The Effects of Gender and Reading Mediums on Reading Comprehension
Abstract
The present study examined the effects of gender and different types of reading mediums on reading comprehension among students. Forty undergraduates were asked to read four psychopathology texts (two digital texts and two print texts). Results showed that there was no significant difference in reading comprehension between gender. However, the mean scores obtained by females were slightly higher than males. Results also showed that reading comprehension between the two groups (print versus digital) was not significantly different. Nevertheless, the mean scores revealed that participants’ performance in print reading was slightly better than digital reading, suggesting that participants may have benefited a bit more from print reading. The present findings shed further light on the effects of digital reading and print reading on reading comprehension.
Keywords: Digital reading; Gender differences; Print reading; Reading comprehension
References
Ackerman, R., & Goldsmith, M. (2011). Metacognitive regulation of text learning: On screen versus on paper. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(1), 18-12.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022086
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3
Boyle, G. J., Furedy, J. J., Neumann, D. L., & Westbury, H. R. (2010). Sex differences in verbal and visual-spatial tasks under different hemispheric visualfield presentation conditions. Perceptual and motor skills, 110(2), 396-410.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.110.2.396-410
Farah, C. S., & Maybury, T. (2009). Implementing digital technology to enhance student learning of pathology. European Journal of Dental Education, 13(3), 172-178. doi: 10.1111/j.1600- 0579.2009.00570.x
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0579.2009.00570.x
Garland, K. J., & Noyes, J. M. (2004). Computer experience: A poor predictor of computer attitudes. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(6), 823-840.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2003.11.010
Gould, J. D., & Grischkowsky, N. (1984). Doing the same work with hard copy and cathode ray tube (CRT) computer terminals. Human Factors, 26, 323- 337. doi:10.1177/001872088402600- 308 Kerr,
https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088402600308
M. A., & Symons, S. E. (2006). Computerized presentation of text: Effects on children's reading of informational material. Reading and Writing, 19(1), 1-19.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-003-8128-y
Kimura, D. (2002). Sex differences in the brain. Scientific American, 287, 32- 37. Lee, D. S., Ko, Y. H.,
Shen, I. H., & Chao, C. Y. (2011). Effect of light source, ambient illumination, character size and interline spacing on visual performance and visual fatigue with electronic paper displays. Displays, 32(1), 1-7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.displa.2010.09.001
Liu, Z., & Huang, X. (2008). Gender differences in the online reading environment. Journal of Documentation, 64(4), 616-626.
https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410810884101
Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Brønnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 58, 61-68.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.12.002
McCrea-Andrews, H. J. (2014). A comparison of adolescents' digital and print reading experiences: Does mode matter? South Carolina, SC: Tiger Prints, Clemson University.
Muter, P., Latremoullie, S. A., Treurniet, W. C. & Beam, P. (1982). Extended reading of continuous text on television screens. Human Factors, 24(5), 501- 508.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088202400501
Oakhill, J. & Yuill, N. (1996). Higher order factors in comprehension disability: processes and remediation. In Cornoldi and Oakhill (eds.) Reading comprehension difficulties. Processes and intervention.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1- 6. Proaps, A. B., & Bliss, J. P. (2014). The effects of text presentation format on reading comprehension and video game performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 41-47.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.039
Schumacher, P. & Morahan-Martin, J. (2001). Gender, internet and computer attitudes and experiences. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(1), 95-110.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(00)00032-7
Seymour, P. H. K., & Evans, H. M. (1994). Levels of phonological awareness and learning to read. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 6, 221- 250.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01027084
Singer, L. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2017). Reading across mediums: Effects of reading digital and print texts on comprehension and calibration. The Journal of Experimental Education, 85(1), 155-172.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2016.1143794
Speck, O., Ernst, T., Braun, J., Koch, C., Miller, E., & Chang, L. (2000). Gender differences in the educational organization of the brain for working memory. NeuroReport, 11, 2581- 2585.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00001756-200008030-00046
Stoop, J., Kreutzer, P., & Kircz, J. (2013). Reading and learning from screen versus print: A study in changing habits; Part 1. New Library World, 114, 284- 300. doi:10.1108/NLW-01-2013-0012
https://doi.org/10.1108/NLW-01-2013-0012
Sun, S. Y., Shieh, C, J., & Huang, K. P. (2013). A research on comprehension differences between print and screen reading. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences Special Issue, 16, 87-101.
https://doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v16i5.640
Vekiri, I., & Chronaki, A. (2008). Gender issues in technology use: Perceived social support, computer self-efficacy and value beliefs, and computer use beyond school. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1392-1404.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.01.003
Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1994). Development of readingrelated phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bi-directional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 30(1), 73-87.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.30.1.73
Wallis, C. (2010). The impacts of media multitasking on children's learning and development: Report from a research
March 2020 seminar. New York, NY: Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop. Wastlund, E. (2007). Experimental studies of human-computer interaction: Working memory and mental workload in complex cognition.
Gotebord, Sweden: Department of Psychology, Gotenburg University. Wu, J. Y. (2013). Gender differences in online reading engagement, metacognitive strategies, navigation skills and reading literacy. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30, 252- 271.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12054
Zickuhr, K., Rainie, L., Purcell, K., Madden, M., & Brenner, J. (2012). Younger American's reading and library habits. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center
Copyright Transfer Statement for Journal
1) In signing this statement, the author(s) grant UNIMAS Publisher an exclusive license to publish their original research papers. The author(s) also grant UNIMAS Publisher permission to reproduce, recreate, translate, extract or summarize, and to distribute and display in any forms, formats, and media. The author(s) can reuse their papers in their future printed work without first requiring permission from UNIMAS Publisher, provided that the author(s) acknowledge and reference publication in the Journal.
2) For open access articles, the author(s) agree that their articles published under UNIMAS Publisher are distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-SA (Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, for non-commercial purposes, provided the original work of the author(s) is properly cited.
3) The author(s) is/are responsible to ensure his or her or their submitted work is original and does not infringe any existing copyright, trademark, patent, statutory right, or propriety right of others. Corresponding author(s) has (have) obtained permission from all co-authors prior to submission to the journal. Upon submission of the manuscript, the author(s) agree that no similar work has been or will be submitted or published elsewhere in any language. If submitted manuscript includes materials from others, the authors have obtained the permission from the copyright owners.
4) In signing this statement, the author(s) declare(s) that the researches in which they have conducted are in compliance with the current laws of the respective country and UNIMAS Journal Publication Ethics Policy. Any experimentation or research involving human or the use of animal samples must obtain approval from Human or Animal Ethics Committee in their respective institutions. The author(s) agree and understand that UNIMAS Publisher is not responsible for any compensational claims or failure caused by the author(s) in fulfilling the above-mentioned requirements. The author(s) must accept the responsibility for releasing their materials upon request by Chief Editor or UNIMAS Publisher.
5) The author(s) should have participated sufficiently in the work and ensured the appropriateness of the content of the article. The author(s) should also agree that he or she has no commercial attachments (e.g. patent or license arrangement, equity interest, consultancies, etc.) that might pose any conflict of interest with the submitted manuscript. The author(s) also agree to make any relevant materials and data available upon request by the editor or UNIMAS Publisher.
