Deep Reading and Distraction
/The following is an excerpt from Digital Course Materials: A Case Study of the Apple iPad in the Academic Environment.
Reading has several different purposes. People can read for enjoyment, to self-inform, to keep up-to-date, to follow directions, or to fill out a form (O'Hara, 1996; Schilit et al., 1999). Students, however, read for other reasons: to learn, to prepare for discussion, to summarize, to solve or analyze a problem, to write and revise documents, and for research. To execute the various tasks of learning, students engage in deep reading. Deep reading goes beyond what is written; readers must infer and think for themselves, as well as come to their own insights and conclusions (Wolf, 2010). This section will discuss deep reading and the potential for distraction.
Deep reading is a form of cognitive reading theory that requires the reader to “engage in an active construction of meaning, in which they grapple with the text and apply their earlier knowledge as they question, analyze, and probe” (Wolf & Barzillai, 2009, p. 34). Wolf and Barzillai liken the current transition from p-books to e-books and other forms of electronic media to ancient Greece’s transition from an oral culture to a literary one. To Socrates, the threat came in the form of the written word. The rise of the literary culture and its growing body of written works allowed the literate young to decode would-be knowledge without the life-long personal approach to the intellectual process of seeking, analyzing and internalizing it for their own. Thus, literacy would deprive them of what Socrates believed to be a true examined life of wisdom and virtue. This equates to the modern transition to e-books and the impact they may have on deep reading. Also, according to Wolf and Barzillai, the codex of the p-book itself plays a role in deep reading through its linearity and singularity of purpose. This aids in acquiring the readers full attention to participate in deep reading. However, deep reading can be disrupted by any number of distractions.
There are a variety of ways to interrupt the reading process and minimize deep reading. Similar to reading print text, external distractions from outside sources can disrupt reading. Examples of this include interruptions from people or noise in the environment. Even when reading print text, there is the paradoxical interruption that could come from technology—like looking up at a computer while reading print. Any interruption can cause the reader to switch tasks. Modern research shows that people switch simple tasks every three minutes and switch projects every ten and a half minutes (González & Mark, 2004). Switching tasks during print or electronic reading lowers the ability to immerse oneself in the text and engage in deep reading. However, reading from electronic text can offer a variety of distractions that could interrupt the reading process over and above the distractions that affect print reading.
Both internal and external features of the technology have to potential to distract the reader. Internally, hyperlinks embedded into the electronic text can interrupt the reader’s concentration. Instead of print text that follows a linear line, the reader has to contemplate the purpose of the hyperlink and decide whether to pursue the hyperlink or continue reading. The act of making a decision in the middle of absorbing written content disrupts the ability to fully focus on the intent of the material. Mark (2009) commented on the duality of hyperlinks; “a hyperlink brings you information faster, but is also more of a distraction” (para. 4). The hyperlink feature commonly requested by e-book readers enhances learning by defining words through a dictionary, linking to explain a reference, or navigating faster around the text. However, this convenience can come at the cost of suspending the reading process and the cognitive reflection that comes with learning through reading.
Externally, electronic text hosted on a multi-model device like a personal computer, smart phone, or tablet, competes with the other applications on the device. A reader can temporarily lose focus and immediately switch to another task available on the device. At times, external distractions from the other functions on the device can pop up in front of the reader—like an email notification or appointment reminder. Sometimes these pop-ups do not go away until the reader stops reading and performs a function to eliminate the interruption. Aamodt (2009) stated “frequent task switching costs time and interferes with the concentration needed to think deeply about what you read” (para. 3). Also, research shows when someone jumps tasks, it takes an average of 23 minutes to return to the original task (González & Mark, 2004). This break from the original task of deep reading would also disrupt the construction of meaning gained through the process. Both the internal and external distractions can increase the time required for students to complete reading assignments.
Overall, the benefits of electronic text could pose a paradoxical threat to the process of reading. While the technology provides ample opportunity to augment the knowledge gained from the reading material, it can also hinder the ultimate depth in understanding. Also, every improvement in e-reader technology provides more and more “enhancements” to reading: enhancements that may also be viewed as distractions.
References
Aamodt, S. (2009). Does the brain like e-books? A test of character. Retrieved from http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/14/does-the-brain-like-e-books/
González, V. M., & Mark, G. (2004, April). Constant, constant, multi-tasking craziness: Managing multible working spheres. Paper presented at the Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group on Computer Human Interaction Annual Conference, Vienna, Austria.
Mark, G. (2009). Does the brain like e-books? The effects of perpetual distraction. Retrieved from http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/14/does-the-brain-like-e-books/
O'Hara, K. (1996). Towards a typology of reading goals. Cambridge, UK: Rank Xerox Research Centre, Cambridge Laboratory.
Schilit, B. N., Price, M. N., Golovchinsky, G., Tanaka, K., & Marshall, C. C. (1999). As we read: The reading appliance revolution. IEEE Computer, 32(1), 65-73.
Wolf, M. (2010). Our "deep reading" brain: its digital evolution poses questions. Nieman Reports, 64(2), 7-8.
Wolf, M., & Barzillai, M. (2009). The importance of deep reading. Educational Leadership, 66(6), 32-37.
