skip to main content
10.1145/3492724.3492727acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmexihcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

An Exploratory Study on Academic Reading Contexts, Technology, and Strategies

Published: 13 January 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Reading is a fundamental activity to academic performance at all levels. People’s ability to read efficiently in academic contexts is affected by many factors, including their environment and the technology that they use. In past decades the media that people use to read as well as their reading environments have changed substantially; e.g., people now can use smart phones to read academic material and they are often distracted by notifications. Better reading can potentially be supported through new technologies and the re-design of existing technologies which play a role in the process, but to embark on such design improvements we firstly need to understand the current practices, technologies, preferences, and environments that people use for reading. We present an exploratory study from a survey of 110 participants, offering an updated picture of their reading technology use, environments and strategies. Amongst our main contribution are the results of our analysis, which show that despite a generally negative attitude towards the ability of digital technologies to support focus, there is a pervasive use of technologies in many forms. We also identified that there is a relation between people’s awareness of internal interruptions and their understanding of the negative effect of digital technologies in their attention span. We believe that these results are informative for the design and introduction of new technologies that will support future academic reading endeavours.

Supplementary Material

a3-rocha-supplement (a3-rocha-supplement.ppt)
Appendices

References

[1]
Annette Adler, Anuj Gujar, Beverly L. Harrison, Kenton O’Hara, and Abigail Sellen. 1998. A Diary Study of Work-Related Reading: Design Implications for Digital Reading Devices. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Los Angeles, California, USA) (CHI ’98). ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., USA, 241–248. https://doi.org/10.1145/274644.274679
[2]
MJ Adler and C Van Doren. 2014. How to read a book: The classic guide to intelligent reading (Touchstone ed.).
[3]
Mihai Bâce, Sander Staal, and Andreas Bulling. 2020. Quantification of Users’ Visual Attention During Everyday Mobile Device Interactions. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376449
[4]
Naomi S Baron. 2015. Words onscreen: The fate of reading in a digital world. Oxford University Press, USA.
[5]
Naomi S Baron, Rachelle M Calixte, and Mazneen Havewala. 2017. The persistence of print among university students: An exploratory study. Telematics and Informatics 34, 5 (2017), 590–604.
[6]
Duncan P. Brumby, Christian P. Janssen, and Gloria Mark. [n.d.]. How Do Interruptions Affect Productivity?In Rethinking Productivity in Software Engineering. https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.library.uvic.ca/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4842-4221-6_9
[7]
James E Cane, Fabrice Cauchard, and Ulrich W Weger. 2012. The time-course of recovery from interruption during reading: Eye movement evidence for the role of interruption lag and spatial memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 65, 7(2012), 1397–1413.
[8]
Nicholas Carr. 2020. The shallows: What the Internet is doing to our brains. WW Norton & Company.
[9]
Anne-Marie Chang, Daniel Aeschbach, Jeanne F Duffy, and Charles A Czeisler. 2015. Evening use of light-emitting eReaders negatively affects sleep, circadian timing, and next-morning alertness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112, 4 (2015), 1232–1237.
[10]
Laura Dabbish, Gloria Mark, and Víctor M. González. 2011. Why Do i Keep Interrupting Myself? Environment, Habit and Self-Interruption. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (CHI ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3127–3130. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979405
[11]
Sidney D’Mello, Kristopher Kopp, Robert Earl Bixler, and Nigel Bosch. 2016. Attending to Attention: Detecting and Combating Mind Wandering during Computerized Reading. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, California, USA) (CHI EA ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1661–1669. https://doi.org/10.1145/2851581.2892329
[12]
Sidney D’Mello, Andrew Olney, Claire Williams, and Patrick Hays. 2012. Gaze tutor: A gaze-reactive intelligent tutoring system. International Journal of human-computer studies 70, 5 (2012), 377–398.
[13]
David Dunning. 2011. Chapter five - The Dunning–Kruger Effect: On Being Ignorant of One’s Own Ignorance. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, James M. Olson and Mark P. Zanna (Eds.). Vol. 44. Academic Press, 247–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-385522-0.00005-6
[14]
Warwick B Elley. 1992. How in the world do students read? IEA study of reading literacy.(1992).
[15]
Lauren Fell. 2020. Trust and COVID-19: Implications for Interpersonal, Workplace, Institutional, and Information-Based Trust. Digit. Gov.: Res. Pract. 2, 1, Article 10 (Nov. 2020), 5 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3428472
[16]
David P Fernandez, Daria J Kuss, and Mark D Griffiths. 2020. Short-term abstinence effects across potential behavioral addictions: A systematic review. Clinical Psychology Review 76 (2020), 101828.
[17]
Steven R Fischer. 2004. A history of reading. Reaktion books.
[18]
Cyrus K Foroughi, Nicole E Werner, Daniela Barragán, and Deborah A Boehm-Davis. 2015. Interruptions disrupt reading comprehension.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 144, 3 (2015), 704.
[19]
Juliane Franze, Kim Marriott, and Michael Wybrow. 2014. What Academics Want When Reading Digitally. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM Symposium on Document Engineering (Fort Collins, Colorado, USA) (DocEng ’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 199–202. https://doi.org/10.1145/2644866.2644894
[20]
Jonathan Grudin. 2016. Technology and Academic Lives. Commun. ACM 59, 11 (Oct. 2016), 37–39. https://doi.org/10.1145/2911980
[21]
Jonathan Haber, Miguel A. Nacenta, and Sheelagh Carpendale. 2014. Paper vs. Tablets: The Effect of Document Media in Co-Located Collaborative Work. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces(Como, Italy) (AVI ’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1145/2598153.2598170
[22]
Michael Harris. 2018. I have forgotten how to read. The Globe and Mail (2018). https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/i-have-forgotten-how-toread/article37921379/
[23]
Rex Hartson and Pardha S Pyla. 2012. The UX Book: Process and guidelines for ensuring a quality user experience. Elsevier.
[24]
Matthew Hong, Anne Marie Piper, Nadir Weibel, Simon Olberding, and James Hollan. 2012. Microanalysis of Active Reading Behavior to Inform Design of Interactive Desktop Workspaces. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces (Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA) (ITS ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 215–224. https://doi.org/10.1145/2396636.2396670
[25]
Derrick M Kiger. 1989. Effects of music information load on a reading comprehension task. Perceptual and motor skills 69, 2 (1989), 531–534.
[26]
David M. Levy. 1997. I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: Reading and Attention in Digital Libraries. In Proceedings of the Second ACM International Conference on Digital Libraries (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA) (DL ’97). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 202–211. https://doi.org/10.1145/263690.263817
[27]
Irene Lopatovska and Deanna Sessions. 2016. Understanding academic reading in the context of information-seeking. Library Review (2016).
[28]
R Ignacio Madrid, Herre Van Oostendorp, and Mari Carmen Puerta Melguizo. 2009. The effects of the number of links and navigation support on cognitive load and learning with hypertext: The mediating role of reading order. Computers in Human Behavior 25, 1 (2009), 66–75.
[29]
Alberto Manguel. 2014. A history of reading. Penguin.
[30]
Gloria Mark, Shamsi Iqbal, and Mary Czerwinski. 2017. How Blocking Distractions Affects Workplace Focus and Productivity. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers(Maui, Hawaii) (UbiComp ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 928–934. https://doi.org/10.1145/3123024.3124558
[31]
Diane Mizrachi, Joumana Boustany, Serap Kurbanoğlu, Güleda Doğan, Tania Todorova, and Polona Vilar. 2016. The academic reading format international study (ARFIS): Investigating students around the world. In European Conference on Information Literacy. Springer, 215–227.
[32]
K Mokhtari and C Reichard. 2002. Metacognitive awareness of reading strategies inventory (MARSI) Version 1.0. Journal of Educational Psychology 49, 2 (2002), 249–259.
[33]
Johannes Naumann. 2015. A model of online reading engagement: Linking engagement, navigation, and performance in digital reading. Computers in Human Behavior 53 (2015), 263–277.
[34]
Johannes Naumann, Tobias Richter, Ursula Christmann, and Norbert Groeben. 2008. Working memory capacity and reading skill moderate the effectiveness of strategy training in learning from hypertext. Learning and Individual Differences 18, 2 (2008), 197–213.
[35]
Karalyn E Patterson. 1981. Neuropsychological approaches to the study of reading. British Journal of Psychology 72, 2 (1981), 151–174.
[36]
Morgan N. Price, Bill N. Schilit, and Gene Golovchinsky. 1998. XLibris: The Active Reading Machine. In CHI 98 Conference Summary on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Los Angeles, California, USA) (CHI ’98). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 22–23. https://doi.org/10.1145/286498.286510
[37]
Prolific. [n.d.]. Prolific. https://www.prolific.co
[38]
Qualtrics. [n.d.]. Qualtrics XM. https://www.qualtrics.com
[39]
Ying Que, Yueyuan Zheng, Janet H. Hsiao, and Xiao Hu. 2020. Exploring the Effect of Personalized Background Music on Reading Comprehension. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries in 2020 (Virtual Event, China) (JCDL ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1145/3383583.3398543
[40]
Elissa M. Redmiles. 2020. User Concerns 8 Tradeoffs in Technology-Facilitated COVID-19 Response. Digit. Gov.: Res. Pract. 2, 1, Article 6 (Nov. 2020), 12 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3428093
[41]
Judith C Roberts and Keith A Roberts. 2008. Deep reading, cost/benefit, and the construction of meaning: Enhancing reading comprehension and deep learning in sociology courses. Teaching Sociology 36, 2 (2008), 125–140.
[42]
Larry D Rosen, L Mark Carrier, and Nancy A Cheever. 2013. Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced task-switching while studying. Computers in Human Behavior 29, 3 (2013), 948–958.
[43]
David M. Sanbonmatsu, David L. Strayer, Nathan Medeiros-Ward, and Jason M. Watson. 2013. Who Multi-Tasks and Why? Multi-Tasking Ability, Perceived Multi-Tasking Ability, Impulsivity, and Sensation Seeking. PLOS ONE 8, 1 (Jan. 2013), e54402. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0054402 Publisher: Public Library of Science.
[44]
Abigail J Sellen and Richard HR Harper. 2003. The myth of the paperless office. MIT press.
[45]
Hirohito Shibata and Kentaro Takano. 2014. Reading from Paper versus Reading from a Touch-Based Tablet Device in Proofreading. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (London, United Kingdom) (JCDL ’14). IEEE Press, 433–434.
[46]
Angela Siegel, Mark Zarb, and Teri Balser. 2021. Learning from COVID. In Proceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (Virtual Event, USA) (SIGCSE ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1356. https://doi.org/10.1145/3408877.3439521
[47]
Linda S Siegel. 1993. The development of reading. In Advances in child development and behavior. Vol. 24. Elsevier, 63–97.
[48]
Robert E Slavin, Alan Cheung, Cynthia Groff, and Cynthia Lake. 2008. Effective reading programs for middle and high schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Reading Research Quarterly 43, 3 (2008), 290–322.
[49]
Richard J Telfer and Robert S Kann. 1984. Reading achievement, free reading, watching TV, and listening to music. Journal of Reading 27, 6 (1984), 536–539.
[50]
Alexander Thayer, Charlotte P. Lee, Linda H. Hwang, Heidi Sales, Pausali Sen, and Ninad Dalal. 2011. The Imposition and Superimposition of Digital Reading Technology: The Academic Potential of e-Readers. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (CHI ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2917–2926. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979375
[51]
VERBI Software. [n.d.]. MAXQDA. https://www.maxqda.com
[52]
Johannes Vosskuhl, René J. Huster, and Christoph S. Herrmann. 2015. Increase in short-term memory capacity induced by down-regulating individual theta frequency via transcranial alternating current stimulation. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 9 (2015). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00257 Publisher: Frontiers.
[53]
Adrian F Ward, Kristen Duke, Ayelet Gneezy, and Maarten W Bos. 2017. Brain drain: The mere presence of one’s own smartphone reduces available cognitive capacity. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research 2, 2 (2017), 140–154.
[54]
Eileen Wood, Lucia Zivcakova, Petrice Gentile, Karin Archer, Domenica De Pasquale, and Amanda Nosko. 2012. Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with technology on real-time classroom learning. Computers & Education 58, 1 (2012), 365–374.
[55]
Han Zhang, Kevin Miller, Raymond Cleveland, and Kai Cortina. 2018. How listening to music affects reading: Evidence from eye tracking.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 44, 11(2018), 1778.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
MexIHC '21: Proceedings of the 8th Mexican Conference on Human-Computer Interaction
December 2021
47 pages
ISBN:9781450387170
DOI:10.1145/3492724
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 13 January 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Reading behaviour
  2. attention
  3. digital technologies.

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

MexIHC' 21

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 20 of 40 submissions, 50%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 144
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)37
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)9
Reflects downloads up to 08 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media