IFeL blog

Structure, Dialogue and Autonomy

No problem with reading on tablets over a long period of time

2 Comments

“Tablets are not suited for reading over an extended period of time”; this statement is widespread. For example Scott Liu, head of the American-Taiwanese company E Ink Holdings, states that reading over an extended period of time on a Liquid Crystal display leads to increased visual fatigue. “The iPad is a fascinating multifunctional device, but not intended for hour-long reading” (stern.de). In comparison, E-ink readers, with their paper similar displays, are looked at as an adequate replacement for a book.

But is it true that the tablet is an inadequate device for reading over an extended period of time? Critical statements against the tablet as a replacement for the book are widespread but there is a lack of scientific evidence for these assumptions. For that reason, a study answering this question was implemented at the Institute for Research in Open- Distance- and eLearning (IFeL).

In a laboratory study, the participants read for several hours on either E-ink (Sony PRS-600) or LCD-Tablet (Apple iPad), where different measures of reading behaviour and visual strain were regularly (after each hour) recorded. These dependent measures included subjective (visual) fatigue, a letter search task, reading speed, oculomotor behaviour, and pupillary light reflex.

The results of the study show that reading on both display types is good and very similar in terms of both subjective and objective measures. Participants did not have more visual fatigue when reading on a tablet than when reading on an E-ink device. We concluded from this study that it is not the technology itself, but rather the image quality that is crucial for reading. The study shows that compared to the visual display units of past decades, recent electronic displays allow good and comfortable reading, even for extended time periods.

A few critical remarks still need to be made though. This laboratory study was conducted under artificial light conditions. Therefore it is unclear if an experiment under daylight conditions would lead to the same results. Another interesting question is how the sleep quality is influenced by different display technologies.

But still, the result of the study is an important novelty in reading research, and is opposed to many statements from publishers and subjective user self tests, that have stated that tablets are not appropriate for reading over a long period of time.

More information on the study is available online: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2012.00928.x/abstract

Publication:

Siegenthaler, E., Bochud, Y., Bergamin, P. and Wurtz, P. (2012), Reading on LCD vs e-Ink displays: effects on fatigue and visual strain. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 32: 367–374. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2012.00928.x

Sources:

http://www.stern.de/digital/homeentertainment/e-book-lesegeraete-die-gretchenfrage-beim-elektronischen-lesen-1596371.html

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “No problem with reading on tablets over a long period of time

  1. One of the wrongest scientist article i have ever read in my entire life (not the one of this blog but the original article itself)….thanks to Eink screen, finally i can spend even 4 hours in reading WITHOUT any sort of problems. Instead, after 30 minutes of reading on a LCD screen of any computer you want, even FULLHD screens, my eyes immediately burn!!! Out there is full of people who can’t resist in reading for more than 30 minutes with a typical LCD screen, you can find them everywhere…i can’t really believe scientists have made such a ridicolous test with just 10 people……simply ridicolous and unrealistic…..

  2. It is great that you profit from reading on eInk devices. As you already stated, most people have the subjective impression that reading from eInk or paper is more relaxing for the eyes than reading from LCD or LED – and that is exactly why this study was performed, since empirical evidence on this matter (i.e. that reading from one of these two screen-technologies is more fatiguing) is sparse. The study’s results show that the subjects in this study had the SUBJECTIVE feeling of higher experienced fatigue when reading from LCD compared to eInk, despite the eye-tracking data show no OBJECTIVE difference in terms of eye-movements invovled or visual fatigue measures.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s