References
- Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
- Balestra, M., Shaer, O., Okerlund, J., Ball, M., & Nov, O. (2016, February). The effect of exposure to social annotation on online informed consent beliefs and behavior (Ed.), Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (pp. 900–912). San Francisco, USA.
- Ball, R., & Hourcade, J. P. (2011). Rethinking reading for age from paper and computers. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 27(11), 1066–1082. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2011.555319
- Barnett, T. (2014). Social reading: The Kindle’s social highlighting function and emerging reading practices. Australian Humanities Review, 56, 141–162. http://australianhumanitiesreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/AHR56_7_Barnett.pdf
- Barnett, T. (2015). Platforms for social reading: The material book’s return. Scholarly and Research Communication, 6(4), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.22230/src.2015v6n4a211
- Biocca, F., Harms, C., & Gregg, J. (2001, May). The networked minds measure of social presence: Pilot test of the factor structure and concurrent validity. In 4th annual international workshop on presence, Philadelphia, PA (pp. 1–9).
- Blyth, C. (2014). Exploring the affordances of digital social reading for L2 literacy: The case of eComma. In J. P. Guikema & L. Williams (Eds.), Digital literacies in foreign and second language education (pp. 201–226). San Marcos, TX: Computer Assisted Language Instruction Consortium (CALICO).
- Boot, P. (2019). Editing social media: The case of online book discussion. International Journal of Digital Humanities, 1(2), 251–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42803-019-00014-8
- Brake, D. R. (2012). Who do they think they’re talking to? Framings of the audience by social media users. International Journal of Communication, 6, 1056–1076. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/932/747
- Byrne, B. M. (2012). Multivariate applications series. Structural equation modeling with Mplus: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
- Chen, C. M., & Chen, F. Y. (2014). Enhancing digital reading performance with a collaborative reading annotation system. Computers in Education, 77, 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.010
- Chen, C. M., Li, M. C., & Chen, T. C. (2020). A web-based collaborative reading annotation system with gamification mechanisms to improve reading performance. Computers & Education, 144, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103697
- Clarke, R., Hookway, N., & Burgess, R. (2017). Reading in community, reading for community: A survey of book clubs in regional Australia. Journal of Australian Studies, 41(2), 171–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/14443058.2017.1312484
- Cordón-García, J., Alonso-Arévalo, J., Gómez-Díaz, R., & Linder, D. (2013). Social reading: Platforms, applications, clouds and tags. Chandos Publishing.
- Craig, C. (2019). Reading identity: American and Irish Women’s book clubs, culture, and identity. Irish Journal of Sociology, 27(2), 128–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0791603519828664
- Cronin, J. J., Jr, Brady, M. K., & Hult, G. T. M. (2000). Assessing the effects of quality, value, and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments. Journal of Retailing, 76(2), 193–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(00)00028-2
- Daniels, H. (2002). Literature circles: Voice and choice in book clubs and reading groups (2nd ed.). Stenhouse.
- Daniels, H. (2006). What’s the next big thing with literature circles? Voices from the Middle, 13(4), 10–15. http://secondaryenglish.pbworks.com/f/smokey_whatsnext.pdf
- Dean, M. D. (2016). A call to embrace social reading in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(3), 296–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2014.991934
- Despot, I., Lebeda, I. L., & Tomašević, N. (2016). Social reading – the reader on digital margins. Libellarium, 9(1), 185–196. https://doi.org/10.15291/libellarium.v9i1.269
- Dong, M. (2018). Zhongguo yidong yuedu shichang baipishu 2018 [China mobile reading market white paper 2018]. Beijing, China: Analysys International. https://www.analysys.cn/article/detail/20018952.
- Ellis, J., & Cook, K. (2013). Building a community of readers: Social reading and an aggregated ebook reading app for libraries. The Library with the Lead Pipe, http://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2013/building-a-community-of-readers-social-reading-and-an-aggregated-ebook-reading-app-for-libraries/
- Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
- Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
- Fortin, D. R., & Dholakia, R. R. (2005). Interactivity and vividness effects on social presence and involvement with a web-based advertisement. Journal of Business Research, 58(3), 387–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(03)00106-1
- Gao, F. (2013). A case study of using a social annotation tool to support collaboratively learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 17, 76–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.11.002
- Gil-Lopez, T., Shen, C., Benefield, G. A., Palomares, N. A., Kosinski, M., & Stillwell, D. (2018). One Size fits all: Context collapse, self-presentation strategies and language styles on Facebook. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 23(3), 127–145. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmy006
- Golsteijn, C., & Van den Hoven, E. (2011). Facilitating communication about books through an online community. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 15(2), 197–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-010-0301-0
- Gonzalez, D. (2014, May). Online annotation and the future of reading.MIT graduate program in comparative media study. Retrieved from https://cms.mit.edu/online-annotation-future-reading/
- Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer‐mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649709526970
- Hartley, J., & Turvey, S. (2001). Reading groups. Oxford University Press.
- Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
- Johnson, L., Smith, R., Willis, H., Levine, A., & Haywood, K. (2011). The 2011 horizon report. The New Media Consortium.
- Johnson, R. D., Hornik, S., & Salas, E. (2008). An empirical examination of factors contributing to the creation of successful e-learning environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(5), 356–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2007.11.003
- Kalir, J. H. (2020). Social annotation enabling collaboration for open learning. Distance Education, 41(2), 245–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1757413
- Kim, H. Y. (2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: Assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics, 38(1), 52–54. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2013.38.1.52
- Kim, J., Song, H., & Lee, S. (2018). Extrovert and lonely individuals’ social TV viewing experiences: A mediating and moderating role of social presence. Mass Communication and Society, 21(1), 50–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2017.1350715
- Kim, J., Spielmann, N., & McMillan, S. J. (2012). Experience effects on interactivity: Functions, processes, and perceptions. Journal of Business Research, 65(11), 1543–1550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.02.038
- Kim, K. J., Park, E., & Sundar, S. S. (2013). Caregiving role in human–robot interaction: A study of the mediating effects of perceived benefit and social presence. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1799–1806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.009
- Kim, M., Chang, Y., Park, M. C., & Lee, J. (2015). The effects of service interactivity on the satisfaction and the loyalty of smartphone users. Telematics and Informatics, 32(4), 949–960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.05.003
- Ko, H., Roberts, M. S., & Cho, C. H. (2006). Cross-cultural differences in motivations and perceived interactivity: A comparative study of American and Korean internet users. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 28(2), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2006.10505201
- Kutzner, K., Petzold, K., & Knackstedt, R. (2019). Characterising social reading platforms: A taxonomy-based approach to structure the filed. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, Siegen, Germany.
- Laine, J., & Kuula, T. (2013). Digital social reading services: Needs and values of Finnish readers. In Deconstructing Media Convergence Conference at the ICT&S Center at University of Salzburg, Austria, 21–23.
- Lee, E. J., & Shin, S. Y. (2012). Are they talking to me? Cognitive and affective effects of interactivity in politicians’ Twitter communication. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 15(10), 515–520. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0228
- Lee, K. M., Jeong, E. J., Park, N., & Ryu, S. (2011). Effects of interactivity in educational games: A mediating role of social presence on learning outcomes. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 27(7), 620–633. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2011.555302
- Li, W., & Mao, Y. (2021). Yishuhuiyou haishi monizhijiao? Yuedu shejiao wangzhan yonghu xingwei dui xianshang shehui ziben de yingxiang [Meeting friends through books: How SNS-based reading activities influence online social capital]. Communication and Society, 55, 163–195.
- Li, W., & Wu, Y. H. (2017). Adolescents’ social reading: Motivation, behavior, and their relationship. The Electronic Library, 35(2), 246–262. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-12-2015-0239
- Liao, L. F. (2006). A flow theory perspective on learner motivation and behavior in distance education. Distance Education, 27(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910600653215
- Litt, E. (2012). Knock, knock. Who’s there? The imagined audience. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(3), 330–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2012.705195
- Litt, E., & Hargittai, E. (2016). The imagined audience on social network sites. Social Media+ Society, 2(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116633482
- Lu, H. P., Lin, J. C. C., Hsiao, K. L., & Cheng, L. T. (2010). Information sharing behaviour on blogs in Taiwan: Effects of interactivities and gender differences. Journal of Information Science, 36(3), 401–416. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551510363631
- Marshall, C. C. (1997). Annotation: From paper books to the digital library. In Proceedings of the second ACM international conference on Digital libraries (pp. 131–140). New York, NY: ACM Press.
- Massey, B. L., & Levy, M. R. (1999). Interactivity, online journalism, and English-language Web newspapers in Asia. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 76(1), 138–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909907600110
- McMahan, C., Hovland, R., & McMillan, S. (2009). Online marketing communications: Exploring online consumer behavior by examining gender differences and interactivity within internet advertising. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 10(1), 61–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2009.10722163
- McMillan, S. J. (2005). The researchers and the concept: Moving beyond a blind examination of interactivity. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 5(2), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2005.10722096
- Merga, M. K. (2015). Are avid adolescent readers social networking about books? New Review of Children’s Literature and Librarianship, 21(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614541.2015.976073
- Mob Research Institute. (2020). 2020 yidong yuedu hangye yanjiubaogao [Mobile reading industry report 2020]. Shanghai, China: MobTech. https://www.mob.com/mobdata/report/109
- Nunes, B. P., Kawase, R., Dietze, S., de Campos, G. H. B., & Nejdl, W. (2012). Annotation tool for enhancing e-learning courses. In E.Popescu et al.(Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Web-based Learning (pp. 51–60). Heidelberg: Springer.
- Oliver, R. L. (1997). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the customer. McGraw-Hill.
- Park, C., & Kim, D. G. (2020). Exploring the roles of social presence and gender difference in online learning. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 18(2), 291–312. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12207
- Pianzola, F., Rebora, S., & Lauer, G. (2020). Wattpad as a resource for literary studies. Quantitative and qualitative examples of the importance of digital social reading and readers’ comments in the margins. PloS ONE, 15(1), 1–46. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226708
- Pireddu, M. (2014). Social reading: An opportunity for new ways of learning. ICT in Higher Education and Lifelong Learning. SIREM 2013 Conference Proceedings (pp. 110–112). Bari, Italy.
- Preacher, K. J., & Kelley, K. (2011). Effect size measures for mediation models: Quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects. Psychological Methods, 16(2), 93–115. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022658
- Rauwers, F., Voorveld, H. A., & Neijens, P. C. (2016). The effects of the integration of external and internal communication features in digital magazines on consumers’ magazine attitude. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 454–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.042
- Rehberg Sedo, D. (2002). Predictions of life after Oprah: A glimpse at the power of book club readers. Publishing Research Quarterly, 18(3), 11–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-002-0009-8
- Rehberg Sedo, D. (2003). Readers in reading groups: An online survey of face-to-face and virtual book clubs. Convergence, 9(1), 66–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/135485650300900105
- Rehberg Sedo, D. (2011). “I used to read anything that caught my eye, but … ”: Cultural authority and intermediaries in a virtual young adult book club. In D. Rehberg Sedo (Ed.), Reading communities from salons to cyberspace (pp. 101–122). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Caskurlu, S. (2017). Social presence in relation to students’ satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 402–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.001
- Ruvane, M. B. (2006). Defining annotations: A visual (re) interpretation. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 43(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.14504301226
- Schreiber, J. B. (2008). Core reporting practices in structural equation modeling. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 4(2), 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2007.04.003
- Shen, N. K., & Khalifa, M. (2008). Exploring multidimensional conceptualization of social presence in the context of online communities. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 24(7), 722–748. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310802335789
- Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. John Wiley & Sons.
- Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32(11), 1492–1512. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.11.1492
- Stein, B. (2010). Matrix—A taxonomy of social reading. Organization name: Future of the Book. http://futureofthebook.org/social-reading/matrix/index.html
- Stevens, J. R. (2012). The Kindle vs. the Nook: Two models of social reading. International Journal of the Book, 9(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9516/CGP/v09i02/36933
- Sundar, S. S., Jia, H., Waddell, T. F., & Huang, Y. (2015). Toward a theory of interactive media effects (TIME): Four models for explaining how interface features affect user psychology. In S. S. Sundar (Ed.), The handbook of the psychology of communication technology (pp. 47–86). Wiley & Sons.
- Sundar, S. S., Kim, J., & Gambino, A. (2017). Using theory of interactive media effects (TIME) to analyze digital advertising. In S. Rodgers & E. Thorson (Eds.), Digital advertising (pp. 86–109). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
- Szuprowicz, B. O. (1995). Implementing multimedia for business. Computer Technology Research Corporation.
- Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage.
- Thoms, J. J., & Poole, F. (2017). Investigating linguistic, literary, and social affordances of L2 collaborative reading. Language Learning & Technology, 21(2), 139–156. https://dx.doi.org/10125/44615
- Tseng, S. S., Yeh, H. C., & Yang, S. H. (2015). Promoting different reading comprehension levels through online annotations. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.927366
- Tu, C. H., & McIsaac, M. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15389286AJDE1603_2
- Verpoorten, D., Specht, M., & Westera, W. (2015). Annotations as reflection amplifiers in online learning – An exploratory study. Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Awareness and Reflection in Technology-Enhanced Learning (ARTEL, pp. 11-25). In conjunction with the 10th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning (EC-TEL): Design for Teaching and Learning in a Networked World, Toledo, Spain.
- Vlieghe, J., Muls, J., & Rutten, K. (2016). Everybody reads: Reader engagement with literature in social media environments. Poetics, 54, 25–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2015.09.001
- Vlieghe, J., & Rutten, K. (2013). Rhetorical analysis of literary culture in social reading platforms. CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture, 15(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.2244
- Vlieghe, J., Vandermeersche, G., & Soetaert, R. (2016). Social media in literacy education: Exploring social reading with pre-service teachers. New Media & Society, 18(5), 800–816. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814547683
- Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19(1), 52–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365092019001003
- Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365096023001001
- Wang, R., & Sundar, S. S. (2018). How does parallax scrolling influence user experience? A test of TIME (Theory of interactive media effects). International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 34(6), 533–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2017.1373457
- Wen, Z., & Fan, X. (2015). Monotonicity of effect sizes: Questioning kappa-squared as mediation effect size measure. Psychological Methods, 20(2), 193–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000029
- Winget, M. (2013). A meditation on social reading and its implications for preservation. Preservation, Digital Technology & Culture, 42(1), 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1515/pdtc-2013-0004
- Zhan, Z., & Mei, H. (2013). Academic self-concept and social presence in face-to-face and online learning: Perceptions and effects on students’ learning achievement and satisfaction across environments. Computers & Education, 69, 131–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.002