References
- Ackerman, R., & Goldsmith, M. (2011). Metacognitive regulation of text learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 17(1), 18–32. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022086
- Ackerman, R., & Lauterman, T. (2012). Taking reading comprehension exams on screen or on paper? A metacognitive analysis of learning texts under time pressure. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1816–1828. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.04.023
- Annisette, L. E., & Lafreniere, K. D. (2017). Social media, texting, and personality: A test of the shallowing hypothesis. Personality and Individual Differences, 115, 154–158. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.02.043
- Ariasi, N., & Mason, L. (2011). Uncovering the effect of text structure in learning from a science text: An eye-tracking study. Instructional Science, 39(5), 581–601. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-010-9142-5
- Ballenghein, U., Kaakinen, J. K., Tissier, G., & Baccino, T. (2020). Cognitive engagement during reading on digital tablet: Evidence from concurrent recordings of postural and eye movements. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73(11), 1820–1829. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/2F1747021820931830
- Bansi, S., Oudega, M., Koornneef, A., & van Den Broek, P. (2016). The influence of presentation medium and induced beliefs on reading comprehension: An eyetracking study [Poster presentation]. Session presented at the Scandinavian Workshop on Applied Eye Tracking 2016, Turku, Finland.
- Baron, N. S. (2015). Words onscreen: The fate of reading in a digital world. Oxford University Press.
- Barrio-Cantalejo, I. M., Simón-Lorda, P., Melguizo, M., Escalona, I., Marijuán, M. I., & Hernando, P. (2008). Validación de la Escala INFLESZ para evaluar la legibilidad de los textos dirigidos a pacientes [Validation of the INFLESZ Scale to assess the readability of texts addressed to patients]. Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra, 31(2), 135–152. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4321/S1137-66272008000300004
- Bartell, A. L., Schultz, L. D., & Spyridakis, J. H. (2006). The effect of heading frequency on comprehension of print versus online information. Technical Communication, 53(4), 416–426.
- Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2021). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1-27. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/index.html.
- Beach, K. L. (2008). The effect of media, text length, and reading rates on college student reading comprehension levels [Doctoral dissertation]. https://search.proquest.com/docview/89266558
- Catrysse, L., Gijbels, D., Donche, V., De Maeyer, S., Lesterhuis, M., & Van Den Bossche, P. (2018). How are learning strategies reflected in the eyes? Combining results from self-reports and eye-tracking. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 118–137. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12181
- Chen, D., & Catrambone, R. (2015). Paper vs. screen effects on reading comprehension, metacognition, and reader behavior. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 59(1), 332–336. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931215591069
- Chen, G., Cheng, W., Chang, T., Zheng, X., & Huang, R. (2014). A comparison of reading comprehension across paper, computer screens, and tablets: Does tablet familiarity matter? Journal of Computers in Education, 1(2–3), 213–225. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-014-0012-z
- Clinton, V. (2019). Reading from paper compared to screens: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Journal of Research in Reading, 42(2), 288–325. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12269
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.
- Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2013). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Routledge.
- Delgado, P., & Salmerón, L. (2021). The inattentive on-screen reading: Reading medium affects attention and reading comprehension under time pressure. Learning and Instruction, 71, 101396 . . https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101396
- Delgado, P., Vargas, C., Ackerman, R., & Salmerón, L. (2018). Don’t throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension. Educational Research Review, 25, 23–38. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.09.003
- Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
- Feng, S., D’Mello, S., & Graesser, A. C. (2013). Mind wandering while reading easy and difficult texts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 586–592. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0367-y
- Fiedler, K., Ackerman, R., & Scarampi, C. (2019). Metacognition: Monitoring and controlling one’s own knowledge, reasoning and decisions. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Funke (Eds.), The psychology of human thought: An introduction (pp. 89–111). Heidelberg University Publishing.
- Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (4th ed.). London: Sage.
- Forrin, N. D., Mills, C., D’Mello, S. K., Risko, E. F., Smilek, D., & Seli, P. (2021). TL; DR: Longer sections of text increase rates of unintentional mind-wandering. The Journal of Experimental Education, 89(2), 278–290. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2020.1751578
- Forrin, N. D., Risko, E. F., & Smilek, D. (2019). On the relation between reading difficulty and mind-wandering: A section-length account. Psychological Research, 83(3), 485–497. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-017-0936-9
- Fulmer, S. M., & Frijters, J. C. (2011). Motivation during an excessively challenging reading task: The buffering role of relative topic interest. The Journal of Experimental Education, 79(2), 185–208. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2010.481503
- Furenes, M. I., Kucirkova, N., & Bus, A. G. (2021). A comparison of children’s reading on paper versus screen: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 9(4), 483–517. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3102/2F0034654321998074
- Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., & Keener, M. C. (2008). Metacognition in education: A focus on calibration. In J. Dunlosky & R. Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of memory and metacognition (pp. 411–455). Erlbaum.
- Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
- Hoenig, J. M., & Heisey, D. M. (2001). The abuse of power: The pervasive fallacy of power calculations for data analysis. The American Statistician, 55(1), 19–24. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1198/000313001300339897
- Hynd, C. R., McWhorter, J. Y., Phares, V. L., & Suttles, C. W. (1994). The role of instructional variables in conceptual change in high school physics topics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 933–946. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660310908
- Hyönä, J., Lorch, R. F., & Kaakinen, J. K. (2002). Individual differences in reading to summarize expository text: Evidence from eye fixation patterns. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 44–55. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.1.44
- Hyönä, J., Lorch, R. F., & Rinck, M. (2003). Eye movement measures to study global text processing. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind’s eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 313–334). Elsevier.
- Hyönä, J., & Nurminen, A. M. (2006). Do adult readers know how they read? Evidence from eye movement patterns and verbal reports. British Journal of Psychology, 97(1), 31–50. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1348/000712605X53678
- Jeong, Y. J., & Gweon, G. (2021). Advantages of print reading over screen reading: A comparison of visual patterns, reading performance, and reading attitudes across paper, computers, and tablets. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.1908668
- Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87(4), 329–354. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.87.4.329
- Kaakinen, J. K., Ballenghein, U., Tissier, G., & Baccino, T. (2018). Fluctuation in cognitive engagement during reading: Evidence from concurrent recordings of postural and eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44(10), 1671–1677. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000539
- Kaakinen, J. K., & Hyönä, J. (2005). Perspective effects on expository text comprehension: Evidence from think-aloud protocols, eye-tracking, and recall. Discourse Processes, 40(3), 239–257. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp4003_4
- Kaakinen, J. K., Hyönä, J., & Keenan, J. M. (2002). Perspective effects on online text processing. Discourse Processes, 33(2), 159–173. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326950DP3302_03
- Kendeou, P., & Van Den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 35(7), 1567–1577. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193491
- Kinnunen, R., & Vauras, M. (1995). Comprehension monitoring and the level of comprehension in high- and low-achieving primary school children’s reading. Learning and Instruction, 5(2), 143–165. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(95)00009-R
- Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.
- Kintsch, W., & Van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363–394. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363
- Klimesch W. (1996). Memory processes, brain oscillations and EEG synchronization. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 24(1–2), 61–100.
- Kong, Y., Seo, Y. S., & Zhai, L. (2018). Comparison of reading performance on screen and on paper: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 123, 138–149. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.005
- 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. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0056178
- Latini, N., & Bråten, I. (2021). Strategic text processing across mediums: A verbal protocol study. Reading Research Quarterly. Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.418
- Latini, N., Bråten, I., & Salmerón, L. (2019). It’s all about sex: Reading medium affects processing and integration of textual and pictorial information about human sexuality. Manuscript submitted for publication.
- Lauterman, T., & Ackerman, R. (2014). Overcoming screen inferiority in learning and calibration. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 455–463. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.046
- Lenhard, W., Schroeders, U., & Lenhard, A. (2017). Equivalence of screen versus print reading comprehension depends on task complexity and proficiency. Discourse Processes, 54(5–6), 427–445. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2017.1319653
- Lorch, R. F., & Lorch, E. P. (1996). Effects of headings on text recall and summarization. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(3), 261–278. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1996.0022
- Lorch, R. F., Lorch, E. P., Ritchey, K., McGovern, L., & Coleman, D. (2001). Effects of headings on text summarization. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(2), 171–191. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1037
- Mangen, A., & Van der Weel, A. (2016). The evolution of reading in the age of digitisation: An integrative framework for reading research. Literacy, 50(3), 116–124. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/lit.12086
- 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/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.12.002
- McDonald, R. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Erlbaum.
- Metcalfe, J. (1998). Cognitive optimism: Self-deception or memory-based processing heuristics? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(2), 100–110. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0202_3
- Metcalfe, J., & Finn, B. (2008). Evidence that judgments of learning are causally related to study choice. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(1), 174–179. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.1.174
- Mizrachi, D., Salaz, A. M., Kurbanoglu, S., Boustany, J., & ARFIS Research Group. (2018). Academic reading format preferences and behaviors among university students worldwide: A comparative survey analysis. PLOS ONE, 13(5), e0197444. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197444
- Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Hooper, M. (2017). PIRLS 2016 International Results in Reading. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College. http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/pirls2016/international-results/
- Norman, E., & Furnes, B. (2016). The relationship between metacognitive experiences and learning: Is there a difference between digital and non-digital study media? Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 301–309. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.043
- OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 reading framework. In OECD, PISA 2018 assessment and analytical framework (pp. 21–71). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1787/5c07e4f1-en.
- Qiu, J., & Helbig, R. (2012). Body posture as an indicator of workload in mental work. Human Factors, 54(4), 626–635. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720812437275
- R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. https://www.R-project.org/
- Rawson, K. A., Dunlosky, J., & Thiede, K. W. (2000). The rereading effect: Metacomprehension accuracy improves across reading trials. Memory & Cognition, 28(6), 1004–1010. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209348
- Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372–422. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372
- Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457 1506. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210902816461
- Rayner, K., Chace, K. H., Slattery, T. J., & Ashby, J. (2006). Eye movements as reflections of comprehension processes in reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3), 241–255. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr1003_3
- Reichle, E. D., Reineberg, A. E., & Schooler, J. W. (2010). Eye movements during mindless reading. Psychological Science, 21(9), 1300–1310. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610378686
- Salmerón, L., Delgado, P., Vargas, C., & Gil, L. (2021). Tablets for all? Testing the screen inferiority effect with upper primary school students. Learning and Individual Differences, 86, 101975. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2021.101975
- Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 23–52. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009004801455
- Singer Trakhman, L. M., Alexander, P. A., & Berkowitz, L. E. (2019). Effects of processing time on comprehension and calibration in print and digital mediums. The Journal of Experimental Education, 87(1), 101–115. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2017.1411877
- Singer Trakhman, L. M., Alexander, P. A., & Silverman, A. B. (2018). Profiling reading in print and digital mediums. Learning and Instruction, 57, 5–17. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.04.001
- Singer, L. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2017b). 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/https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2016.1143794
- Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2008). On the relative Independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(4), 672–695. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0022–3514.94.4.672
- Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 66–73. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.66
- Trizano-Hermosilla, I., & Alvarado, J. M. (2016). Best alternatives to Cronbach’s alpha reliability in realistic conditions: Congeneric and asymmetrical measurements. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 769. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00769
- Unsworth, N., & McMillan, B. D. (2013). Mind wandering and reading comprehension: Examining the roles of working memory capacity, interest, motivation, and topic experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(3), 832–842. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029669
- Van Gog, T., & Jarodzka, H. (2013). Eye tracking as a tool to study and enhance cognitive and metacognitive processes in computer-based learning environments. In R. Azevedo & V. Aleven (Eds.), International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies (pp. 143–156). Springer.
- Wolf, M. (2018). Reader, come home: The reading brain in a digital world. Harper.
- Wolf, M., & Barzillai, M. (2009). The importance of deep reading. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 32–37. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.461.7284&rep=rep1&type=pdf