屏幕阅读pk纸质阅读 Those headed for the top add print to their digit-开云·全站app登录官网

Measured against how long we have been around, humans began reading only recently. The earliest scripts emerged about 5,000 years ago.以人类不存在的整个历史取决于，人类只是在最近才开始读者。最先的手稿经常出现在约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.希腊人在约3000年前发明者了具有元音的、成熟期的字母表。

约翰内斯谷登堡(Johannes Gutenberg)于560年前印刷出有了圣经。If reading from the printed page is recent, then reading from a digital screen is a just-peeled-the-protective-plastic-off novelty.如果说人类只是从最近才开始读者印刷文字的话，那么从数字屏幕上读者就如刚扔掉塑料保护膜一样的新鲜。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.很多人把数字化读者的经常出现叙述为自谷登堡以来的仅次于变革。

我们尚能无法确认数字化屏幕对读者过程具备何种影响。尽管研究人员尝试了研究纸质读者和屏幕读者的区别，但结果并不明晰。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.一些研究找到，纸质读者和屏幕读者在解读和回想方面完全没区别。另外一些研究找到，屏幕阅读者在解读和记忆方面展现出较好。

Apart from the difficulties of assessing how people absorb meaning, digital devices are still changing and developing, attempting to make the reading process smoother.除了在评估人们如何吸取语意上不存在艰难外，数字化设备仍在大大变化和发展，企图让读者过程更为流畅。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”.正如读者研究员、挪威斯塔万格大学(University of Stavanger)的安妮芒让(Anne Mangen)和加拿大阿尔伯塔大学(University of Alberta)的唐奎肯(Don Kuiken)所否认的那样，最差把他们和其他人的研究看做是“一次关于可能性的探寻，而非具体的假设检验”。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.他们对人们在屏幕（iPad上的Kindle应用软件）和纸质读者否不存在差异展开研究，不过也仔细观察了读者小说和非小说之间的差异。

他们给了研究对象一篇描写一宗再次发生在商场的现实谋杀案的文章，告诉他其中一组这件事是虚构的，告诉他另一组文章是现实的。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.在指出读者内容为小说的研究对象中，屏幕读者和纸质读者之间完全没差异。在iPad上读者的人对文中所述事件的再次发生地点有点不确认。

但是他们对文字描述的解读、对故事情节的投放以及对人物的同情程度，与纸质阅读者完全没差异。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.那两组指出自己读者的所谓小说的研究对象，则不存在明显差异。与纸质阅读者比起，iPad阅读者对文字描述的解读更差，对故事的投放要强，同情心也较少。

Why the difference? The writers quote research suggesting that reading non-fiction involves fast processing (“skimming”)” while fiction involves slow processing (“savouring”).为什么不会不存在差异？两位作者提到研究称之为，读者非小说牵涉到较慢处置（“略读”），而读者小说牵涉到较慢处置（“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.这或许指出，在屏幕上读者事实类信息促成阅读者展开略读，因此当文字描述较为详尽时，解读就较好。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.这与我的经验吻合。作为英国《金融时报》评判新兴市场国家艺术奖的主席，我目前正在读者10本小说。

由于我最近在公干，我大多时候都用Kindle整天。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.我更喜欢实实在在的书，因为它有重量，能只能翻回之前的页，也能直观感受到自己早已读书了多少——这是我“看见摸得着”的，而不必须依赖屏幕下方的进度条来辨别。

但是，Kindle外形小巧灵活，读者一起不受伤眼睛，而且就像上述研究的参加者那样，我可以让自己投放故事情节。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.读者新闻则有所不同。当下班的列车很挤迫时，我用iPhone上的一款app看新闻，而不是必要看报纸。当我转入办公室网页英国《金融时报》时，我发现自己看完了大部分内容——但并非全部。

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.当我用于app时，我只看自己感兴趣的内容。但我看纸质报纸时，我会看一些之前不告诉自己不会感兴趣的内容。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.有人曾谈及纸质读者的车祸进账，但我指出没有这么非常简单。

作为快速增长最慢的数字化读者方式，手机读者很简单，但是它似乎比纸质读者更加“较宽”。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.报纸获取周边视觉。你不仅有可能看见意想不到的信息，还可能会把它与你读过的内容联系一起。

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.对于职责就是思索有可能影响业务的威胁、机会和变化的人来说，这很最重要。这并非是个非此即彼的自由选择。

你也必需沉浸于到数字化世界中，才能理解它对人们的不道德产生了什么影响。Studies in the US show that those who still read a newspaper are higher-earning and better-educated.美国的研究指出，如今依然读者报纸的人的收益更高、不受教育水平也更高。

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.他们也广泛年纪更大。但是我也不会不时地遇上一个20多岁的“数字化原住民”在读者纸质报纸。

我会立马指出他们享有一个光明的前途。

本文来源：开云·全站app登录官网-www.bjjark.com