Print versus digital reading comprehension tests: does the congruency of study and test medium matter?
Saved in:
| Title: | Print versus digital reading comprehension tests: does the congruency of study and test medium matter? |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Ben‐Yehudah, Gal galby@openu.ac.il, Eshet‐Alkalai, Yoram |
| Source: | British Journal of Educational Technology. Jan2021, Vol. 52 Issue 1, p426-440. 15p. 2 Charts, 1 Graph. |
| Subject Terms: | *Reading comprehension ability testing, *Educational tests & measurements, *Learning ability testing, *Experimental design, *Adults, *Higher education |
| Abstract: | The use of digital environments for both learning and assessment is becoming prevalent. This often leads to incongruent situations, in which the study medium (eg, printed textbook) is different from the testing medium (eg, online multiple‐choice exams). Despite some evidence that incongruent study‐test situations are associated with inferior achievements, the effect of study‐test congruency has not been investigated systematically. Here, we examine this question in the context of digitally displayed versus printed text comprehension using a full‐factorial experimental design. One hundred and twelve university students participated in the study. They studied an expository text in one medium (print or digital) and then, comprehension was assessed in either the same (congruent) or the different (incongruent) medium. No significant differences in performance were found between the congruent and incongruent study‐test conditions. However, consistent with findings reported in the literature, comprehension of the digital text was inferior to that of the printed text. Results show that this screen inferiority occurred irrespective of the testing medium. These findings suggest that studying in one medium and taking the test in another does not affect comprehension, but the medium in which one studies does influence test outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of British Journal of Educational Technology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | The use of digital environments for both learning and assessment is becoming prevalent. This often leads to incongruent situations, in which the study medium (eg, printed textbook) is different from the testing medium (eg, online multiple‐choice exams). Despite some evidence that incongruent study‐test situations are associated with inferior achievements, the effect of study‐test congruency has not been investigated systematically. Here, we examine this question in the context of digitally displayed versus printed text comprehension using a full‐factorial experimental design. One hundred and twelve university students participated in the study. They studied an expository text in one medium (print or digital) and then, comprehension was assessed in either the same (congruent) or the different (incongruent) medium. No significant differences in performance were found between the congruent and incongruent study‐test conditions. However, consistent with findings reported in the literature, comprehension of the digital text was inferior to that of the printed text. Results show that this screen inferiority occurred irrespective of the testing medium. These findings suggest that studying in one medium and taking the test in another does not affect comprehension, but the medium in which one studies does influence test outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 00071013 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/bjet.13014 |
