07 July 2010 10:24 GMT
Image: Grockit.com
People read printed books most quickly but find reading iPads most enjoyable, according to user experience testers Nielson Norman Group.
Apple iBook: The Most Fun You Can Have Processing Sequenced Characters Into Cognitively Enriching Experience
Reading printed pages is 10% faster but also less enjoyable than reading iPads and eBooks, according to a new study released by the Nielson Norman Group.
User experience testers Nielson Norman compared reading speeds and user satisfaction on several formats including: printed books, iPads, Kindle 2s and PC monitors.
Testing 24 subjects, the Group found that reading printed pages is outright faster than reading other formats, but slightly less enjoyable than reading eBooks and iPads. The PC monitor tested worst on both criteria.
The study worked as follows:
For example, users disliked the iPad's weight and the Kindle's grey-on-grey text. Reading on PC monitors meanwhile scored poorly because the format reminded people of work.
In contrast, users found reading printed pages relaxing and liked that the iBook app included remaining chapter length.
Nielson concluded the study by saying: “This study is promising for the future of e-readers and tablet computers. We can expect higher-quality screens in the future, as indicated by the recent release of the iPhone 4 with a 326 dpi display.
But even the current generation is almost as good as print in formal performance metrics — and actually scores slightly higher in user satisfaction.”
Comment
For advocates of printed or digital reading, the report provides ammunition for both sides: reading print is faster but reading e-books more enjoyable.
Head of eReaders at Sony Steve Haber predicted last month that printed text will be obsolete in 5 years: Nielson's conclusion that technological improvements will make eBook reading easier seemingly corroborates this. To this extent the publishing industry looks in trouble.
On the other hand: people may not abandon printed books simply because an alternative is available.
For consumers meanwhile, the Nielson Norman report raises a question: what kind of reading experience do you want?
For fast and relaxing reading printed books are preferable. For ultimately more enjoyable user experiences choose eBooks.
There are obviously other factors to consider: the higher price but greater capacity of eReaders for example. The choice though seems ultimately clear.
Finally, it is worth querying the Nielson Norman report before potentially spending hundreds of pounds based on these findings.
The 24-person test group is notably small for example – and what are their characteristics? The comments and preferences of a PhD-educated English Literature lecturer are likely to differ from those of a Tesco trolley attendant.
Furthermore, what does numerically rating the experience of these reading formats truly tell us? One user may be fiercely prejudiced against electronic devices; another may be predisposed to receiving paper cuts.
In short then, it is difficult to assess the genuine value of Nielson Norman's report without more information.
Sources
Adam Hadhazy, 'Reading Print Book Faster Than E-Books On iPad And Kindle,' iPadNewsDaily, 06 July 2010.
Darren Allan, Study Says People Read eBooks Slower Than Print,' TechWatch.co.uk, 07 July 2010.
Jakob Nielson, 'iPad And Kindle Reading Speeds,' UseIt.com, 02 July 2010.
Ryan Fleming, 'Study: Reading eBook eReaders Takes Longer Than Print,' DigitalTrends.com, 06 July 2010.
Image: Grockit.com
People read printed books most quickly but find reading iPads most enjoyable, according to user experience testers Nielson Norman Group.
Apple iBook: The Most Fun You Can Have Processing Sequenced Characters Into Cognitively Enriching ExperienceReading printed pages is 10% faster but also less enjoyable than reading iPads and eBooks, according to a new study released by the Nielson Norman Group.
User experience testers Nielson Norman compared reading speeds and user satisfaction on several formats including: printed books, iPads, Kindle 2s and PC monitors.
Testing 24 subjects, the Group found that reading printed pages is outright faster than reading other formats, but slightly less enjoyable than reading eBooks and iPads. The PC monitor tested worst on both criteria.
The study worked as follows:
- 24 users were asked to read an Ernest Hemingway short story on the different formats. Report writer Jakob Nielson notes that: “We picked Ernest Hemingway because his work is pleasant and engaging to read, and yet not so complicated it would be above the heads of users.”
- Users were timed, and then given a comprehension test to assess their retention and understanding. The average reading time was 17 minutes 20 seconds: “enough time to get them immersed in the story,” says Nielson.
- Print page reading time was fastest (unstated) and rated 5.6 on an enjoyment scale out of 7.
- iPad reading time was 6.2% slower than the printed page, but rated 5.8 on the enjoyment scale.
- Kindle 2 reading time was 10.7% slower than the printed page, but rated 5.7 on the enjoyment scale.
- PC monitor reading time was slowest (unstated) and rated only 3.6 on the enjoyment scale.
For example, users disliked the iPad's weight and the Kindle's grey-on-grey text. Reading on PC monitors meanwhile scored poorly because the format reminded people of work.
In contrast, users found reading printed pages relaxing and liked that the iBook app included remaining chapter length.
Nielson concluded the study by saying: “This study is promising for the future of e-readers and tablet computers. We can expect higher-quality screens in the future, as indicated by the recent release of the iPhone 4 with a 326 dpi display.
But even the current generation is almost as good as print in formal performance metrics — and actually scores slightly higher in user satisfaction.”
Comment
For advocates of printed or digital reading, the report provides ammunition for both sides: reading print is faster but reading e-books more enjoyable.
Head of eReaders at Sony Steve Haber predicted last month that printed text will be obsolete in 5 years: Nielson's conclusion that technological improvements will make eBook reading easier seemingly corroborates this. To this extent the publishing industry looks in trouble.
On the other hand: people may not abandon printed books simply because an alternative is available.
For consumers meanwhile, the Nielson Norman report raises a question: what kind of reading experience do you want?
For fast and relaxing reading printed books are preferable. For ultimately more enjoyable user experiences choose eBooks.
There are obviously other factors to consider: the higher price but greater capacity of eReaders for example. The choice though seems ultimately clear.
Finally, it is worth querying the Nielson Norman report before potentially spending hundreds of pounds based on these findings.
The 24-person test group is notably small for example – and what are their characteristics? The comments and preferences of a PhD-educated English Literature lecturer are likely to differ from those of a Tesco trolley attendant.
Furthermore, what does numerically rating the experience of these reading formats truly tell us? One user may be fiercely prejudiced against electronic devices; another may be predisposed to receiving paper cuts.
In short then, it is difficult to assess the genuine value of Nielson Norman's report without more information.
Sources
Adam Hadhazy, 'Reading Print Book Faster Than E-Books On iPad And Kindle,' iPadNewsDaily, 06 July 2010.
Darren Allan, Study Says People Read eBooks Slower Than Print,' TechWatch.co.uk, 07 July 2010.
Jakob Nielson, 'iPad And Kindle Reading Speeds,' UseIt.com, 02 July 2010.
Ryan Fleming, 'Study: Reading eBook eReaders Takes Longer Than Print,' DigitalTrends.com, 06 July 2010.
0 comments:
Post a Comment