Unaided access to multiple document reading functions alone does not improve comprehension over a traditional pdf viewer¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · 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? LiquidText Access and Non-Guidance conditions did not significantly outperform the Adobe Reader control on comprehension. → Jordan Lombard 2021
Evidence¶
Jordan Lombard 2021¶
Jordan Lombard, Ivar Bråten, Cécile van de Leemput, Franck Amadieu. (2021). Performance and acceptance when using tablets as a multiple document learning tool: do application and guidance matter? Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-021-09537-6
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Post-hoc REGWF comparisons after a significant omnibus ANOVA, F(3, 84) = 7.46, p < .001, showed no significant comprehension differences among LiquidText Access, LiquidText Non-Guidance, and the control condition. Functions available without guidance gave no advantage over sequential reading.
"whereas there were no statistically significant differences (p > .05) between the three last mentioned conditions"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Guided LiquidText users redistribute task time toward document processing and away from writing — related
- Students guided to use LiquidText show lower acceptance of tablets for multiple document work than controls despite better performance — related
- Guided use of a multiple document reading application yields higher multiple document comprehension than access-only, unguided, or traditional pdf viewer use — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
simultaneous-access-insufficient-for-comprehension |
title |
Unaided access to multiple document reading functions alone does not improve comprehension over a traditional pdf viewer |
description |
Unaided access to multiple document reading functions alone does not improve comprehension over a traditional pdf viewer |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2021 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — jordan-lombard-2021 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.