Study: Those who use an e-reader are worse at remembering a plot

A new study found that those who read a story on an e-reader versus a paper version were worse at putting the story's events in the right timeline.

|
Brian Snyder/Reuters
A commuter uses his e-reader in Cambridge, Mass.

Does someone who read a novel on paper remember more about the story than a person who used an e-reader to peruse the same text?

Yes, according to a new study. The Guardian reports that lead researcher Anne Mangen of Stavanger University in Norway said at a recent conference in Italy that she and those she worked with presented 50 people with a short story by writer Elizabeth George. Of those 50 readers, 25 received a paper copy and 25 used a Kindle e-reader and then all were then asked questions about the story’s setting, characters, and other details. 

“The Kindle readers performed significantly worse on the plot reconstruction measure, i.e. when they were asked to place 14 events in the correct order,” Mangen said, according to the Guardian. 

Why would Kindle readers be worse at putting steps of the story in order? Mangen suggested that it’s the process of reading a physical book. “When you read on paper you can sense with your fingers a pile of pages on the left growing, and shrinking on the right," she said. "You have the tactile sense of progress, in addition to the visual…. Perhaps this somehow aids the reader, providing more fixity and solidity to the reader's sense of unfolding and progress of the text." 

Mangen says this isn’t the first time she’s seen this happen – last year, she and other researchers had some Norwegian high school students read paper texts and others read the section via a PDF file. “Students who read texts in print scored significantly better on the reading comprehension test than students who read the texts digitally,” she said. 

Not all researchers agree with Mangen, however, and questions about retention and comprehension among e-book readers remain a source of ongoing debate. Last year an article in Scientific American suggested that although initially reading on screens may diminish readers' capacity to understand what they read, that could change over time as readers become more accustomed to reading on screen.

How’s your recall when you read something via your e-reader? Do you think you’d score better on putting a plot in order?

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Study: Those who use an e-reader are worse at remembering a plot
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Books/chapter-and-verse/2014/0820/Study-Those-who-use-an-e-reader-are-worse-at-remembering-a-plot
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe