Prior meta-analyses found the screen inferiority effect did not differ as a function of digital device type¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The review reports, citing Delgado et al. (2018) and Öztop and Nayci (2021), that device type (computers vs. handheld devices) did not significantly moderate the screen inferiority effect, though few handheld-device studies were included. → Salmerón 2023

Evidence¶

Salmerón 2023¶

Salmerón, L., Altamura, L., Delgado, P., Karagiorgi, A., & Vargas, C. (2023). Reading comprehension on handheld devices vs. on paper: A narrative review and meta-analysis of the medium effect and its moderators. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/edu0000830

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r?

The review attributes this to two prior meta-analyses that grouped studies by computer versus handheld device. It cautions the results "must be taken with caution" because handheld-device studies were few (n = 12 in Delgado et al., 2018; n = 2 in Öztop & Nayci, 2021).

"In both cases, the effects were not significant, indicating that the screen inferiority effect did not differ as a function of digital device."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Time frame is a major activity moderator of the screen inferiority effect, with larger effects when reading time is limited — related
• Text genre moderates the screen inferiority effect, with stronger negative effects for expository than narrative texts — related
• The screen inferiority effect on handheld devices is larger for undergraduate students and for participants assessed individually — related
• Reading comprehension is slightly worse on handheld devices than in print in between-participants studies (g = -.113) — related