Collina, E. (2017). “Print vs. Electronic”…scontro o incontro? Biblioteche Oggi, 35(5), 25–32.

Johnston, N., Salaz, A. M., & Alsabbagh, L. (2016). Print and digital reading preferences and behaviors of university students in Qatar. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 676, 48. Retrieved from
Mizrachi, D. (2015). Undergraduates’ academic reading format preferences and behaviors. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(3), 301–311.
Mizrachi, D., Boustany, J., Kurbanoğlu, S., Doğan, G., Todorova, T., & Vilar, P. (2016). The Academic Reading Format International Study (ARFIS): Investigating students around the world. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 676, 215–227. Retrieved from
Pálsdóttir, Á., & Einarsdóttir, S. B. (2016). Print vs. digital preferences: Study material and reading behavior of students at the University of Iceland. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 676, 228–237. Retrieved from
Pešut, D., & Živković, D. (2016). Students’ academic reading format preferences in Croatia. New Library World, 117(5/6), 392–406.
Põldaas, M. (2016). Print or Electronic? Estonian Students’ Preferences in Their Academic Readings. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 676, 238–246. Retrieved from
Ríos Amaya, J., & Secker, J. (2016). Choosing between print and electronic… Or keeping both? Academic Reading Format International Study (ARFIS) UK Report. Retrieved from
Todorova, T., Krasteva, R., Trencheva, T., & Tsvetkova, E. (2016). Academic policy reflections of student’s reading behavior study in ULSIT.  Communications in Computer and Information Science, 676, 256–264. Retrieved from



An update on the ARFIS study” 28 May, 2017. UK Copyright Literacy [blog].

The battle between an eBook and the print” 16 May, 2017. The Signal.

Print isn’t dead: Students prefer it over digital for academic reading, study finds” 16 May, 2017. Carnegie Mellon University News.

Students prefer print to electronic, says UCLA study” 10 May, 2017. Marhaba.

College Students’ Reading Behaviors in Print and Online: A Conversation with Dr. Diane Mizrachi” 29 July, 2016. Huffington Post.

Further Reading

Adler, M. (1940). How to read a book: The art of getting a liberal education. Simon and Schuster Inc., New York.

Baron, N. (2015), Words onscreen: The fate of reading in a digital world. Oxford University Press, New York.

Becker, B.W. (2015), “Ebooks in the Library: the current state of research.” Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 34(4), pp. 230-233.

Cull, B. W. (2011), “Reading revolutions: Online digital text and implications for reading in academe.” First Monday, 16(6).

Extended Bibliography:
Works related to print and digital reading for learning

Cognitive studies and reading comprehension

Ackerman, R., & Goldsmith, M. (2011). Metacognitive regulation of text learning: On screen versus on paper. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(1), 18-32.    doi:

Ackerman R, Lauterman T (2012) Taking reading comprehension exams on screen or on paper? A metacognitive analysis of learning texts under time pressure. Computers in Human Behavior 28(5): 1816–1828.

Ben-Yehudah G, Eshet-Alkalai Y (2014) The influence of text annotation tools on print and digital reading comprehension. In: 9th Chais conference for the study of innovation and learning technologies: Learning in the technological era (eds Eshet-Alkalai Y, Caspi A, Geri N, .), Raanana, Israel, 11–12 February 2014, pp. 28–35.

Chen, G., Cheng, W., Chang, T., Zheng, X., & Huang, R. (2014). A comparison of reading comprehension across paper, computer screens, and tablets: Does tablet familiarity matter? Journal of Computers in Education, 1(2–3), 213–225.

Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Geri, N. (2007). Does the medium affect the message? The influence of text     representation format on critical thinking. Human Systems Management, 26(4), 269-279.

Mangen, Anne, Bente R. Walgermo, and Kolbjørn Brønnick. “Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension.” International Journal of Educational Research 58: 61-68. 2013. Cognitive/Reading comprehension

Mangen, A. and Kuiken, D. (2014). Lost in an iPad: narrative engagement on paper and tablet. Scientific Study of Literature, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 150-177.

Sidi, Y., Ophir, Y., & Ackerman, R. (2016). Generalizing screen inferiority-does the medium, screen versus paper, affect performance even with brief tasks? Metacognition and Learning, 11(1), 15-33.

Subrahmanyam, K., Michikyan, M., Clemmons, C., Carrillo, R., Uhls, Y. T., & Greenfield, P. M. (2013). Learning from paper, learning from screens: impact of screen reading and multitasking conditions on reading and writing among college students. International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning (IJCBPL), 3(4), 1-27.

Studies of print versus digital reading preference

Aharony, N. & Bar-Ilan, J. (2016). Students’ academic reading preferences: An exploratory study. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. 1-11. Very extensive bibliography

Corlett-Rivera, K., & Hackman, T. (2014). E-book usage and attitudes in the humanities, social sciences, and education. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 14(2), 255–286.

Dilevko, J., & Gottlieb, L. (2002). Print sources in an electronic age: A vital part of the research process for undergraduate students. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 28(6), 381–392.

Foasberg, N. (2014). Student reading practices in print and electronic media. College and Research Libraries, 75(5), 705–723.

Gabriel, Lizette. “Are Students Keeping Up with the E-book Evolution? Are E-books Keeping Up with Students’ Evolving Needs? Distance Students and E-book Usage, A Survey.” Journal of Library & Information Services in Distance Learning.  6.3/4: 180-198. Jul-Dec2012 e-books

Ji, S. W., Michaels, S., & Waterman, D. (2014). Print vs. electronic readings in college courses: Cost-efficiency and perceived learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 17–24.

Liu, Z. (2006). Print vs. electronic resources: A study of user perceptions, preferences, and use. Information Processing and Management, 42(2), 583–592.

Mizrachi, Diane. (2010) “Undergraduates’ Academic Information and Library Behaviors: Preliminary Results.” Reference Services Review 38.4: 571-580. From my dissertation study

Mizrachi, D., & Bates, M. J. (2013). Undergraduates’ personal academic information management and the consideration of time and task-urgency. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(8), 1590–1607.

Mizrachi, D. (2015). Undergraduates’ Academic Reading Format Preferences and Behaviors. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(3), 301-311.

Mizrachi, D. (2016). Buy, borrow, or access online? Reference Services Review, 44(4), 583-595.

University of California Libraries. UC Libraries Academic e-Book Usage Survey: Springer e-Book Pilot Project Springer e-Book Pilot Project, May 2011. Retrieved from

Literature on e-book costs

Bailey, T.P., Scott, A.L., Best, R.D.  (2015). Cost differentials between e-books and print in academic libraries. College & Research Libraries. 76 (1); 6-18.

Herman, P.C. (2014, September 29). The Hidden Costs of E-books at University Libraries. The Times of San Diego. Retrieved from

In popular media

Carr, Nicholas. (2013, August 29). Paper vs. pixel. Nautilus. Retrieved from popular

Crum, M. (Feb. 27, 2015). Sorry, Ebooks. These 9 studies show why print is better. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from

Flood, A. (2014). Readers absorb less on Kindles than on paper, study finds.

Keim, B. (2014, May 1). Why the smart reading device of the future may be…paper.” Wired. Retrieved from

Niccoli, A. (2015) Paper or tablet? Reading recall and comprehension. Educause Review. Retrieved from

Rosenwald, M. S. (2014, April 12). Serious reading takes a hit from online scanning and skimming, researchers say.” The Washington Post.

Tan, T. (8 July 2014). College students still prefer print textbooks. Publishers Weekly.

Weinstock, J. (2010). Turning the page: Printed books are losing out to digital resources, bringing profound change to school libraries while provoking a fierce debate over the very act of reading. THE Journal, June 1, 2010. Retrieved from

What’s new?