ArticleJournal of research in reading2021
Experiencing literature on the e-reader: the effects of reading narrative texts on screen.
Article in Journal of research in reading, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- An investigation of the effects of different text formats on middle school students' reading comprehension performance.PloS one · 2025Trial
- Don't Throw Away Your Notebook: Effects of Task Difficulty and Presentation Medium on Memory Performance.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Experiencing literature on the e-reader: the effects of reading narrative texts on screen.Journal of research in reading · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe digitalisation of literature is proliferating, and the increasing spread of digital reading devices and the availability of digital texts is likely to make
methodsUsing a between-subjects experimental design, 207 participants read the beginning of a novel either in a printed book or on an e-reader. They then completed a reading comprehension test and questionnaires about their cognitive and emotional experiences.
resultsOverall, the results do not suggest the clear superiority of either of the two reading media. Neither reading speed nor reading comprehension differed significantly between the two groups. Even though a broad range of reading experiences was measured, neither cognitive nor emotional reading experiences differed significantly between the groups.
conclusionAn e-reader does not affect either reading performance or cognitive and emotional experience of reading a narrative text, compared with a printed book.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.