Cited by 141Media Influence and HealthNarrative Theory and AnalysisDigital Media and Philosophy

Lost in an iPad: Narrative engagement on paper and tablet

Mangen, Anne, Kuiken, Don·2014·Scientific Study of Literature

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of reading medium and a paratext manipulation on aspects of narrative engagement. In a 2 (medium: booklet vs. iPad) by 2 (paratext: fiction vs. nonfiction) between-subjects factorial design, the study combined state oriented measures of narrative engagement and a newly developed measure of interface interference. Results indicated that, independently of prior experience with reading on electronic media, readers in the iPad condition reported dislocation within the text and awkwardness in handling their medium. Also, iPad readers who believed they were reading nonfiction were less likely to report narrative coherence and transportation, while booklet readers who believed they were reading nonfiction were, if anything, more likely to report narrative coherence. Finally, booklet (but not iPad) readers were more likely to report a close association between transportation and empathy. Implications of these findings for cognitive and emotional engagement with textual narratives on paper and tablet are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1075/ssol.4.2.02man

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Mangen and Kuiken (2014) also found that even experienced iPad readers were more likely to lose track of their place in the text and to report awkwardness when using the device.

    “Mangen and Kuiken (2014) also found that even experienced iPad readers were more likely to lose track of their place in the text and to report awkwardness when using the device.”
  • In Mangen and Kuiken (2014), the differences between paper and iPad were present only in the group that believed they were reading nonfiction; reading format did not affect narrative engagement when readers believed the story was fiction.

    “However, these differences were present only in the group that believed they were reading nonfiction; reading format did not affect narrative engagement when readers believed the story was fiction.”
  • Recent studies suggest that emotional transport into stories may be reduced in digital media.

    “Recent studies (Mangen & Kuiken, 2014;Mangen, 2016) suggest that emotional transport into stories may be reduced in digital media.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mangen, A., & Kuiken, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Stavanger (NO)
  • University of Alberta (CA)
Venue
Scientific Study of Literature
Published
2014-12-31
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
150-177
ISSN
  • 2210-4372 (ISSN-L)
  • 2210-4380
OpenAlex
W1994861539
Cited by
141
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
222.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Scientific Study of Literature (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Media Influence and Health
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Narrative Theory and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Digital Media and Philosophy
Keywords
narrative engagement, reading media, paratext, digital reading, iPad, transportation, narrative coherence, empathy, reader experience

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review