Hypertext fiction reading: haptics and immersion
Open accessAbstract
Reading is a multi‐sensory activity, entailing perceptual, cognitive and motor interactions with whatever is being read. With digital technology, reading manifests itself as being extensively multi‐sensory – both in more explicit and more complex ways than ever before. In different ways from traditional reading technologies such as the codex, digital technology illustrates how the act of reading is intimately connected with and intricately dependent on the fact that we are both body and mind – a fact carrying important implications for even such an apparently intellectual activity as reading, whether recreational, educational or occupational. This article addresses some important and hitherto neglected issues concerning digital reading, with special emphasis on the vital role of our bodies, and in particular our fingers and hands, for the immersive fiction reading experience.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Digital readers are experiencing a gradual shift towards higher reading frequency of short-length texts and fast-paced content, which do not tend to foster engagement nor deep processing.
“When it comes to reading, superficial processing, such as scanning and skimming (Mangen, 2008), refers to the gradual shift that digital readers are experiencing towards higher reading frequency of short-length texts and fast-paced content, which do not tend to foster engagement nor deep processing (Baron, 2021; Ra et al., 2018).”
From Do New Forms of Reading Pay Off? A Meta-Analysis on the Relationship Between Leisure Digital Reading Habits and Text Comprehension (2025) · cites this paper as Mangen, 2008
Cites
Experiments in Digital Literacy
Alkali, Y. E., & Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2004) · CyberPsychology & Behavior · doi:10.1089/cpb.2004.7.421 · Cited by 364 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Toward an Integrated Framework of Multiple Text Use
List, A., & Alexander, P. A. (2019) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2018.1505514 · Cited by 147 · see citing works
Lost in an iPad: Narrative engagement on paper and tablet
Mangen, A., & Kuiken, D. (2014) · Scientific Study of Literature · doi:10.1075/ssol.4.2.02man · Cited by 141 · see citing works
Self-citationAltamura, L., Vargas, C., & Salmerón, L. (2025) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543231216463 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
- Authors
- Mangen, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Stavanger (NO)
- Corresponding author
- Mangen, Anne
- ORCID
- Mangen, Anne
- Venue
- Journal of Research in Reading
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-10-07
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 404-419
- ISSN
- 0141-0423 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9817
- OpenAlex
- W2126041726
- Cited by
- 277
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 4.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Research in Reading (publishedVersion)
- NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Digital Media and Philosophy
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › General Arts and Humanities › Corporeality, Perception, and Education
- Keywords
- hypertext fiction, digital reading, haptics, immersion, multisensory reading, mind-body problem, embodied reading, interactive fiction
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