Objective and perceived reading performance: an empirical study comparing reading media and methods
Upper secondary Paper vs screen Reading and writing Analog vs digital
Links to claims
Supports (1)
| Claim | Basis |
|---|---|
| C3 | Kill-condition test survived 2026-10-03: short no-scroll HS texts, objective medium null; preference still for paper. |
Limits (1)
| Claim | Basis |
|---|---|
| C3 | Immediate short linear passages only; aligns with paginated/no-scroll bound; preference persists. |
Review state: first-pass draft, pending human review.
Source note
Syntes: Seo, Rhim & Gweon (2026) — short no-scroll HS texts: objective medium null; preference for paper
Källa: Seo, K., Rhim, J., & Gweon, G. (2026). Objective and perceived reading performance: an empirical study comparing reading media and methods. Universal Access in the Information Society. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-026-01325-8
Verified numbers (full OA text)
- Design: N=67 high-school students; paper vs 15.6″ FHD laptop; silent vs oral; five short CSAT-style passages (~360–390 words, one page, no page-turn/scroll).
- Objective RP: no significant medium difference (low construal F(1,65)=0.299, p=.586; high construal F(1,65)=0.009, p=.927).
- Perceived: preference higher for paper (F(1,65)=15.642, p<.001); convenience ns; expected comprehension ns by medium (F(1,65)=0.471, p=.495).
- Authors note short linear no-scroll design; longer scrolling texts may differ.
Role for C3
Kill-condition test for short paginated HS informational text: prong (a) screen ≥ paper met (null); prong (b) expected-comprehension gap not shown (ns), but preference still favors paper. Kill incomplete for C3's average deep continuous / scrolling-driven meta claim; aligns with existing paginated/no-scroll bound (Clinton-Lisell). Survived 2026-10-03 as kill-test; claim wording unchanged.
Metadata as recorded
- ID
- MEDIA-015
- Tier
- RCT
- Closed-book follow-up
- nej (immediate comprehension after each passage; no delayed retention)
- Titel
- Objective and perceived reading performance: an empirical study comparing reading media and methods
- Författare
- Seo, K.; Rhim, J.; Gweon, G.
- År
- 2026 (Univ Access Inf Soc; published online 17 March 2026)
- Källa/DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-026-01325-8
- URL
- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10209-026-01325-8
- Typ
- 2×2 between-subjects (paper vs digital × silent vs oral); N=67 high-school students; short linear passages (~360–390 words, single page, no scrolling)
- Åldersgrupp
- gymnasium (ages 17–20)
- Teman
- papper-vs-skarm;lasning-och-skrivande;analogt-vs-digitalt
- Hämtad
- 2026-10-03
- Paywall
- OA
The original files (PDF or abstract) are kept in the project archive and are not published here.