The study was interesting, yet by the author's own words incomplete with only something like 24 participants. Even then, I wasn't clear if each of the 24 read three different stories, one per device, or how the breakdown went.
Also, a sensationalist headline to attract hits, the comparison was among paper, the Kindle and the iPad. Why not "Reading on paper is faster than reading on iPad or Kindle"?
Finally, while the whole study was pretty pointless, reading on the iPad was slightly better than reading on the Kindle but within the margin or error.
Also, a sensationalist headline to attract hits, the comparison was among paper, the Kindle and the iPad. Why not "Reading on paper is faster than reading on iPad or Kindle"?
Finally, while the whole study was pretty pointless, reading on the iPad was slightly better than reading on the Kindle but within the margin or error.