Print and Digital Reading Preferences and Behaviors of University Students in Qatar

  • Nicole JohnstonEmail author
  • Alicia Salaz
  • Lana Alsabbagh
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 676)


This paper presents findings of a study that investigated the reading preferences and behaviors of university students in Qatar. The study involved a survey of the print versus digital preferences of students in Qatar followed by an observation of the academic reading behaviors of university students using eye tracking glasses for explanatory insight. Results from the survey indicated that students preferred reading course materials and textbooks in print and felt they learn better this way. Results also indicated that language did not play a large part in students reading format preferences, and a large percentage of students only highlighted and took notes when reading in print. This finding was supported by the eye tracking test that showed that most students only used features such as highlighting and taking notes in print format. The eye tracking reading tests revealed some differences in print versus digital reading behaviors, for example that students tended to navigate differently in digital format by skimming and flipping back and forth more than in print, and that participants spent more time concentrating on the print text. As students tended to mimic their print reading behaviors in digital format except for using features, this would indicate that if students were more familiar with digital features then they would use them when reading digitally. Although students may prefer print, the reality is that course materials are increasingly becoming available only in digital format, therefore libraries and publishers can help students by providing both training in how to use features of digital formats and by developing user friendly digital formats that mimic print reading.


Reading preferences Reading behaviors Print Digital Format Electronic reading Eye tracking 


  1. 1.
    Cooke, L.: Eye tracking: how it works and how it relates to usability. Tech. Commun. 52(4), 456–463 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boustany, J.: Print vs. electronic: what do French students prefer in their academic reading material? In: The Third European Conference on Information Literacy (ECIL), Tallinn, Estonia (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kortelainen, T.: Reading format preferences of finnish university students. In: Kurbanoğlu, S., Boustany, J., Špiranec, S., Grassian, E., Mizrachi, D., Roy, L. (eds.) ECIL 2015. CCIS, vol. 552, pp. 446–454. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-28197-1_45 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zabukovec, V., Vilar, P.: Paper or electronic: preferences of slovenian students. In: Kurbanoğlu, S., Boustany, J., Špiranec, S., Grassian, E., Mizrachi, D., Roy, L. (eds.) ECIL 2015. CCIS, vol. 552, pp. 427–435. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-28197-1_43 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mizrachi, D.: Undergraduates’ academic reading format preferences and behaviors. J. Acad. Librariansh. 41(3), 301–311 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Foasberg, N.M.: Student reading practices in print and electronic media. Coll. Res. Librar. 75(5), 705–723 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen, G., et al.: A comparison of reading comprehension across paper, computer screens, and tablets: does tablet familiarity matter? J. Comput. Educ. 1(2), 213–225 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Woody, W.D., Daniel, D.B., Baker, C.A.: E-books or textbooks: students prefer textbooks. Comput. Educ. 55(3), 945–948 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lorigo, L., et al.: Eye tracking and online search: lessons learned and challenges ahead. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 59(7), 1041–1052 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bojko, A.: Using eye tracking to compare web page designs: a case study. J. Usability Stud. 1(3), 112–120 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Djamasbi, S., Siegel, M., Tullis, T.: Generation Y, web design, and eye tracking. Int. J. Hum Comput Stud. 68(5), 307–323 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beymer, D., Russell, D., Orton, P.: An eye tracking study of how font size and type influence online reading. In: Proceedings of the 22nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Culture, Creativity, Interaction, vol. 2, pp. 15–18. British Computer Society, Liverpool (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kruger, J.-L., Steyn, F.: Subtitles and eye tracking: reading and performance. Reading Res. Q. 49(1), 105–120 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liu, P.-L.: Using eye tracking to understand learners’ reading process through the concept-mapping learning strategy. Comput. Educ. 78, 237–249 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Josephson, S., Holmes, M.E.: Visual attention to repeated internet images: testing the scanpath theory on the world wide web. In: Proceedings of the 2002 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications. ACM (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Edith Cowan UniversityPerthAustralia
  2. 2.Carnegie Mellon UniversityDohaQatar
  3. 3.Qatar UniversityDohaQatar

Personalised recommendations