Objective and Perceived Reading Performance: Mixed-Method Experimental Study Comparing Reading Media and Methods (Preprint)

Abstract

Despite the prevalent use of digital media, traditional reading approaches like reading on paper or employing oral reading are recommended when high levels of RP are required. However, little research on Reading Performance (RP) according to the reading medium has been conducted in current prevailing digital device environment. In addition, although the effectiveness of oral reading has been shown to help immature language speakers, the effect of oral reading has not been proven for mature language speakers. For the Reading Performance (RP), both objective indicators such as reading comprehension and perceived indicators such as enjoyment are considered important in today's diverse reading environment.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether there are differences in objective and perceived RP according to two factors: reading media (paper versus screen), and methods (silent versus oral) in mature language speakers.

We conducted a two-by-two between-subject mixed method experimental study. A total of 63 immature language speakers participated based on the smartphone ownership, and daily internet usage were recruited. For the reading medium variable, participants read on either paper or screen. For the reading method variable, participants followed either silent reading or oral reading. The reading materials and comprehension questions used in the study were those from XXX(blind-review) SAT. To measure the objective RP, we evaluated comprehension in two levels; low- and high-construal. For the perceived RP, we surveyed three variables; reading preference, reading convenience, and expected comprehension.

Our experimental study revealed that reading preference in perceived RP is higher when reading on paper than on screen (F(1, 61)=8.391, P=.005). Reading preference of perceived RP is also higher when oral reading than silent reading (F(1,61)=7.808, P =.007). However, the results showed no significant difference between groups in reading convenience and expected comprehension of perceived RP. In the objective RP, low- and high-construal level of comprehension did not differ according to the reading media and methods.

As far as we know, this is the first study that measures the concept of perceived RP explicitly. Our study, in which readers preferred reading on paper rather than on a screen, even though participants reported no difference in objective RP, implies that measures should be taken to overcome the negative perception of digital reading. In addition, the findings that the perceived PR of oral reading was higher than that of silent reading suggests that oral reading can be used for mature language speakers in situations where perceived RP is the reading goal.