Cécile Van De Leemput

Reading Multiple Documents on Tablet: Effects of Applications and Strategic Guidance on Performance and Acceptance.

In this experimental study, 66 undergraduate students in psychology used an iPad pro to study several documents dealing with the same topic. The study aimed to compare the effects of using two different applications on comprehension in a multiple document reading task: Adobe Reader, which is an application oriented towards linear reading, and LiquidText, which is an application designed for non-linear reading. Further, because studying multiple texts is a complex learning task that requires effective and efficient processing strategies, the study tested the effect of strategic guidance that was expected to promote both performance and acceptance of tablets. The results indicated the existence of a performance-preference paradox: while the participants guided in the use of LiquidText achieved better comprehension, they expressed less acceptance of tablets as a tool for studying multiple documents than did the participants who used Adobe Reader.

Comparative Study of Laptops and Touch-Screen PCs for Searching on the Web

This study compares the use of a laptop versus a touch-screen PC to perform web-based information search tasks. Thirty-six participants took part in a lab-based experiment. They were asked to use either a laptop or a touch-screen PC to seek information on the web and retrieve relevant pieces of information while their sessions were recorded. Cognitive load was measured through eye-related data and cortical activity (EEG) along with a self-reported scale. Main results indicated that participants who used the laptop outperformed those who used the touch-screen PC, with more relevant webpages bookmarked (F = 9.678, p = .004) and more relevant elements retrieved (F = 6.302, p = .018). Participants with the touch-screen PC also spent more time on each webpage than their counterparts (F = 9.2141, p = .005). These results suggest that using the touch-screen PC required more mental effort, which is supported by cognitive load measurements. Linear mixed-model analyses showed significant differences across devices in both pupil size variation (F = 3.692, p = .05) and EEG-based cognitive load index (F = 5.181, p = .028). This study raises issues about whether touch-screen computers are suited for every computing needs.