Quote:
Originally Posted by HamsterRage
....
Of course, this was years ago, I don't have any citations and it may have been completely debunked by now.
In any event, I can't see how this would translate to the world of LED, Plasma and eInk. There's no strobing effect. All of the pixels are lit up at the same time, and they only flicker off and on when the picture changes. eInk is particularly static until you change pages.
|
HR, your comment above is
interesting!
"Arnie" gives his POV on screen and reading:
"In the TouTubevideo, Dan gives his opinion that “screening” is (in his words) “vastly inferior” to reading on paper. He suggests that brain scans be done with subjects reading on paper and then reading on electronic devices. I assume from his tone that he is confident that experts would agree that the mental experience of reading on paper would be shown to touch the brain in a much healthier way. ......I am not so sure that there would be much of a difference, nor do I think that such studies would clearly reveal some major flaw in “screening”. Since Dan is just conjecturing, it is quite possible that “screening” might be revealed to be superior in some ways."
I replied to "Arnie":
''Arnie, good response! I like this kind of intelligent feedback. And you are right, this is pure conjecture on my part, based on a hunch based on anecdotal and personal experience, but yes, just a conjecture, and you are very right: it could go the other way. In fact, it could turn out that screening is superior to reading on paper, if not in all ways, at least in some ways, yes!
I am not confident of anything, re all this, Arnie. I am only confident that is good to ask these kinds of questions and let the MRI scans show us the way later on. It could go 50/50 and in fact, that is a strong likelihood. I have no agenda, and I have no dog in this fight. Just curious.
Thanks for weighing on on this. I like your reasoned approach. ''