screen more so then with a pBook.
|
All of this is trivial points that you take into consideration when designing a study. Why do people here assume that the study is not well designed just because the result seems to indicate something that people do not like or find not intuitive?
A statistical significant results is usually said to be a result were the chance for it being causes by random variations is less than 5%.
Is there any reason to assume that this study has claimed something that is not supported by the statistics?