Article published In: Scientific Study of Literature
Vol. 4:2 (2014) ► pp.150–177
Lost in an iPad
Narrative engagement on paper and tablet
Anne Mangen | Department of Archivistics, Library and Information Studies, Oslo & Akershus University College, Norway / 2The Reading Centre, University of Stavanger, Norway
Published online: 30 March 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.4.2.02man
https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.4.2.02man
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of reading medium and a paratext manipulation on aspects of narrative engagement. In a 2 (medium: booklet vs. iPad) by 2 (paratext: fiction vs. nonfiction) between-subjects factorial design, the study combined state oriented measures of narrative engagement and a newly developed measure of interface interference. Results indicated that, independently of prior experience with reading on electronic media, readers in the iPad condition reported dislocation within the text and awkwardness in handling their medium. Also, iPad readers who believed they were reading nonfiction were less likely to report narrative coherence and transportation, while booklet readers who believed they were reading nonfiction were, if anything, more likely to report narrative coherence. Finally, booklet (but not iPad) readers were more likely to report a close association between transportation and empathy. Implications of these findings for cognitive and emotional engagement with textual narratives on paper and tablet are discussed.
References (88)
Ackerman, R., & Goldsmith, M. (2011). Metacognitive regulation of text learning: On screen versus on paper. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(1), 18–32.
Altmann, U., Bohrn, I.C., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W., & Jacobs, A.M. (2012). Fact versus fiction: How paratextual information shapes our reading processes. Social cognitive and affective neuroscience (Advance Access published September 29, 2012).
Appel, M., & Malečkar, B. (2012). The influence of paratext on narrative persuasion: Fact, fiction, or fake? Human Communication Research, 38(4), 459–484.
Baccino, T., & Pynte, J. (1994). Spatial coding and discourse models during text reading. Language and Cognitive Processes, 91, 143–155.
Bal, P.M., & Veltkamp, M. (2013). How does fiction reading influence empathy? An experimental investigation on the role of emotional transportation. PloS one, 8(1).
Benedetto, S., Drai-Zerbib, V., Pedrotti, M., Tissier, G., & Baccino, T. (2013). E-readers and visual fatigue. PloS one, 8(12), e83676.
Bennett, S., & Maton, K. (2010). Beyond the ‘digital natives’ debate: Towards a more nuanced understanding of students’ technology experiences. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 261, 321–331.
Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775–786.
Bradford, J.W. (2012). A case study examining the reading and study habits of gifted readers in the context of deep reading. Doctoral thesis, Kennesaw State University, GA, USA. Retrieved from [URL]
Braun, I.K., & Cupchik, G. (2001). Phenomenological and quantitative analyses of absorption in literary passages. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 19(1), 85–109.
Busselle, R., & Bilandzic, H. (2008). Fictionality and perceived realism in experiencing stories: A model of narrative comprehension and engagement. Communication Theory, 18(2), 255–280.
Cataldo, M.G., & Oakhill, J. (2000). Why are poor comprehenders inefficient searchers? An investigation into the effects of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 791–799.
Cipielewski, J., & Stanovich, K.E. (1992). Predicting growth in reading ability from children’s exposure to print. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 54(1), 74–89.
Derntl, B., Finkelmeyer, A., Eickhoff, S., Kellermann, T., Falkenberg, D.I., Schneider, F., & Habel, U. (2010). Multidimensional assessment of empathic abilities: Neural correlates and gender differences. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 35(1), 67–82.
Djikic, M., Oatley, K., Zoeterman, S., & Peterson, J.B. (2009). On being moved by art: How reading fiction transforms the self. Creativity Research Journal, 21(1), 24–29.
Dyson, M.C., & Haselgrove, M. (2000). The effects of reading speed and reading patterns on the understanding of text read from screen. Journal of Research in Reading, 23(2), 210.
Eklundh, K.S. (1992). Problems in achieving a global perspective of the text in computer-based writing. Instructional Science, 21(1), 73–84.
Eveland, W.P., Jr., & Dunwoody, S. (2002). An investigation of elaboration and selective scanning as mediators of learning from the Web versus print. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46(1), 34–53.
Feagin, S.L. (1996). Reading with feeling: The aesthetics of appreciation. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Gerlach, J., & Buxmann, P. (2011). Investigating the acceptance of electronic books: The impact of haptic dissonance on innovation adoption. European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS).
Gerrig, R.J. (1993). Experiencing narrative worlds: On the psychological activities of reading. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Green, M.C., & Brock, T.C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 701–721.
. (2002). In the mind’s eye: Transportation-imagery model of narrative persuasion. In M.C. Green, J.J. Strange, & T.C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations (pp. 315–341). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Haas, C. (1996). Writing technology: Studies on the materiality of literacy. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Hakemulder, J.F. (2004). Foregrounding and its effect on readers’ perception. Discourse Processes, 38(2), 193–218.
Helsper, E.J., & Eynon, R. (2010). Digital natives: Where is the evidence? British Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 503–520.
Jeong, H. (2012). A comparison of the influence of electronic books and paper books on reading comprehension, eye fatigue, and perception. The Electronic Library, 301, 390–408.
Johnson, D.R. (2012). Transportation into a story increases empathy, prosocial behavior, and perceptual bias toward fearful expressions. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(2), 150–155.
Jones, C., Ramanau, R., Cross, S., & Healing, G. (2010). Net generation or digital natives: Is there a distinct new generation entering university? Computers & Education, 54(3), 722–732.
Kamil, M.L., Pearson, P.D., Moje, E.B. & Afflerbach, P.P. (Eds.) (2011). Handbook of Reading Research. New York & London: Routledge.
Kidd, D.C., & Castano, E. (2013). Reading literary fiction improves theory of mind. Science, 342(6156), 377–380.
Kim, H. & Kim, J. (2013). Reading from an LCD monitor versus paper: Teenagers’ reading performance. International Journal of Research Studies in Educational Technology (IJRSET), 21, 1–10.
Kretzschmar, F., Pleimling, D., Hosemann, J., Füssel, S., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2013). Subjective impressions do not mirror online reading effort: Concurrent EEG-eyetracking evidence from the reading of books and digital media. PloS one, 8(2), e56178.
Kuiken, D., Campbell, P., & Sopčák, P. (2012). The experiencing questionnaire: Locating exceptional reading moments. Scientific Study of Literature, 2(2), 243–272.
Kuiken, D., & Oliver, M.B. (2013). Aesthetic engagement during moments of suffering. Scientific Study of Literature, 3(2), 294–321.
Liu, Z. (2005). Reading behavior in the digital environment: Changes in reading behavior over the past ten years. Journal of Documentation, 61(6), 700–712.
. (2012). Digital reading: An overview. Chinese Journal of Library and Information Science Vol. 5(1).
Livingstone, S. (2012). Critical reflections on the benefits of ICT in education. Oxford review of education, 38(1), 9–24.
. (2010). Digital learning and participation among youth: Critical reflections on future research priorities. International Journal of Learning, 2(2–3), 1–13.
Mangen, A. (2006). New narrative pleasures? A cognitive-phenomenological study of the experience of reading digital narrative fictions. Doctoral thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology [NTNU], Trondheim, Norway. Retrieved from [URL]
. (2008). Hypertext fiction reading: Haptics and immersion. Journal of research in reading, 31(4), 404–419.
Mangen, A., Robinet, P., Olivier, G., & Velay, J.-L. (in prep.). Where in the book and when in the story? Comparing comprehension when reading a mystery story in print and on Kindle.
Mangen, A., Walgermo, B.R., & Brønnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper vs. computer screens: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 581, 61–68.
Mar, R.A., & Oatley, K. (2008). The function of fiction is the abstraction and simulation of social experience. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(3), 173–192.
Mar, R.A., Oatley, K., Hirsh, J., dela Paz, J., & Peterson, J.B. (2006). Bookworms versus nerds: Exposure to fiction versus non-fiction, divergent associations with social ability, and the simulation of fictional social worlds. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(5), 694–712.
Mar, R.A., Oatley, K., & Peterson, J.B. (2009). Exploring the link between reading fiction and empathy: Ruling out individual differences and examining outcomes. Communications, 341, 407–428.
Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56(2), 429–440.
Margolin, S.J., Driscoll, C., Toland, M.J., & Kegler, J.L. (2013). E‐readers, computer screens, or paper: Does reading comprehension change across media platforms? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 271, 512–519.
Mason, R.A., & Just, M.A. (2009). The role of the Theory-of-Mind cortical network in the comprehension of narratives. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3(1), 157–174.
Miall, D.S., & Kuiken, D. (1994). Beyond text theory: Understanding literary response. Discourse Processes, 17(3), 337–352.
. (1999). What is literariness? Three components of literary reading. Discourse Processes, 28(2), 121–138.
Mol, S.E., & Bus, A.G. (2011). To read or not to read: A meta-analysis of print exposure from infancy to early adulthood. Psychological Bulletin, 137(2), 267–296.
Nell, V. (1988). Lost in a book: The psychology of reading for pleasure. New Haven: Yale University Press.
O’Regan, J.K., & Noë, A. (2001). A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(5), 939–973.
Oatley, K. (2011a). Fiction and its study as gateways to the mind. Scientific Study of Literature, 1(1), 153–164.
Oatley, K., Mar, R.A., & Djikic, M. (2012). The Psychology of fiction: Present and future. In I. Jaén & J.J. Simon (Eds.), Cognitive literary studies: Current themes and new directions. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Paris, S.G., Wasik, B.A., & Turner, J.C. (1991). The development of strategic readers. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal & P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research Vol. II (pp. 609–640). New York: Longman.
Pattuelli, M.C., & Rabina, D. (2010). Forms, effects, function: LIS students’ attitudes towards portable e-book readers. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 62(3), 228–244.
Piolat, A., Roussey, J.-Y., & Thunin, O. (1997). Effects of screen presentation on text reading and revising. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 47(4), 565–589.
Reniers, R.L.E.P., Corcoran, R., Drake, R., Shryane, N.M., & Völlm, B.A. (2011). The QCAE: A questionnaire of cognitive and affective empathy. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93(1), 84–95.
Rose, E. 2011. The phenomenology of on-screen reading: University students’ lived experience of digitised text. British Journal of Educational Technology, 421, 515–526.
Rothkopf, E. (1971). Incidental memory for location of information in text. Journal of Verbal Learning and Behavior, 101, 608–613.
Siegenthaler, E., Wurtz, P., Bergamin, P. & Groner, R. (2011). Comparing reading processes on e-ink displays and print. Displays, 32(5), 268–273.
Siegenthaler, E., Schmid, L., Wyss, M., & Wurtz, P. (2012). LCD vs. e-ink: An analysis of the reading behaviour. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 5(5), 1–7.
Spunt, R.P., & Lieberman, M.D. (2011). An integrative model of the neural systems supporting the comprehension of observed emotional behavior. Neuroimage, 591, 3050–3059.
Stanovich, K.E. (1993). Does reading make you smarter? Literacy and the development of verbal intelligence. In W.R. Hayne (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 241) (pp. 133–180): JAI.
Wolf, M. (2007). Proust and the squid: The story and science of the reading brain. New York: HarperCollins.
Wolf, M., & Barzillai, M. (2009). The importance of deep reading. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 32–37.
Wolf, M., Ullman-Shade, C., & Gottwald, S. (2012). The emerging, evolving reading brain in a digital culture: Implications for new readers, children with reading difficulties, and children without schools. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 11(3), 230–240.
Wästlund, E. (2007). Experimental studies of human-computer interaction: Working memory and mental workload in complex cognition. Doctoral thesis, Department of Psychology, Gothenburg University, Sweden. Retrieved from [URL]
Wästlund, E, Reinikka, H, Norlander, T, & Archer, T (2005). Effects of VDT and paper presentation on consumption and production of information: Psychological and physiological factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 211, 377–394.
Zechmeister, E.B., & McKillip, J. (1972). Recall of place on the page. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(5), 446–453.
Zillmann, D. (1991). Empathy: Affect from bearing witness to the emotions of others. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Responding to the screen: Reception and reaction processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 135–167.
Zunshine, L. (2006). Why we read fiction: Theory of mind and the novel. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Press.
Zwaan, R.A. (1993). Aspects of literary comprehension: A cognitive approach. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: J. Benjamins Pub. Co.
Cited by (104)
Cited by 104 other publications
Iverson, Kelly R. & Michael K. Scullin
Kaygısız, Çağrı
Kocaarslan, Mustafa & Burçin Çetin Elsıkma
Kreuzmair, Elias
Mendhakar, Akshay, Katarzyna Sierak, Kirren Chana & Helmut Leder
Merchán-Sánchez-Jara, Javier-Félix, Ludovica Mastrobattista, María Muñoz-Rico, Sara González-Gutiérrez & José-Antonio Cordón-García
Tüchler, Aisha Futura & Kate Cain
Antonini, Alessio, Sam Brooker & Lovro Škopljanac
Dotan, Shahar & Tami Katzir
Hakemulder, Frank & Anne Mangen
Hranchak, Tetiana, Nicholas Dease & Irene Lopatovska
Jeske, Ingrid C.
Kuhn, Axel, Annika Schwabe, Hajo Boomgarden, Lukas Brandl, Günther Stocker, Gerhard Lauer, Ina Brendel-Kepser & Marion Krause-Wolters
Nery, Isabel
Nery, Isabel
Russell, Eric-John
Spjeldnæs, Kari & Faltin Karlsen
Syal, Samira, Marcia Davis, Xiaodong Zhang, Jason Schoeneberger, Samantha Spinney, Douglas J. Mac Iver & Martha Mac Iver
Tang, Huimin, Boon Giin Lee, Dave Towey, Kaiyi Chen, Yichu Fang, Runzhou Zhang & Matthew Pike
van de Ven, Inge
Wu, Jianfeng, Dongfang Jiao, Yuting Cai, Songyang Guo, Yuyun Chen, Chengmin Li & Hongchun Yang
Brüggemann, Thomas, Ulrich Ludewig, Ramona Lorenz & Nele McElvany
Fang, Lan & Li Xiangming
Jennes, Iris, Elias Blanckaert & Wendy Van den Broeck
Kokkola, Lydia
Kwok, Alex Pak Ki, Mian Yan, Zhe Hao Xu, Jing Yun Lin, Run Da Chen & Shi Long Wen
Balling, Gitte & Lisbet Vestergaard
Bon, Esmeralda V. & Michael Burke
Bresó-Grancha, Noemí, María José Jorques-Infante & Carmen Moret-Tatay
Clinton-Lisell, Virginia
Frean, Jennifer
Jian, Yu-Cin
Kovacevic, Nikola, Maheshya Weerasinghe & Jordan Aiko Deja
Kuzmičová, Anežka, Markéta Supa & Martin Nekola
Liu, Wei, Heng Huang, Atif Saleem & Zhongping Zhao
Mastrobattista, Ludovica & Javier Merchán-Sánchez-Jara
Petrová, Zuzana
Strouse, Gabrielle A., Steven R. Chesnut, Lisa A. Newland, Daniel J. Mourlam, Danielle Hertel & Brandon Nutting
Toroujeni, Seyyed Morteza Hashemi
Trasmundi, Sarah Bro, Juan Toro & Anne Mangen
Andersen, Tore Rye, Stefan Kjerkegaard & Birgitte Stougaard Pedersen
Fortunati, Leopoldina & John O’Sullivan
Gaillard, Stefan, Zoril A. Oláh, Stephan Venmans & Michael Burke
Inie, Nanna, Louise Barkhuus & Claus Brabrand
Jeong, You Jin & Gahgene Gweon
Kosch, Lukas, Günther Stocker, Annika Schwabe & Hajo G. Boomgaarden
Rosa, Lotta-Sofia La & Aku-Ville Lehtimäki
Stougaard Pedersen, Birgitte, Maria Engberg, Iben Have, Ayoe Quist Henkel, Sarah Mygind & Helle Bundgaard Svendsen
Bailey, Gavin, Deepak Ranjan Sahoo & Matt Jones
Böhme, Richard & Meike Munser-Kiefer
Guerberof-Arenas, Ana & Antonio Toral
2020. The impact of post-editing and machine translation on creativity and reading experience. Translation Spaces 9:2 ► pp. 255 ff.
Guerberof-Arenas, Ana & Antonio Toral
Haddock, Geoffrey, Colin Foad, Victoria Saul, Will Brown & Rose Thompson
Kuzmičová, Anežka, Theresa Schilhab & Michael Burke
Schwabe, Annika, Lukas Brandl, Hajo G. Boomgaarden & Günther Stocker
Schwabe, Annika, Lukas Brandl, Hajo G. Boomgaarden & Günther Stocker
Soto-Sanfiel, María-Teresa & Ariadna Angulo-Brunet
Vanhees, Claudio, Mathea Simons & Vanessa Joosen
Vanhees, Claudio, Mathea Simons & Vanessa Joosen
Bailey, Gavin
Cavalli, Eddy, Pascale Colé, Hélène Brèthes, Elise Lefevre, Samuel Lascombe & Jean-Luc Velay
Clinton, Virginia
Fabry, Regina E. & Karin Kukkonen
Flynn, Simon & Mark Hardman
Hennig-Thurau, Thorsten & Mark B. Houston
Kucirkova, Natalia
Mangen, Anne, Gérard Olivier & Jean-Luc Velay
Pianzola, Federico, Katalin Bálint & Jessica Weller
2019. Virtual reality as a tool for promoting reading via enhanced narrative absorption and empathy. Scientific Study of Literature 9:2 ► pp. 163 ff.
Xu, Ying, Joanna C. Yau & Stephanie M. Reich
Avramova, Yana R., Patrick De Pelsmacker & Nathalie Dens
Beelders, Tanya R. & Jean-Pierre L. du Plessis
Delgado, Pablo, Cristina Vargas, Rakefet Ackerman & Ladislao Salmerón
Halim, Ferdinand S. S. & Ari Widyanti
Kaakinen, Johanna K., Orsolya Papp-Zipernovszky, Egon Werlen, Nuria Castells, Per Bergamin, Thierry Baccino & Arthur M. Jacobs
2018. Emotional and motivational aspects of digital reading. In Learning to Read in a Digital World [Studies in Written Language and Literacy, 17], ► pp. 141 ff.
Koopman, Eva Maria (Emy)
Kuzmičová, Anežka, Patrícia Dias, Ana Vogrinčič Čepič, Anne‐Mette Bech Albrechtslund, André Casado, Marina Kotrla Topić, Xavier Mínguez López, Skans Kersti Nilsson & Inês Teixeira‐Botelho
Matheson, Heath E. & Lawrence W. Barsalou
Schugar, Jordan & Heather Schugar
Turner, Rose & Fatima M. Felisberti
2018. Relationships between fiction media, genre, and empathic abilities. Scientific Study of Literature 8:2 ► pp. 261 ff.
Vogrinčič Čepič, Ana, Anežka Kuzmičová & Patrícia Dias
Bailey, Gavin, Deepak Sahoo & Matt Jones
Dantas, Taisa, José Antonio Cordón-García & Raquel Gómez-Díaz
Hermena, Ehab W., Mercedes Sheen, Maryam AlJassmi, Khulood AlFalasi, Maha AlMatroushi & Timothy R. Jordan
Hou, Jinghui, Justin Rashid & Kwan Min Lee
Jacobs, Arthur M. & Jana Lüdtke
2017. Immersion into narrative and poetic worlds. In Narrative Absorption [Linguistic Approaches to Literature, 27], ► pp. 69 ff.
Kuiken, Don & Shawn Douglas
2017. Forms of absorption that facilitate the aesthetic and explanatory effects of literary reading. In Narrative Absorption [Linguistic Approaches to Literature, 27], ► pp. 217 ff.
Rutherford, Leonie, Lisa Waller, Margaret Merga, Michelle McRae, Elizabeth Bullen & Katya Johanson
Schilhab, Theresa
Burke, Michael, Anezka Kuzmicova, Anne Mangen & Theresa Schilhab
2016. Empathy at the confluence of neuroscience and empirical literary studies. Scientific Study of Literature 6:1 ► pp. 6 ff.
Chesnokova, Anna
2016. Chapter 6. Empirical stylistics in an EFL teaching context. In Scientific Approaches to Literature in Learning Environments [Linguistic Approaches to Literature, 24], ► pp. 105 ff.
Goodman, Sara G., Travis L. Seymour & Barrett R. Anderson
Mangen, Anne & Roger Säljö
Mangen, Anne & Adriaan van der Weel
McKay, Dana & George Buchanan
Obaid, Mohammad, Ilgιm Veryeri Alaca, Paweł W. Woźniak, Lars Lischke & Mark Billinghurst
Yuill, Nicola & Alex F. Martin
McKay, Dana, Wally Smith & Shanton Chang
Tveit, Åse Kristine & Anne Mangen
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
