Passage 5 Reasons Physical Books Might Be Better Than E-Books
5 Reasons Physical Books Might Be Better Than E-Books
by Shaunacy Ferro
Though e-book1 readers have become a more common sight around town, traditional books still have their evangelists.2 According to The New York Times, e-book sales have been falling in 2015. Print definitely isn’t dead. In fact, according to some research, it may actually be a better choice for some readers. While scientists are still trying to tease out exactly how digital reading affects us differently, here are five ways e-books might be inferior to their dead-tree cousins.
E-books can reduce reading comprehension.
In a study of middle schoolers, West Chester University researchers found that students who read on iPads3 had lower reading comprehension than when they read traditional printed books. They discovered that the kids sometimes skipped text in favor of interactive features in the e-books, suggesting that certain multimedia in children’s e-books can be detrimental to the practice of reading itself. However, the researchers noted that some interactive features in e-books are designed to enhance comprehension, and that those might be more helpful than game-type interactive graphics.
Young kids can get distracted by e-books.
Similar results were found by a small study by the Joan Ganz Cooney Center that consisted of 32 kids reading e-books and print books with their parents. It found that “enhanced” e-books might be distracting. Kids who read enhanced e-books—ones with interactive, multimedia experiences—were more engaged with them physically, but in the end they remembered fewer narrative details than those who read print books or basic e-books.
You remember less about a book’s timeline.
Another study of adults also found that e-books can be hard to absorb. The researchers asked 25 people to read a 28-page story on a Kindle4 and 25 to read the story in paperback, then asked the readers to put 14 events from the story in chronological order. Those who read the story on a Kindle performed worse on the chronology test than the book readers, though they performed about the same as print readers in other tests. Earlier research by the same scholars, from Stavanger University in Norway, found that Norwegian 10th graders also remembered more about texts if they read them in print rather than on a computer screen.
They’re not great as textbooks.
While e-book textbooks are often cheaper (and easier to carry) than traditional door-stop5 textbooks, college students often don’t prefer them. In some surveys of college kids, the majority of students have reported preferring print books. However, a 2012 study from the UK’s National Literacy Trust of kids ages 8 to 16 found that more than 50 percent of children reported preferring screen reading.
They’re tiring.
Staring at a lit screen can be tiring for the eyes and the brain. A 2005 study from Sweden found that reading digitally required a higher cognitive workload than reading on paper. Furthermore, staring at LED6 screens at night can disrupt sleep patterns. A 2014 Harvard study found that people who used e-readers with LED screens at night slept worse and were more tired the next day. So, if you’re going to go for an e-book, go for one without the backlight.
The take-away message? If you’re really trying to absorb material, you might want to go for a physical book. And if you’re going to be up all night studying, turn off the backlight.
However, all this may not mean that reading on a Kindle is really going to melt your brain. For instance, reading an e-book on a computer is a much different experience than reading on a Kindle, which is specifically designed for consuming books. So, too, is playing with an interactive e-book on an iPad, compared to using a simpler e-book device that only presents the text, with no opportunities to click away into digital distractions.
And some studies have found that part of the difference between the way people absorb information from e-books versus paper might be due to approaching e-books differently—in one test, participants didn’t regulate their study time with digital books like they did with paper texts, leading to worse performances. It’s possible that our expectations of e-book reading—as well as the different designs of the digital reading experience on a computer or iPad or Kindle—might affect how we approach the text and how much effort we put into studying them. As generations of e-book readers evolve, and people become more accustomed to the idea of sitting down with a digital textbook, these factors could change—for better or for worse.
“5 Reasons Physical Books Might Be Better Than E-Books” by Shaunacy Ferro from MENTAL FLOSS, October 2, 2015. Copyright © 2015 Mental Floss, Inc.
1e-book: an electronic book, a publication made available digitally for reading on a computer or other device
2evangelists: advocates or supporters
3iPads: tablet computers
4Kindle: device for reading e-books
5door-stop: a reference to the idea that some textbooks are large and heavy enough to hold a door open
6LED: Light-emitting diode; LEDs are often used as a backlight for electronic devices such as smart phones and tablets.
Question
Which evidence in the passage is most relevant to the author’s claim that “our expectations of e-book reading . . . might affect how we approach the text” (paragraph 9)?
- AStudies found that students used their study time less productively with e-books than with print books.
- BA study found that e-books enhanced with multimedia engaged children to interact physically with the e-books.
- CAdult readers recalled more details from a story read in a print book than in an e-book.
- DOne study found that people who read e-books had poor recall of chronological events.
Show the answer
Correct answer: A
The question asks which evidence in the passage is most relevant to the author’s claim that “our expectations of e-book reading . . . might affect how we approach the text” (paragraph 9).
A. CORRECT. According to information in the passage, “kids sometimes skipped text in favor of interactive features” (paragraph 2) and they “remembered fewer narrative details” (paragraph 3). Additionally, a study found that “participants didn’t regulate their study time with digital books like they did with paper texts, leading to worse performances” (paragraph 9). This information directly demonstrates the author’s claim that expectations of e-book reading might affect how people approach the text.
B. Incorrect. In paragraph 3, the author states that e-books may be physically engaging, but they are also “distracting,” and readers who used them “remembered fewer narrative details.” While this evidence is important in helping readers understand why children who read e-books may comprehend less information than children who read print text, the evidence does not as strongly relate to the author’s claim as the idea in the correct answer does.
C. Incorrect. The author states that one “study of adults also found that e-books can be hard to absorb” (paragraph 4) and that “if you’re really trying to absorb material, you might want to go for a physical book” (paragraph 7). Although the evidence presented here provides support for the idea that retaining information from an e-book is more difficult than from a print book, it does not as strongly relate to the author’s claim as the idea in the correct answer does.
D. Incorrect. The author points out in paragraph 4 that adults “who read the story on a Kindle performed worse on the chronology test than the book readers.” Although this evidence shows how well adults can recall a series of events read in an e-book versus how well adults can recall a series of events read in a print book, the evidence does not as strongly relate to the author’s claim as the idea in the correct answer does.
Question analysis
Near the end of an article about e-books, the author claims that readers' expectations might affect how they approach a text, and this evidence question asks which finding is most relevant to that claim. Students must see exactly what the claim is about, since all four choices report research from the article.
- Grade level
- Grade 7 reading and task
- Compared with grade 7
- At grade 7 Matching evidence to a specific claim is typical grade 7 argument work. The claim sits in the article's densest sentence, cut by an ellipsis, so students must reread it in full, but the evidence itself is short and plainly stated.
- Estimated difficulty
- Moderate: several steps, or a close reading with one strong distractor.
- Thinking it demands
- Depth of knowledge 2, skills and concepts · mainly evaluate
- What makes it hard
- The right answer is reworded moderate
- Reading between the lines minor
- Evidence
- Answered from several paragraphs or stanzas
- Reading level
- Passage: about grade 10, 829 words; question and choices: about grade 9, 89 words.
- Corrected from the DOE handbook
- A reversed statement of the author’s claim in the explanation was corrected.
- Students, last 30 days
- Not enough answers yet to show (it takes 10).
Why it is hard, traps and wrong answers (shows the answer)
Why it is hard
The claim is about cause, what readers expect shaping how they read, so evidence about results, such as weaker recall, does not reach it. The key evidence sits in the same paragraph as the claim, just before it, but the right choice rewords it and generalizes it to “studies” and “students”. The most tempting wrong answer describes children interacting with e-books, a behavior, but one driven by the e-books' features rather than by readers' expectations.
The right answer is reworded moderate Choosing the answer
The right choice turns paragraph 9's “didn't regulate their study time with digital books like they did with paper texts” into “used their study time less productively”, while another choice echoes paragraph 4's chronology test. (Freedle & Kostin, 1993; Kirsch & Mosenthal, 1990)
Reading between the lines minor Working it out
The student must see that how readers manage their study time is a way of approaching a text, and that it reflects what they expect from a screen. (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994; Kintsch, 1998)
Strategy: Put the quoted claim into your own words, naming what does the affecting and what is affected, then ask which choice is evidence of exactly that relationship.
Traps
- Supports only part of the claim: In a question about evidence: a line that backs one half of the claim but not the other, or a related point rather than the claim itself.
- Twists what the text says: Uses the text's topic and ideas but changes what it says: who did it, how much, when, or why.
The wrong answers, classified
B Supports only part of the claim (King et al., 2004; Thissen, Steinberg & Fitzpatrick, 1989)
Sees children interacting physically with enhanced e-books as a way of approaching the text, but paragraph 3 credits the e-books' features for that, not what readers expected.
C Twists what the text says (King et al., 2004)
Misstates the adult Kindle study, where readers did worse only at putting events in order and about the same on other tests, and reports a result rather than an approach.
D Supports only part of the claim (King et al., 2004; Thissen, Steinberg & Fitzpatrick, 1989)
Accurately recalls the Kindle readers' weaker chronology scores, but a result of e-reading says nothing about the habits or expectations that the claim says shape it.
What was corrected from the DOE handbook, and why
- Explanation: The handbook ends its explanation of choice A by saying the evidence demonstrates “the author’s claim that expectations of e-book reading might be affected by how people approach the text.” The claim in paragraph 9, quoted in the question, runs the other way: “our expectations of e-book reading . . . might affect how we approach the text.” The sentence now reads “might affect how people approach the text.”
Working it out, step by step
Put the claim in plain words
Expectations are what you think something will be like. How you approach a text is the way you go about reading it. So the claim says that what we expect from e-books may change how we read them. The cause is our expectations. The effect is how we read.
Find evidence about how people read
Look just before the claim, in paragraph 9. In one test, “participants didn’t regulate their study time with digital books like they did with paper texts, leading to worse performances.” To regulate means to control or plan. So people handled their study time differently with e-books, and they did worse.
Connect the evidence to the claim
Planning your study time is part of how you approach a text. People planned differently on a screen, perhaps because they expected screen reading to be different. That is the very link the claim describes: what you expect shapes how you read.
Check each choice
- A fits: using study time “less productively,” or less well, is a way of approaching the text.
- B is wrong because the kids played with the e-books because of the books’ features, not their own expectations.
- C is wrong because it misstates the adult study, where e-book readers did worse only at putting events in order.
- D is wrong because poor memory of events is a result, not a way of approaching the text.
Watch out: B and D tell what happened with e-books. But the claim is about readers’ habits and where they come from.
Choose the answer
Only A shows readers going about their reading differently with e-books. So the answer is A.
Why this answer and not the closest wrong one
B comes closest, because touching and playing with an e-book is a kind of behavior. But paragraph 3 credits the books’ interactive features for that, not what readers expected. A shows readers managing their study time differently with screens, which is how they approached the text.
More questions like this
The original DOE question
The passage “5 Reasons Physical Books Might Be Better Than E-Books” as printed (pages 58–59)
