Reading Comprehension on Handheld Devices Versus on Paper: A Narrative Review and Meta-Analysis of the Medium Effect and Its Moderators.

Autor/inn/en	Salmerón, Ladislao; Altamura, Lidia; Delgado, Pablo; Karagiorgi, Anastasia; Vargas, Cristina
Titel	Reading Comprehension on Handheld Devices Versus on Paper: A Narrative Review and Meta-Analysis of the Medium Effect and Its Moderators. Gefälligkeitsübersetzung: Leseverständnis auf Mobilgeräten und auf Papier: Ein narrative Übersichtsarbeit und eine Metaanalyse des Medieneffekts und seiner Moderatoren.
Quelle	In: The journal of educational psychology, 116 (2023) 2, S. 153-172Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Link als defekt meldenVerfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	online; gedruckt; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0022-0663; 1939-2176
DOI	10.1037/edu0000830
Schlagwörter	Verständlichkeit; Printmedien; Unterrichtsmedien; Text; Lesen; Leseverstehen; Mobiles Endgerät
Abstract	As handheld devices, such as tablets, become a common tool in schools, a critical and urgent question for the research community is to assess their potential impact on educational outcomes. Previous meta-analytic research has evidenced the "screen inferiority effect": Readers tend to understand texts slightly worse when reading on-screen than when reading the same text in print. Most primary studies from those meta-analyses used computers as on-screen reading devices. Accordingly, the extent to which handheld devices, which provide a reading experience closer to books than computers, are affected by the screen inferiority effect remains an open question. To address this issue, we reviewed relevant literature regarding potential moderating factors for the screen inferiority effect through the lenses of the reading for understanding framework. We then performed two meta-analyses aimed at examining the differences in reading comprehension when reading on handheld devices, as compared to print. Results from the two multilevel random-effect meta-analyses, which included primary studies that used either between-participant (k = 38, g = -0.113) or within-participant (k = 21, g = -0.103) designs, consistently showed a significant small size effect favoring print text comprehension. Moderator analyses helped to partially clarify the results, indicating in some cases a higher screen inferiority effect for undergraduate students (as compared to primary and secondary school students) and for participants who were assessed individually (as opposed to in groups). We discuss the need to continue fostering print reading in schools while developing effective ways to incorporate handheld devices for reading purposes. (ZPID).
Erfasst von	Leibniz-Institut für Psychologie, Trier
Update	2024/3