Post Reply
Switch to Forum Live View What if future MRI studies show reading on paper superior to screen-reading re brain chemistry?
3 years ago  ::  Mar 08, 2012 - 9:58PM #1
Danbloom
Posts: 36

What if? That's my question here.

I have strong hunch, but we need hard science via neuroscience, to confirm or study,
that reading on paper surfaces lights up different regions of the brain VS reading the
same text on a computer or Kindle or Nook or E-reader screen or laptop screen, and that these regions for paper reading are SUPERIOR for 3 things:

1. information processing in the reading brain
2. information retention, also called memory, hehe
3. information analysis, also called critical thinking, hehe

What do YOU think? pro and con. What IF my hunch is correct? What then?

This is not about speed or convenience or smell of books or trendiness of Kindles,
or storage power...but about BRAIN CHEMISTY and how the READING BRAIN works...

DISH!

i have been reseraching this meme for 5 years, and very few people back me up. but i have about 25 PHD professors in my corner now. However, such MRi studies and PET SCAN too are very costly and such research grants are NOT sexy.....so.......hard to apply for.


 


As publishing industry observer Mike Shatzkin told me when I told him my views on paper vs screen reading, re my hunch that reading on paper is superior in terms of brain chemisty
vs reading on screens, again only in terms of brain chem, and that future MRI and PET scan stduies will show that reading on paper surfaces lights up different regions of the brain than reading off screens does amd that these regions are superior for info processing, info retention and info analysis, he said: “Danny, you may very well be right, but just as nobody heeded the calls that radiation and cancer might impact cell phone use, do you think makers of device readers will listen to you or even care if you are right? No way!”

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 13, 2012 - 2:34AM #2
Karma_yeshe_dorje
Posts: 12,803

I've been scanned with one of those horrible machines! It's a physical mapping, although of distribution of water.


But many direct tests of readability, have shown (say the contrast and quality of) printed paper to be much better.

Quick Reply
Cancel
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook