屏幕閱讀pk紙質閱讀 Those headed for the top add print to their digital reading

Measured against how long we have been around, humans began reading only recently. The earliest scripts emerged about 5,000 years ago.

以人類存在的整個歷史衡量，人類只是在最近纔開始閱讀。最早的手稿出現在大約5000年前。

The Greeks produced a fully-developed alphabet, with vowels, about 3,000 years ago. Johannes Gutenberg printed his bible 560 years ago.

希臘人在大約3000年前發明了帶有元音的、成熟的字母表。約翰內斯•谷登堡(Johannes Gutenberg)於560年前印刷出了聖經。

If reading from the printed page is recent, then reading from a digital screen is a just-peeled-the-protective-plastic-off novelty.

如果說人類只是從最近纔開始閱讀印刷文字的話，那麼從數字屏幕上閱讀就如剛剛撕掉塑料保護膜一樣的新鮮。

Many have described the advent of digital reading as the biggest revolution since Gutenberg. We are still not sure what digital screens are doing to the process of reading. While researchers have tried to examine the difference between print and onscreen reading, the results are fuzzy.

很多人把數字化閱讀的出現描述爲自谷登堡以來的最大變革。我們尚無法確定數字化屏幕對閱讀過程具有何種影響。儘管研究人員嘗試了研究紙質閱讀和屏幕閱讀的區別，但結果並不清晰。

Some studies have found little difference in comprehension and recall between those reading print and those looking at screens. Others have found lower understanding and memory among screen readers.

一些研究發現，紙質閱讀和屏幕閱讀在理解和回憶方面幾乎沒有區別。另外一些研究發現，屏幕閱讀者在理解和記憶方面表現較差。

Apart from the difficulties of assessing how people absorb meaning, digital devices are still changing and developing, attempting to make the reading process smoother.

除了在評估人們如何吸收語意上存在困難外，數字化設備仍在不斷變化和發展，試圖讓閱讀過程更加順暢。

As reading researchers Anne Mangen of the University of Stavanger and Don Kuiken of the University of Alberta admit, it is best to see their and others’ studies as “an exploration of possibilities rather than explicit hypothesis testing”.

正如閱讀研究員、挪威斯塔萬格大學(University of Stavanger)的安妮•芒讓(Anne Mangen)和加拿大阿爾伯塔大學(University of Alberta)的唐•奎肯(Don Kuiken)所承認的那樣，最好把他們和其他人的研究看作是“一次關於可能性的探索，而非明確的假設檢驗”。

Their research examined whether people read differently on a screen (the Kindle app on an iPad) and a printed page, but also looked at the difference between fiction and non-fiction. They gave their subjects a piece of writing describing an actual murder at a mall, and told one group it was made-up and the other that it was real.

他們對人們在屏幕（iPad上的Kindle應用軟件）和紙質閱讀是否存在差異進行研究，不過也觀察了閱讀小說和非小說之間的差異。他們給了研究對象一篇講述一宗發生在商場的真實謀殺案的文章，告訴其中一組這件事是虛構的，告訴另一組文章是真實的。

Among those who thought it was fiction, there was little difference between screen and print readers. Those reading from the iPad were a little unsure of their location in the text. But their grasp of the narrative, their immersion in the story and how much sympathy they felt with the characters differed little from that of the print readers.

在認爲閱讀內容爲小說的研究對象中，屏幕閱讀和紙質閱讀之間幾乎沒有差別。在iPad上閱讀的人對文中所述事件的發生地點有點不確定。但是他們對文字敘述的理解、對故事情節的投入以及對人物的同情程度，與紙質閱讀者幾乎沒有差別。

Among those who thought they were reading non-fiction, there was a significant difference. The iPad readers had less narrative grasp, less immersion and less sympathy.

那組認爲自己閱讀的是非小說的研究對象，則存在顯著差別。與紙質閱讀者相比，iPad閱讀者對文字敘述的理解更差，對故事的投入更弱，同情心也更少。

Why the difference? The writers quote research suggesting that reading non-fiction involves fast processing (“skimming”)” while fiction involves slow processing (“savouring”).

爲什麼會存在差異？兩位作者引用研究稱，閱讀非小說涉及快速處理（“略讀”），而閱讀小說涉及慢速處理（“品味”）。

The suggestion is that reading screens for factual information encourages skimming so that when the narrative is more detailed it becomes less comprehensible.

這似乎表明，在屏幕上閱讀事實類信息促使閱讀者進行略讀，因此當文字敘述比較詳細時，理解就較差。

This matches my experience. I am reading 10 novels, as chairman of the judges of theFinancial Times arts awards for emerging market countries. As I have been travelling, I have mostly been reading on a Kindle.

這與我的經驗相符。作爲英國《金融時報》評判新興市場國家藝術獎的主席，我目前正在閱讀10本小說。由於我最近在出差，我大多時候都用Kindle看書。

I prefer real books, for the heft, the ease of paging back and the sense of how far I have read — which I can see and feel, rather than relying on a percentage at the bottom of the page. But a Kindle is compact and easy on the eyes and, like the students in the study, I have had no problem immersing myself in the stories.

我更喜歡實實在在的書，因爲它有重量，能輕易翻回之前的頁，也能直觀感受到自己已經讀了多少——這是我“看得見摸得着”的，而不需要依靠屏幕下方的進度條來判斷。但是，Kindle外形小巧緊湊，閱讀起來不傷眼睛，而且就像上述研究的參加者那樣，我可以讓自己投入故事情節。

Reading news is different. When my morning train is crowded, I read from an iPhone app rather than a newspaper. When I get into the office and page through the FT, I find I have read most of it — but not all.

閱讀新聞則有所不同。當上班的列車很擁擠時，我用iPhone上的一款app看新聞，而不是直接看報紙。當我進入辦公室瀏覽英國《金融時報》時，我發現自己看過了大部分內容——但並非全部。

When I use an app, I read what I am interested in. When I read a print newspaper, I find myself reading things I did not know I was interested in.

當我使用app時，我只看自己感興趣的內容。但我看紙質報紙時，我會看一些之前不知道自己會感興趣的內容。

Others have spoken about the serendipity of print, but I think there is more to it. Reading from a mobile phone, the fastest-growing form of digital reading, is useful, but it is, literally, narrower than print.

有人曾談到紙質閱讀的意外收穫，但我認爲沒這麼簡單。作爲增長最快的數字化閱讀方式，手機閱讀很有用，但是它顯然比紙質閱讀更“窄”。

A newspaper offers peripheral vision. There is the likelihood not only that you will come across unexpected information, but that you will connect it to other things you have read.

報紙提供周邊視覺。你不僅可能看到意想不到的信息，還可能會把它與你讀過的內容聯繫起來。

This is important for those whose job is to think about the threats, opportunities and changes that might affect the business. It is not an either/or. You have to be immersed in the digital world too to know what it is doing to people’s behaviour.

對於職責就是思索可能影響業務的威脅、機會和變化的人來說，這很重要。這並非是個非此即彼的選擇。你也必須沉浸到數字化世界中，才能瞭解它對人們的行爲產生了什麼影響。

Studies in the US show that those who still read a newspaper are higher-earning and better-educated.

美國的研究表明，如今仍然閱讀報紙的人的收入更高、受教育水平也更高。

They are also generally older. But every now and then I meet a 20-something digital native who reads print newspapers, too. I immediately assume they have a great future.

他們也普遍年紀更大。但是我也會不時地遇到一個20多歲的“數字化原住民”在閱讀紙質報紙。我會立馬認爲他們擁有一個光明的前途。