Does your e-reader slow you down?
New e-readers like the Kindle or the iBook app on the iPad may put an entire library in your hands, but they may also be slowing you down. Usability guru Jakob Nielsen recently published his study on the reading speeds for those using printed books, the Kindle, and the iPad. His results propose that users slow down when reading on electronic media – 6.2% slower for iBooks, 10.7% slower for Kindle. While that could be disconcerting for you hardcore literary enthusiasts out there, Nielsen suggests that these results are actually quite promising for the new technology. Even 10% slower is still pretty good. While they’ve yet to outshine print, new e-readers are getting better and seem destined to one day replace ink on paper.
Examine the comments section for any review on iBook and the iPad and you’re bound to find at least one person who laments the sore-eyes and mild headaches that many associate with reading on a computer screen. Devices like the Kindle use e-ink in part to avoid these complaints, but have their own contrast problems to contend with. Users from Nielsen’s study confirmed these attitudes – with most saying they felt more comfortable and relaxed with the printed page. But their reading speeds tell a slightly modified story. A 10% delay is significant but not insurmountable. As screen resolutions improve and contrast levels are better controlled, and as the user interface is refined, we may find that such a delay can be overcome with time.
If the delay does, in fact, exist. I’m not sure how much I trust usability testing. These studies have very small sample sets (this one relied on just 24 users for its data) and rarely account for changes over time. While such small test groups make good sense when trying to find errors in a system, I’m not sure I trust them for measuring something as statistically variable as reading speed. In fact, due to the small sample size Nielsen reports that the difference between iPad and Kindle (6.2% vs. 10.7%) wasn’t significant though the delay versus print media was.
Of course, I don’t think I can dismiss the study. Far from it. Nielsen, part of the Nielsen Norman Group, is one of the more prominent experts on usability. If anyone was going to make a usability study on e-books that I should believe in it would probably be him. I trust his work even if I have my doubts about it’s overall….well, usefulness. If you’re like me, and have your doubts about the scientific veracity of these studies, I suggest you go read the iPad/Kindle report on UseIt.com. Nielsen’s pretty good about describing his methodology.
Maybe the study takes on a better meaning when we include how each reader rated their experience. iPad come out ahead at 5.8, followed by Kindle at 5.7, and print at 5.6 (reading on a PC garnered a meager 3.6). Even if they read a little slower, users seemed to enjoy the experience. That’s good news I think. e-Readers represent such a vast improvement in terms of economic, environmental, and spatial considerations that we probably will use them semi-exclusively in the years ahead. It’s comforting to know that we’re likely to still enjoy reading when we do.
[image credit: iPhoneAppFreelancer]
[source: UseIt/Nielsen Norman Group]
Comments
I find that I read most of my Kindle books on my PC, since I have a large screen on my desktop computer (considerably larger than the size of a standard page in a physical book). I wonder how that might skew the reading speed results?
I am shocked by this result. Most people seemed to think that ipad ebook readers would skim due to the LED screen. However it goes to show that maybe the screen technology does not alter peoples reading habits. The very fact that someone can relax in a sofa and hold the gadget like a book – means that people treat it like a book. Thanks for sharing the results.
Your articles are awesome and always guide me in the right direction! Thanks.
Your articles are awesome and always guide me in the right direction! Thanks.
Yes you read slowler, but it is an “hyperlinked” media, not a linear book : so the media changed, the culture changed , the comparison must change
Yes you read slowler, but it is an “hyperlinked” media, not a linear book : so the media changed, the culture changed , the comparison must change
I tend to read big books, and I truly feel that reading on the Kindle is easier and faster based on the lack of page turning and moving the book around. However I do read slower overall on the Kindle because I take the time to look up words I don’t know, and take notes, and highlight… which are things I never did with print books before.
I tend to read big books, and I truly feel that reading on the Kindle is easier and faster based on the lack of page turning and moving the book around. However I do read slower overall on the Kindle because I take the time to look up words I don’t know, and take notes, and highlight… which are things I never did with print books before.
The study about ereading was a total crock. The difference in reading speed was probably because of unfamiliarity with reading on the device vs great familiarity with reading physical books. Comprehension was about 100% in both cases.
The study about ereading was a total crock. The difference in reading speed was probably because of unfamiliarity with reading on the device vs great familiarity with reading physical books. Comprehension was about 100% in both cases.