The debate on electronic versus paper reading would seem to be a simple, at first glance: do people have a more difficult or an easier time in reading from a screen? But in fact there are a number of related questions about the process of reading--the comprehension and "active engagement," as I put it above, with the text, which are affected by the difference in medium. In particular, these experts seem agreed that there is a tendency to distraction and a dramatically shortened attention span that attends reading from a screen. This is partially an effect of our experience of reading hypertext, on sites like the NY Times or Wikipedia or whatnot, which in knowledge is always produced in small, quickly consumable segments. But a novel or a book of philosophy requires something quite different.
Check it out:
http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/14/does-the-brain-like-e-books/
I would be curious to hear your opinions, particularly since probably most of you have grown up in this digital environment ...
18 comments:
Like Sandra Aamodt said, I think as the technology improves, the reading will be the same on both sources. I think what we will lose will not be an ease of reading or comprehension, but a change in finding materials we want to read. People will be able to find what they want to read much more easily. But that will result in people never accidentally stumbling upon a new book on a new topic which they didn't even know about. I think this will be the great loss in converting to electronic reading. Getting book recommendations from software programs won't open up new areas of interest for people, it'll just lead them in the directions they've already explored.
I honestly think it depends to what you're used to. If I have to do a long reading for class I can't really read it on a screen, it just feels like it takes more effort than when on paper. While smaller blurbs, like a blog, seem a little more attractive online. But as more and more literature gets transferred online, I'm pretty sure people will get accustomed to it, and any deficiencies experienced with electronic reading in the past will begin to fade out.
One can surely argue that by using these electronic books, we are saving trees and not creating as much litter. I personally find the electronic book to be convenient but at the same time I also find it to be tedious because I want the ability to write in the margins to fully understand the material being presented to me. If the electronic book offered this option of allowing the user to write somewhere in the margins, I would then support this machinery.
As per Dan's comment, there would probably be an iPhone app in which you can use a stylus to mark up the text. Heh, kidding... sort of. It doesn't sound so far-fetched.
Although I actually think it's sad that we've become so dependent on technology that physical books may become as unpopular as tape cassettes. I always wonder about power outages and system shutdowns that could hinder our ability to go about our lives since we're so dependent on these gadgets that could be very susceptible to be destroyed.
Natasha makes a very good point about system shutdowns, etc because you have to think, what would happen if suddenly our power went out. All our information saved on computers and what not would be gone!
Just recently I stumbled upon a youtube clip and it stated that by the year 2049 there will be a super computer that will have more knowledge capacity than everyone in the entire world. Since this article presses upon the issue of technology taking over the old ways of life, this scares me. I believe that becoming so dependent on technology will eventually lead to something terrible, so we should keep our old fashion paper and ink!
Although dependency on technology is scary, there are other factors that I find far more threatening and despairing. Which causes me to question if technology makes our lives easier. I personally always print out articles whether it is mandatory or not. The tangibility of the article makes the assignment that much more real and pressing in my mind. The advancement of technology seems to come at a high price. Do eBooks mean the future dismiss of libraries? That thought is heart wrenching. To deny a child the experience of being the proud card holder of a library card and the special moment that is produced when the child takes out his first book is hard to fathom.
The conversion of old books into electronic form seems quite intriguing. Such a conversion would help me as well as many other students out because it would ease the burden of having to carry around 10lb textbooks to and from class. In my case, such a heavy load creates uncomfortable back and shoulder pains, which sometimes take over a week to go away. Therefore, I'd appreciate such a conversion because then I'd essentially only need a laptop for school. However, the only problem I have is that reading a long literary piece online seems to be more difficult to read than a printed out copy. Therefore, I think that younger students should be trained as well as encouraged to read literary works on a screen so that they can become efficient at "electronic reading".
I think the medium does have something to do with the reading experience. When I take out a book to read, I only have the book to concentrate on. However, if I'm going to read something on my iphone, I have distractions everywhere. Personally, I need to be completely focused on the material to retain it the best.
Also, on Natasha's point, how would the world function without electronics. Everything we have from banks to books can now be done electronically. At times I wonder if we were meant to have all of this technology.
Personally I prefer the tangibility of a book, the naturalness, the smell of the pages, the novelty of the book shelf stacked with one's cherished books stored from a life time of reading. I am sure many arguments can be made about accessibility, tree conservation, and the practicality of the electronic form. However, as humanity trends more and more to the electronic age of ease, of Wii Fitness, and text messaging, I wonder what will become of the natural order of things.
I feel that it comes down to personal preference. I could never sit down and read a novel from a screen but who’s to say that others can't. I was never raised reading books from scenes, so to me it just feels weird. But maybe over time as this device becomes more and more popular, reading from a screen and not a book will become the norm.
A perfect example of this is the MCAT. It was once on paper but now it is computer based. Overall, the computer-based scores are looking lower than the paper-based exams did, maybe this is due to the fact of staring onto a computer screen for hours and not having the paper format that one grew up having on tests like the ACT and SAT. Well if the MCAT is already computer based then it looks as if computer based "stuff" is the future. I don't like it.
I would have to say that as some of my classmates have said, it comes down to personal preference on this issue. Speaking for myself, I would consider reading on print a much easier experience than reading through technology. Not only does technology seem to leave that feeling in which you eyes feel burned out, but it also seems to deviate us away from our text. There are so many distractions when we try to read things online and to keep concentration seems to be quite difficult at times, especially when the task is taxing. All in all, in my experience, I would have to say reading text through technology is a much less efficient experience.
When put up against each other, tangible text easily trumps electronic reading. I can interpret and engage the text when I hold and read a book, but when I try and do the same with hypertext, my eyes get that “melting” feeling. Electronic reading has it merits in the forms of real-time news, but when it relates to novels and books, those should be left as tangible items. Really good books are referred to as a "page turners," and digital text will never have that honor.
I think I am biased to say this since I work at the library, but tangible books are far more intriguing than ebooks and Kindles. The library's stacks are filled with thousands of books varying in size, shape and color. Each book I pick up has a character and reading a physical book is much more of an experience than reading an electronic book. I understand that ebooks do have some positive contribution to reading, but they have also been said to contribute to ADHD and slower reading speeds. One must throw away distractions that come with online reading and focus purely on the reading at hand.
I really don't think the question of personal preference broaches Chris' point, which seems to me at the heart of all of the commentators' concerns: how does the medium shape our cognitive experience? Certainly we don't have the same experience between reading a book and watching a movie. Ebooks have the capacity to integrate the two--and will probably be required to do so by market forces. Assuming that is so, what effects will this have on the way that we think?
After years of being excited about the possibilities of multi-tasking, I really think it's not good for any kind of productive, meaningful exercise. If you're a data jockey in an office, or a service employee, multi-tasking will be absolutely necessary. But there are a lot of other jobs that will be negatively affected by it.
As for the fate of libraries, I too would worry for their fate. There is nothing like browsing the shelves of the library, aimlessly, and the things that one discovers. I can't imagine how the internet would recreate that experience.
Post a Comment