Reading time did not differ between Page and Scroll, though Page readers tended to backtrack more¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr?·q3
Currency · newest study 1997 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? Reading time did not differ significantly between presentations; backtracking sequences tended to be more frequent with Page but not significantly. → Annie Piolat 1997
Evidence¶
Annie Piolat 1997¶
Annie Piolat, Jean-Yves Roussey and Olivier Thunin. (1997). Effects of screen presentation on text reading and revising. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1997.0145
q3 · i? · causal · r?
Experiment 1 behavioral measures from the navigation file: reading time (459 s vs. 442 s, F < 1) and backtracking sequences (1.61 vs. 1.17, p < 0.14). Neither difference was statistically significant.
"The mean time taken by participants to read the text did not differ significantly between Page and Scroll (Page = 459 s; Scroll = 442 s;F < 1), nor did the number of backtracking sequences, even though readers tended to produce more backtracking sequences with Page (1.61) than with Scroll (1.17;F(1, 70) = 2.23, p < 0.14)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Writers revising in Page mode backtrack more than Scroll writers, with no difference in total revising time
- Readers locate sentences more accurately after reading a text in page-by-page presentation than in scrolling presentation
- Page writers corrected significantly more coherence errors than Scroll writers, while surface and cohesion corrections did not differ
- Page readers tended to include more details in their summaries than Scroll readers (a marginal result, p = .056), while recall of main ideas did not differ significantly — related
- Only Page readers tended to locate boundary-zone sentences more accurately than central-zone sentences — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
reading-time-null-backtracking-tendency |
title |
Reading time did not differ between Page and Scroll, though Page readers tended to backtrack more |
description |
Reading time did not differ between Page and Scroll, though Page readers tended to backtrack more |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
1997 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-16 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — annie-piolat-1997 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.