ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Augmented reality books: in-depth insights into children's reading engagement.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Children's reading engagement is associated with the quality of their reading experiences and outcomes; however, research to date has only examined children's reading engagement within the context of traditional print books or digital texts. Augmented Reality represents a hybrid reading experience, where traditional paper books are augmented with digital features (e.g., animations, sounds, comprehension questions). This is the first study to examine children's perspectives and experiences of AR books, within the context of reading engagement. In total, 38 demographically diverse children (aged 8-10, 21 male, 17 English as an Additional Language, 14 ethnicities, nine with teacher-reported reading difficulties) from the UK participated. After reading an AR book, children participated in interviews about their reading engagement. Deductive (themes) and inductive (subthemes) approaches to thematic analysis were used, examining children's AR reading experiences within the context of their behavioral, cognitive, affective and social engagement. The majority of children found AR books easy to use, and provided examples of how AR books supported their behavioral engagement (e.g., desire to read more/extend reading practices), altered their cognitive engagement (e.g., reading strategies, visual representation/use of imagination, comprehension monitoring), influenced their affective engagement: (e.g., diverse positive feelings), and social engagement (e.g., prompted interaction and discussion), providing examples suggesting similarities and differences with traditional print books. This paper provides novel in-depth insights into children's perspectives and experiences of AR books, and provides a foundation for researchers, educators, and AR book designers interested in better supporting children's reading experiences and outcomes with AR books.
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.