Ventriglio 1 Brittany Ventriglio Professor Kuzma ENC 1102.

423 12, April 2011 A Web of Ideas: Which Medium Proves To Be More Beneficial? Introduction As technology and the web evolve and become more popular mediums for reading tex t, the manner in which our society reads and processes information from these te xt formats alter quickly. There are both pros and cons when comparing reading hy pertext (reading text from an electronic screen) versus reading linear text (rea ding from a traditional book.) Because of these differences, one may face a chal lenge when deciding which medium may be ones personal preference and a more effic ient tool to utilize when retrieving information. Research has found some negati ve aspects associated with reading hypertext (Carr; Destefano and LeFevre). Carr references his personal experiences of using the internet as a medi um to support his belief that Google and the utilization of basic internet hinders the readers ability to stay focused on one piece of text. He also includes anoth er opinion from a credible psychologist, Maryanne Wolf, developmental psychologi st at Tufts University, who expresses concern that utilizing the net weakens ones capacity to gain deep meaning and comprehension from hypertext. Carr cites a st udy claiming readers go online to actually avoid reading in a traditional sense an d that, even though our society reads more than it did in previous years, readin g via hypertext triggers a new way of thinking. In a similar sense, DeStefano an d LeFevre provide support for their belief that reading hypertext actually impai rs ones ability to comprehend text. Ventriglio 2 Both authors discussthe use of a process model of hypertext reading to measure th e cognitive processes that took place while readers read text through an online database. The article concluded, after the studies took place, that students wil l often need more guidance in learning hypertext than higher-ability readers. Wh at could this mean for lower-ability readers? We are still unsure. Dillon also i ncorporates facts regarding the negative effects of reading hypertext and claims that hypertext has largely failed to fulfill much of its early promise. The aut hor uses primarily personal knowledge regarding both mediums to make the claim t hat hypertext will continue to influence our use of information but only if desi gned and used properly. On the other hand, both Peter Foltz as well as Esther and Madrid argue t hat there is no significant difference between reading hypertext or linear text. Foltz, a professor in the Department of Psychology from New Mexico State Univer sity, first discusses research results based on an experiment regarding this top ic and concludes that there is no great advantage in reading one type versus the other. Although he also concludes in his second article that there is no great difference between the two mediums, Foltz initially cites statistical data in hi s first article. This data is an outcome from an experiment in which the compreh ension and reading times show that there were very few differences between the t ext formats but that the changes that did exist may have arose from the differen t strategies used for reading through the text. Although this may leave a small gap of uncertainty, Esther and Madrid reveal testing results from fifty universi ty students from the discipline of Tourism. The Statistical analyses revealed th at the hypertextual medium did not affect learners overall reading comprehension.. . (Uso-juan and Ruiz-Madrid 59). Overall, these three articles conclude that ther e are no significant differences present among cognitive performances regarding the hyper and linear mediums of reading. Ventriglio 3 Although most sources conclude that either reading hypertext may hinder cognitive performance or that there may be no significant difference between the

two mediums, both George Landow as well as OHara and Sellen focus on the positiv e aspects of reading either hypertext or linear text. Landow exemplifies on the g reat benefits of reading hypertext. He makes numerous statements that show the a dvantages of reading hypertext and states that many of us now think of books as f ragile, non-permanent, and claims that books have lost their aesthetic stature and sense of sensibility and performance. (Landow 208). While much of Landows article deals with pros and cons of both hypertext reading and reading from a book, it s eems as though Landows article acts as an advocate toward hypertext reading. On t he other side of the spectrum, OHara and Sellen focus on the positive aspects of reading linear text instead. This article includes a laboratory study to compare reading linear text versus reading hypertext. Ten voluntary people participated in a study and were asked to summarize a four-page article. The article points out that linear text continues to be the preferred medium because of the fact th at on-line reading hinders the reader from annotating the reading. The article i ncludes improvements that can be made in the future regarding hypertext reading, such as bigger screen sizes, but makes the overall claim that linear text is mo re beneficial for a reader that normally engages with his or her text. In determining which medium is more beneficial for a reader to use, it i s quite unclear because of the many aspects that are present when making this de cision. For instance, DeStefano and LeFevre focus more on the cognitive aspect o f reading through a chosen medium while Landow and OHara and Sellen touch more on the pleasurable aspects of reading hypertext, such as being able to annotate wh ile reading linear text. Although much information is present, there Ventriglio 4 is always a different purpose for reading that is present each time a reader pic ks up a book or opens their web browser to take in some information. Whether it be seeking specific information, reading for an assignment, or perhaps for ones enj oyment, whichever medium seems to be more beneficial each time may rely solely o n preference of the reader. Methodology In an attempt to ultimately find out which medium proves to be more beneficial t o the reader, I have accumulated data from two different sources. My secondary r esearch was found by surveying twenty-three freshman students enrolled in an Eng lish course at the University of Central Florida. Surveying these college studen ts, gave me a clear idea as to what well-educated students prefer as their medi um for reading, as well as their rationale for selecting the medium that they di d. Parts of the survey included somewhat simple questions, such as Would you rath er read text from an electronic screen, such as the internet, or from a traditio nal book? and also included questions that asked the responder to provide a short written response of his or her own. One of the questions posed was What are some of the positive aspects that you find from reading from a book? Any negatives? M y purpose for asking questions that requested a written response, was to provide myself with more personalized data to help find an answer to this very broad qu estion. My other source of research, or primary research, was based on eight cre dible sources, some of which were found from the online UCF library system, or f rom J-STOR. All eight sources were written by authors who provide valuable and/o r statistical evidence as to why, in their opinion, utilizing one medium may pro ve better than the other medium.

Ventriglio 5 Results While over fifty percent, particularly fifteen students, of the twenty three stu dents surveyed chose book as the medium they preferred for reading, the majority o f those students also checked the box that indicated that he or she tends to ann otate when reading. Most of them also included that they like the portability that a book provides and claim that he or she has trouble staying focused when readi ng online. On the other hand, those who chose the electronic medium for reading,

such as Meredith Jones, claim that reading online gets to the point quicker, and that its process is short and simple. They also expressed an appreciation for the easy portability and access of the internet versus the drudgery of having to car ry a weighty textbook. Discussion Because of the fact that each time a reader picks up a book or opens the interne t to read some text accompanies a different purpose for reading, it is unclear a s to which medium may be more sufficient to use. After reviewing and considering the points that were given from scholarly articles in addition to reviewing the survey data from my primary research, I have come to the conclusion that the mo st beneficial medium of reading may rely on a number of factors. Such factors in clude the readers purpose for reading, his/her ability to stay focused throughout a lengthy written text, his/her choice for portability, ease-of-use and conveni ence, and most prominent, the readers overall personal preference of medium, whic h may fluctuate. While all authors provide at least one credible opinion and/or statistic al data, all authors describe how either medium affected a readers ability to com prehend, either positively or negatively, the experimental text. Each author ana lyzes the cognitive aspects of which medium may be better, such as the cognitive performance of the readers or their memory that was tested Ventriglio 6 whenthey were asked to recall certain information from the experimental texts. Ev en so, no article incorporates the many aspects that come into play when decidin g which medium may be better to use, with some articles leaving small gaps in th e conclusions. For example, DeStefano and LeFevre focus the ways in which hypert ext impairs reading performance. They use a process model of hypertext reading t o measure the readers cognitive processes as they read text via an online databas e. Overall, the authors made the claim that students will often need more guidan ce in learning hypertext than readers who function at a higher-ability. While it is important, and almost easy, to take this issue into consideration for the low er-ability readers and their requirement to provide more support when utilizing h ypertext, where does that leave higher-ability readers? This is just one of the numerous gaps and aspects that require us to still pose the question, Which mediu m is, undeniably, more beneficial to use? This proves the premise that, depending on the cognitive ability of the reader, linear text may be more beneficial for students while, on the other hand, hypertext may be advantageous to higher-abili ty readers. The deciding factors for which medium may be more beneficial cogniti vely are undefined and the aspects that answer this question may be endless and, ultimately, may depend on the readers personal preference. Additionally, several articles that were found as part of my secondary research claim that there is n o difference in cognitive performance that separates the amount of efficiency of the reading hypertext versus linear text. This claim was found in the articles of both Peter Foltz articles as well as Esther and Madrids article. The Statistica l analyses from Esther and Madrid reveal that the hypertextual medium did not affect learners overall reading compre hension... (Uso-juan and Ruiz-Madrid 59). This overall reveals that, although the searticles reveal statistical evidence, there are many variables that are consid ered Ventriglio 7 whenexperimenting to try to answer this question. These numerous variables serve to support the reason as to why different experiments conclude differing results as to which medium is more literary-beneficial. After conducting my primary research and considering the outcomes of fro m the twenty-three completed surveys, it is also clear that while the eight sour ces deal with the mediums in a cognitive sense, there are other factors besides cognition that may determine which medium is more beneficial. The majority of re spondents chose linear text or book as their medium of choice when reading. When a sked to offer support for their choice, most responders who chose the book form

claim that reading linear text prevents them from getting distracted as they do when they read from the internet. Additionally, several responders noted that th ey preferred the tangible feel of a book and the convenience of its portability. T his proves that there are other factors, besides cognition, that determine which medium is more beneficial to use. For instance, when simply looking up a defini tion of unknown word and a computer is nearby, it may be more beneficial to use the computer than to go hunting for a dictionary or thesaurus. Also, while many state that reading linear text rather than hypertext helps the reader stay focus ed, one must consider the internets ease of use and availability when accessing l inks to delve into a specific topics. An oppositional viewpoint can suggest that a reader may experience difficulty staying focused when linking between web sit es. All of these factors come into play when deciding which medium to use each t ime the reader must decide between hyper or linear text. Despite the fact that the choice of hyper or linear text may vary each t ime, depending on the reader and his or her purpose for reading, the advantages and disadvantages of both mediums are still present. For example, Peter Foltz art icle "Comprehension, Coherence and Strategies in Ventriglio 8 Hypertext and Linear Text" goes into detail about how hypertext is able to incor porate new features that are not able to be incorporated into linear text, such as graphics like detailed charts and graphs that do not look as eye-appealing or easy to read on paper. On the other hand, Landows statement in his article suggests the viewpoint which many of us now thin k of books as fragile and non-permanent, a belief that correlates with a student s urveyors response as a negative or disadvantage of reading from a book. Although there are numerous pros and cons to both mediums, one reader may prefer the port ability of a book and choose linear text as his or her preferred medium while an other may choose hypertext simply because of dainty feel of a book. In this case , once again, the preference depends on the reader. Although endless cognitive-based studies can be experimented and analyze d, and while numerous authors are able to give their credible opinions on which medium may be more efficient to read from, the one that proves more beneficial t o yourself is the one that can best suit your needs in your daily life. With tha t being said, we all know our day-to-day lives are constantly changing. While t he portability and ease of reading from a traditional book is the medium you may prefer on Monday when walking from class-to-class in the hallways, Tuesday may help you choose otherwise when trying to find the latest news that is updated to CNNs website. Overall, the most beneficial medium to use is the one you choose e ach day that is based on your purpose for reading, reading selection, your atten tion span when reading, and, in my opinion, the most predominant factor of all, your sole personal preference that suits you best.

Ventriglio 9 Works Cited Carr, Nicholas. Is Google Making Us Stupid? The Atlantic. The Atlantic Group. Aug. 2008. Web. 9 Mar. 2011. DeStefano, Diana, and Jo-Anne LeFevre. Cognitive Load in Hypertext Reading: A Rev iew. Computers in Human Behavior 23.3 (May 2007): 1616-41. Web. Mar. 2011. Dillon, Andrew. Myths, Misconceptions and an Alternative Perspective on Informati on Usage and the Electronic Medium. Hypertext and Cognition. Ed. J.F. Roue t et al. Mahwah, NJ: LEA, 1996. 25-42. Web. 11, Mar. 2011. Foltz, Peter. Comprehension, Coherence and Strategies in Hypertext and Linear Tex t. Hypertext and Cognition. Ed. J.F. Rouet et al. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence, 1996. Web 11, Mar. 2011. Foltz, Peter. Readers Comprehension and Strategies in Linear text and Hypertext. Bo ulder, CO: Institute of Cognitive Science, 1996. Web. 7, Mar. 2011.

Juan-Eso, Esther, and Noella Ruiz-Madrid. Reading Printed Versus Online Texts: A Study of EFL Learners Strategic Reading Behavior. International Journal of English Studies 9.2 (2009): 59-79. Web. 7 Mar. 2011. Landow, George. Twenty Minutes Into The Future, Or How Are We Moving Beyond the Book? The Future of the Book. Ed. Geoffrey Nonberg. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997. 209-37. Web. OHara Kenton, and Abigail Sellen. A Comparison of Reading Paper and On-line Docume nts. Ran Xerox Research Center. U.K: Cambridge. 1997. Web. 8, Mar. 2011. Ventriglio, Brittany. Survey: Linear vs. Hypertext Reading. Survey. 29, Mar. 2011. Print.