4 ms·

I am not sure this study is definitely convincing… …but I wonder if the extra amount of scrolling one has to do on smartphones compared to printed books could

I am not sure this study is definitely convincing… …but I wonder if the extra amount of scrolling one has to do on smartphones compared to printed books could be distracting and lowering comprehension. Also, when I try to remember something I have red on a printed book, - sometimes - I can remember where on the page it was written, what else was on the page, or even what the page looked like. I experience none of that when reading on my smartphone.

kbenson 5y ago
I also feel like my comprehension of physical reading material was better, but it's been a while sine I actually used physical material for learning, so it could also just be my brain is worse at retaining information in my old age. Definitely something I think I'll experiment with though.
vagabund 5y ago
I don't know if it's the scrolling per se, so much as the more general psychological relationship we have with phones whose hardware and OS are designed to tantalize and distract. The majority of our prior experiences on the device will have primed our brain for something antithetical to the long-term concentrative state that's necessary for deep comprehension. By the same token of the advice for insomniacs to reserve your bed strictly for sleep, there's value in having purpose-built objects instead of just a singular omnipotent slab of glass.
johnchristopher 5y ago
> Also, when I try to remember something I have red on a printed book, - sometimes - I can remember where on the page it was written, what else was on the page, or even what the page looked like. I experience none of that when reading on my smartphone. This is so obvious to me but more than once I have hit the typical robot HN user on this topic for whom it doesn't matter the medium because he's an eidetic machine. So I'll just post this: > Beyond treating individual letters as physical objects, the human brain may also perceive a text in its entirety as a kind of physical landscape. When we read, we construct a mental representation of the text in which meaning is anchored to structure. The exact nature of such representations remains unclear, but they are likely similar to the mental maps we create of terrain—such as mountains and trails—and of man-made physical spaces, such as apartments and offices. Both anecdotally and in published studies, people report that when trying to locate a particular piece of written information they often remember where in the text it appeared. We might recall that we passed the red farmhouse near the start of the trail before we started climbing uphill through the forest; in a similar way, we remember that we read about Mr. Darcy rebuffing Elizabeth Bennett on the bottom of the left-hand page in one of the earlier chapters. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-scr... And repost my comment from one of those times: >> The value provided by a physical map of a book is knowing how far along you are in the book, yet that's also available in a visual form in an ebook as well. You can even riffle through pages on most e-readers as well, seeing a preview of the page as you move quickly forward or backwards. >> Aside from weight, what value is the physical map really providing? > No, it provides more. > Actually your brain maps physical properties of the book to actual content, creating an overlay map over the story or the content (and our brain is really good at mentally mapping things). This is that map that is being used to know where in the book a particular piece of information is. > Reading on e-reader is more linear than reading a paper book. See: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-scr... https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/uksg.236/ https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/uksg.236/ and https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/aug/19/readers-absorb-less-kindles-paper-study-plot-ereader-digitisation https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/aug/19/readers-absorb... > Besides, no e-reader today can let your riffle through pages as fast as paper book. > When you are in a novel, or in a manual, you have some kinetic and touch feedback to build memories of where's what. The book becomes an extension (à la proprioception) with much less friction than an e-read for which you have to wait for visual feedback (screen refreshing). > With paper books things are at the tip of your fingers. > E-reader have more friction. > That's a reason why I only read novels on e-reader and jot notes in a notepad for non-fiction books. > If I had the budget I'd only have physical books.
- meristohm 5y ago
  Much of this resonates with me, as most of the reading in my life is on paper, and I’m curious what the hooks & landmarks are when listening to stories, which we humans (presumably) did for most of our existence as a species (and our ancestors, and any animals alive now who have an oral/aural tradition). Some of my most memorable stories are audiobooks that I attended to ~fully (Shuggie Bain, notably, in part for the narration), letting my imagination augment the story.
tomjen3 5y ago
It is an interesting idea, but with a physical book you have to turn the page. And that has to be more distracting, because you can't read any part of the page while it is turning. But I also had the experience once (and I think most readers has had it more than once) of reading a book and having to stop because somebody turned the lights off - then realizing that I had been so engrossed in a book that several hours had gone by and the sun had gone down by then.
kristianp 5y ago
The amount of resetting the postion of the eyes back to the start of the next line is much greater on a smartphone. I wonder if the greater effort of scanning affects your brain's ability to sigh and comprehend.
- Laforet 5y ago
  Newspapers and magazines have always formatted long text in narrow columns of 5-7 words. Admittedly I find it very irritating to read every now and then. Most paperbacks have paragraphs that are about twice as wide (10 to 12 words) and it definitely feels more natural.
troupe 5y ago
There was another study that found that people remember things better when reading a heavier book instead of a light one. The obvious solution is to glue a brick to the back of your phone... But seriously, the form and tactile sense of the object in your hand seems to be related to how well you remember things. The trend on phones may be moving away from what makes things easier to remember.

kbenson 5y ago

I also feel like my comprehension of physical reading material was better, but it's been a while sine I actually used physical material for learning, so it could also just be my brain is worse at retaining information in my old age. Definitely something I think I'll experiment with though.

vagabund 5y ago

I don't know if it's the scrolling per se, so much as the more general psychological relationship we have with phones whose hardware and OS are designed to tantalize and distract. The majority of our prior experiences on the device will have primed our brain for something antithetical to the long-term concentrative state that's necessary for deep comprehension. By the same token of the advice for insomniacs to reserve your bed strictly for sleep, there's value in having purpose-built objects instead of just a singular omnipotent slab of glass.

johnchristopher 5y ago

> Also, when I try to remember something I have red on a printed book, - sometimes - I can remember where on the page it was written, what else was on the page, or even what the page looked like. I experience none of that when reading on my smartphone. This is so obvious to me but more than once I have hit the typical robot HN user on this topic for whom it doesn't matter the medium because he's an eidetic machine. So I'll just post this: > Beyond treating individual letters as physical objects, the human brain may also perceive a text in its entirety as a kind of physical landscape. When we read, we construct a mental representation of the text in which meaning is anchored to structure. The exact nature of such representations remains unclear, but they are likely similar to the mental maps we create of terrain—such as mountains and trails—and of man-made physical spaces, such as apartments and offices. Both anecdotally and in published studies, people report that when trying to locate a particular piece of written information they often remember where in the text it appeared. We might recall that we passed the red farmhouse near the start of the trail before we started climbing uphill through the forest; in a similar way, we remember that we read about Mr. Darcy rebuffing Elizabeth Bennett on the bottom of the left-hand page in one of the earlier chapters. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-scr... And repost my comment from one of those times: >> The value provided by a physical map of a book is knowing how far along you are in the book, yet that's also available in a visual form in an ebook as well. You can even riffle through pages on most e-readers as well, seeing a preview of the page as you move quickly forward or backwards. >> Aside from weight, what value is the physical map really providing? > No, it provides more. > Actually your brain maps physical properties of the book to actual content, creating an overlay map over the story or the content (and our brain is really good at mentally mapping things). This is that map that is being used to know where in the book a particular piece of information is. > Reading on e-reader is more linear than reading a paper book. See: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-scr... https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/uksg.236/ https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/uksg.236/ and https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/aug/19/readers-absorb-less-kindles-paper-study-plot-ereader-digitisation https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/aug/19/readers-absorb... > Besides, no e-reader today can let your riffle through pages as fast as paper book. > When you are in a novel, or in a manual, you have some kinetic and touch feedback to build memories of where's what. The book becomes an extension (à la proprioception) with much less friction than an e-read for which you have to wait for visual feedback (screen refreshing). > With paper books things are at the tip of your fingers. > E-reader have more friction. > That's a reason why I only read novels on e-reader and jot notes in a notepad for non-fiction books. > If I had the budget I'd only have physical books.

meristohm 5y ago
Much of this resonates with me, as most of the reading in my life is on paper, and I’m curious what the hooks & landmarks are when listening to stories, which we humans (presumably) did for most of our existence as a species (and our ancestors, and any animals alive now who have an oral/aural tradition). Some of my most memorable stories are audiobooks that I attended to ~fully (Shuggie Bain, notably, in part for the narration), letting my imagination augment the story.

tomjen3 5y ago

It is an interesting idea, but with a physical book you have to turn the page. And that has to be more distracting, because you can't read any part of the page while it is turning. But I also had the experience once (and I think most readers has had it more than once) of reading a book and having to stop because somebody turned the lights off - then realizing that I had been so engrossed in a book that several hours had gone by and the sun had gone down by then.

kristianp 5y ago

The amount of resetting the postion of the eyes back to the start of the next line is much greater on a smartphone. I wonder if the greater effort of scanning affects your brain's ability to sigh and comprehend.

Laforet 5y ago
Newspapers and magazines have always formatted long text in narrow columns of 5-7 words. Admittedly I find it very irritating to read every now and then. Most paperbacks have paragraphs that are about twice as wide (10 to 12 words) and it definitely feels more natural.

troupe 5y ago

There was another study that found that people remember things better when reading a heavier book instead of a light one. The obvious solution is to glue a brick to the back of your phone... But seriously, the form and tactile sense of the object in your hand seems to be related to how well you remember things. The trend on phones may be moving away from what makes things easier to remember.