The Impact of Digital Bible Reading

Christianity Today just published a very interesting article on the impact of digital Bible reading.

https://www.christianitytoday.com/pastors/2019/spring/people-of-ebook.html

Probably, like most of you, I've heard more and more research about this. Here is a quote from the article that is typical.

[quote]Many survey respondents complained that digital text tends to isolate verses apart from their immediate context as well as the Bible as a whole. These respondents noted that the physical layout of the biblical text is important for comprehension, memory, and “correct interpretation.”

Furthermore, despite findings that digital Bibles result in increased Bible reading by many users, challenges to memory and comprehension “persisted even when the frequency of reading actually increased.” As one survey participant reported, “I probably read the Bible more (more often) but possibly less deeply.”

I've been thinking quite a bit about this later and have not personally found that my digital Bible study has suffered compared to my previous paper-version study. Perhaps it may be that I grew up in a paper context and migrated to a digital one.

I am curious to hear what others are observing about this. Do you think that digital Bible reading/study is negatively impacting your "comprehension, memory and correct interpretation"? Or do you think that it may be different within a Logos environment?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

PetahChristian

Spending time with a physical text helps us recall information we've seen. We also tend to learn where to open a book, when locating what we're looking for. Handwritten notes contribute to comprehension and retention. These physical processes become associated with and reinforce memory.

Perhaps there's also something rewarding in holding a book in your hands, which emotionally affects how we remember. (I'd like to think so, but that just might be me.)

Digital reading and notetaking tend to lack those associations which also help us to recall, as well as remember.

Logos offers much power and convenience in terms of searches and study, but I do think we miss out from the lack of natural Bible markup and notetaking in the margins.

Do you think that digital Bible reading/study is negatively impacting your "comprehension, memory and correct interpretation"?

Time and aging is probably having a more significant impact on my memory and retention. [*-)]

Jan Krohn

In Germany we now have a Bible version that is optimized for digital reading, both in layout as well as in translation.

https://www.logos.com/product/166058/basisbibel-neues-testament-und-psalmen

Whether that's a helpful or unhelpful development is probably a matter of opinion... As for me, I don't use it very often.

The biggest danger are distractions by emails, WhatsApp, push notifications from "Simpsons Tapped Out" etc. For that reason I have a dedicated device for Bible reading and study only. At Bible study group, we all use digital tools. But then, I'm the only non millennial in the group. At church, I'd say Bible usage during the service is low because of the projector.

Or do you think that it may be different within a Logos environment?

Absolutely. Logos provides the tools to make digital Bible study even deeper than paper Bible study. However, most people I know don't use Logos but much simpler tools such as YouVersion.

Speaking of Christianity Today, has anyone ever received the complimentary one-year subscription?

DMB

I've heard more and more research about this. Here is a quote from the article that is typical.

A good book on memory is 'Searching for Memory' by Daniel Schacter. It's primarily 'brain' based ... what happens when something bad hurts part of the brain, and how the brain tries to re-build.

One interesting part is that memory has much to do with how it arrived ... auditory, visual, language, all different parts of the brain, and linked through the arriving channel. Re-covering a memory (verses, grouping, etc) can even involve a font, a size, and placement on a page. All varying from person, to person.

That's why I think EastTN's comment on translations today was so apropo ... the recipient of the gospel as key. Each themselves.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062442#Comment_1062442

The biggest danger are distractions by emails, WhatsApp, push notifications from "Simpsons Tapped Out" etc. For that reason I have a dedicated device for Bible reading and study only.

I totally get this part of the challenge of a digital environment and great discipline is needed not to get distracted. I was recently exposed to a book called "Digital Minimalism" by Cal Newport - http://www.calnewport.com/books/digital-minimalism/ that showed how distractions are a major factor in lack of productivity these days. Studies show that our effectiveness is reduced by 10x when we shift focus even for a few minutes which is pretty normal in our "connected" world. I've been working to try to focus more - especially when in the digital world.

Logos provides the tools to make digital Bible study even deeper than paper Bible study. However, most people I know don't use Logos but much simpler tools such as YouVersion.

I too think using Logos in a disciplined way can make a huge difference and agree that just reading a Bible app without context can be a big challenge.

Robert M. Warren

I hereby invoke the Marshall McLuhan quote tax.

$50 US on every quote. Surcharge if the words 'medium' or 'message' are included.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062441#Comment_1062441

Logos offers much power and convenience in terms of searches and study, but I do think we miss out from the lack of natural Bible markup and notetaking in the margins.

I'm not convinced that using Logos for study is less effective than taking notes in a physical margin. I think the key thing is actually engaging your mind and heart in the text.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062444#Comment_1062444

A good book on memory is 'Searching for Memory' by Daniel Schacter. It's primarily 'brain' based ... what happens when something bad hurts part of the brain, and how the brain tries to re-build.

One interesting part is that memory has much to do with how it arrived ... auditory, visual, language, all different parts of the brain, and linked through the arriving channel. Re-covering a memory (verses, grouping, etc) can even involve a font, a size, and placement on a page. All varying from person, to person.

That sounds like a good read. (Do I have to read a paper version? [:)])I don't doubt that there are benefits of receiving information in the same location such as on a page or font size but I also think that it must vary from person to person.

Allen Browne

I am curious to hear what others are observing about this. Do you think that digital Bible reading/study is negatively impacting your "comprehension, memory and correct interpretation"? Or do you think that it may be different within a Logos environment?

Ah, nostalgia is not what it used to be. :-)

Does reading digitally change the way we perceive and receive the message? Yes, in subtle ways it does. These changes can both detract (e.g. being interrupted by notifications) and enhance. A balanced response discusses both.

Personally, I never use a paper Bible any more. I read on a large-screen phone, and research on a laptop with 2nd monitor. The benefits outweigh the disadvantages by an order of magnitude, including piquing my curiosity to read and research more.

Yes, it means managing interruptions, and I’m ruthless. Zero interruptions from social media apps: I’ll go there and read them when I’m ready.

Of course, Logos isn’t just a reading app; it’s is a research tool that empowers us to understand things in ways previous generations could not. For example, last week I asked it to show me all the places where Augustine used baptism NEAR “original sin”. It’s a link protestants are not always aware of, but anyone with an interest in soteriology needs to understand how this giant of the church shaped the way we receive salvation (long before Luther). This would be > a week’s work on paper; < an hour in our digital research world.

That’s why don’t use paper anymore. There’s no comparison.

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062447#Comment_1062447

I'm not convinced that using Logos for study is less effective than taking notes in a physical margin.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both. I certainly prefer digital for many reasons. However: I have known a few godly men (and women!) who had "that one bible" for many years (if not nearly a lifetime). They had notes scribbled in them and knew exactly where everything was. They had their own form of crosslink references. I can understand the advantages of that and think it was something special.

mab

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062451#Comment_1062451

I spend a lot more time in Logos now. But I am still using a print Bible for daily reading. It's not even a question in my mind, but that might change. I really do like a large tablet and the bigger font I can get.

Suzy

Interesting to consider the different opinions.

I have found that over time a pattern has emerged of preferring a paper bible for devotional reading and electronic formats for digging deeper and academic study. Picking up a physical Bible brings a sense of anticipation that is difficult to define.

As far as I can tell there is no difference in reading comprehension. I am a big fan of electronic versions which enable quick access to background material and that is my first choice for study, but find that holding a physical copy is more personal somehow for prayer and liturgical reading.

Veli Voipio

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062456#Comment_1062456

Distractions are necessary for survival in a jungle. Reading a book for a long time or listening to one sinle voice in a meeting causes me to sleep.

In Africa one person may read a book aloud and a group of people is sitting around listening and they comment the reading regularly (often together as a choir). That kind of process might be quite natural for humans and I just wonder how to apply it in our current igital environment.

Sean

I've been thinking quite a bit about this later and have not personally found that my digital Bible study has suffered compared to my previous paper-version study. Perhaps it may be that I grew up in a paper context and migrated to a digital one.

Thanks for starting this topic, Bruce. I've been thinking about it a lot too. Some random musings:

I know both my personal bible reading and my deeper study have been enhanced because of Logos. Due to my location and circumstances, I simply would not be able to have all the resources I have in Logos if I had to get them in print. Plus being able to study in the dark has a lot of advantages for me. At this stage, I've very satisfied with what I'm doing in my personal study.

At my church, the majority of people use a digital Bible (usually phones) both in services and in Bible studies. Yes, they get distracted by other things on them. It's been my habit for a very long time to include all the Bible verses I'm using in my printed notes, so I just read off of that and rarely bring a print Bible. I don't feel bad using my phone or laptop to look up something impromptu, but I sometimes feel bad about not having a paper Bible with me. I have a nice, nearly pristine (well, pristine till very recently [:(]) one I've reserved just for preaching and teaching that I bring sometimes and tell myself to use to try to set a good example. And then I see how small the print is and pull out my phone.

I do nearly all of my reading on my computer or phone (not bragging, but it's a lot). I read maybe one paper book a year. I got a bit alarmed last year as I had lots of difficulty focusing on it as I had become unaccustomed to holding a book and leafing through the pages, etc. That was a popular book. This year I finally finished E. Brunner's Dogmatics, also in paper; I didn't have any problems with that one. I've discovered that regardless of format, I have difficulty with non-academic books--they meander way too much and seem to have difficulty getting to the point. But that's getting away from the topic of this thread.

In conclusion, though, I do share concerns about how going digital may impair learning while it simultaneously empowers it.

Liam Maguire

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062466#Comment_1062466

It is an interesting topic and one that seems to pop up from time to time.

I'm 30 years old and in my case, I almost never use a paper bible anymore as all of my regular bible reading and study is done through logos (web app, iOS app, laptop, etc.). I can't say I have noticed any decline in memorisation over the time I have been using Logos nor in depth of study (in case of the later the opposite is true. But then again, as others have noted Logos is a different beast. Or maybe I did notice a decline in my memory retention but then couldn't remember it or did I remember but fail to recall... :-P

When I read on Logos, I tend to read the bible on my laptop with a Morphological visual filter which colours each word based on whether it is a noun, verb, adjective, etc. and I have a very visual highlighting system which places coloured symbols in the margin based on whether it is a key point in the authors argument, a standout quote, a pastoral application, etc. I believe these visual elements help me retain the information better, but of course, I can't prove it. I do think too, that it can be harder to see connections in the text on digital bibles simply because you can't 'zoom out' and scan four columns of text across two pages or quickly flick back and forth - although logos column view on a large monitor helps, not so much on an iPhone.

The only exceptions to my digital-only approach are that I tend to use a paper bible when I lead our elderly folk's bible study group, whilst some in the group use tablets for bible reading, a number are made uncomfortable by the sight of the study leader using one. I'm happy to be one less distraction, so I take a paper bible. I'd do the same for pastoral (home and hospital) visits and when reading in the Sunday service. Aesthetically speaking, I think the visible presence of a bible is important in those contexts but this may be generational. I also tend to have a paper bible on my desk when sermon writing (but not during the sermon's study phase), but that is more to do with Logos search speed ;P. Finally, I mark up my passage, by hand and write out my study notes and outline by hand. Again, this is a preference thing, if I don't write them out by hand I end up making notes like I'm about to write an academic paper. The physical sermon I type in Atom.

One thing which will be interesting is to see how these trends change over the next 15-30 years. Currently, even most millennials are digital migrants; the vast majority of us can remember a time before home computers, smartphones and the internet. Further, most children still learn to read and write using physical media (wooden pencil, paper book). I suspect (but can't prove) that those born post-2010 will not struggle with the dilemma (digital v. paper) as much as there parents and grandparents generation have and for those who are (eventually) schooled in a digital-only environment will probably look back and wonder what all the fuss was about.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062466#Comment_1062466

In Africa one person may read a book aloud and a group of people is sitting around listening and they comment the reading regularly (often together as a choir). That kind of process might be quite natural for humans and I just wonder how to apply it in our current igital environment.

I think you may be on to something here. Reading out loud definitely changes comprehension. For the last couple of years I've read my Greek NT out loud and this year I'm using the Logos voice of John Schwandt which I'm finding extremely helpful. When you think about it, in generations long ago most of Scripture was communicated orally as there were few copies and most did not read.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062472#Comment_1062472

I have a nice, nearly pristine (well, pristine till very recently ) one I've reserved just for preaching and teaching that I bring sometimes and tell myself to use to try to set a good example. And then I see how small the print is and pull out my phone.

Thanks for your honesty about bringing a physical Bible to be an example. It reminds me of a pastor friend of mine that would put his giving envelope into the collection plate every week even though he gave bi-weekly as he wanted to be an example. I think the condition of our heart and actions far outweighs how we appear to others but I also understand why people do it.

I've discovered that regardless of format, I have difficulty with non-academic books--they meander way too much and seem to have difficulty getting to the point.

I find this to be the case with me as well. I much prefer study over reading for personal enjoyment. I think that's why it is much more of a discipline for me to read fiction than non fiction.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062474#Comment_1062474

I believe these visual elements help me retain the information better, but of course, I can't prove it.

I think the key to remembering anything is actually engaging in the text. Whatever tools we use that help us do that will surely help us with memory and comprehension.

Perk

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062500#Comment_1062500

I think the visual experience is much different. The device I read the Bible on is the same device I use for reading the news, ,texting, checking email and FB. And somehow that feels less "sacred" (Hope that makes sense).

With paper we quickly have to learn the order of the books in order to find references. With digital, I can go to Habakkuk 3:16 just as fast as I can go to John 3:16. Before I needed to know that Habakkuk was one of the minor prophets and located near the end of the OT and John was the fourth gospel in the NT. With digital I don't need to know the order of the books. I don't even need to know if it is in the OT or the NT. I can see how coming to a digital Bible first really changes the experience.

Gerald

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062544#Comment_1062544

I can see how coming to a digital Bible first really changes the experience.

Certainly if someone doesn't have any understanding of the context of what they are reading, digital Bible reading would be a challenge. But this applies to physical bibles too.

J. Remington Bowling

There are ways to take advantage of both worlds.

Use digital (Logos, in this case) as your find and recall tool. Digital can't be beat in terms of quickly finding new or past information. This doesn't meant that, having found resources relevant to your topic, you need to do the rest of your work (by which I mean reading what you've found) in that digital medium. The downside is that this might mean you need a physical copy and digital copy of the same book. Libraries help here.

Take your notes in digital or at least copy your physical notes to digital. Why? Again, because finding those notes in the future with search and tagging is a clear advantage to digital. Another advantage is that physical notes take up physical space and it can be hard to have longer physical notes quickly at hand with the source material in a physical medium. I have notes sitting around my desk that often get damaged through water (either spilt or condensation from a drink sitting next to it) or crumpled or fall off my desk and land behind some device or wires in the back. I have post-it notes in books that sometimes fall out of the book, so I then have to spend more time tagging the note and what sentence or paragraph it refers to in the book. Digital notes are simply easier made, kept, and found in the future.

Regarding comprehension due to digital tex peculiaritiest.

Turn off bells and whistles, both literally, in terms of notifications, and figuratively, in terms of meta-text markings. When reading Scripture in Logos I turn off all the virtual filters so that publisher footnote indicators, non-bible text, and my own notes and highlights are not visible. After I've read what I intended, I go back and turn those things on again and I read through notes I had made previously and see any highlights.
Review what you've read to compensate for recall issues. This is another huge advantage to digital. Use a spaced-repitition flash card program, like Anki, to automate the schedule of when you will review information. Don't worry about filling out the "back" of the card, as though you need to have a question and answer card. Just insert an entire quote onto the front of the card and, with the simple act of repeated reading, you can keep helpful quotes or important points fresh or familiar without much effort. You can summarize the argument of an entire book in a few paragraphs on the front of an Anki card, leaving the back blank. Occasionally, Anki will show you this card and, thus, keep the main argument of a book fresh in your memory. I have done this and it works great. I did this with some books last year and not with others. For those I did it with, I can still remember the main points or important premises in the argument. With books I read last year that I didn't do this with, the details of the book's points are fuzzier in my mind.

The advantages to the digital medium are too significant for the market to ever completely reverse course on this, especially when it comes to research libraries, like Logos. My advice is do most of your reading with physical books but do most of your work in digital.

Bohuslav Wojnar

Yes I also red the article and it made me think a lot. Thank you Bruce for opening this topic.
I read my Bible digitally almost all the time since time immemorial. Sometimes, out of sentiment, I grab a paper one. However recently I am thinking about renewing my devotional reading from the paper Bible - and do it in my mother tongue (which is Polish) although I preach in Czech and sometimes in English, so my reading has been mostly in these two languages. The article pushed me this direction even more.

The benefits of digital study, making notes as long as I want, highlighting etc. looks to me much bigger however than the risk of possible brain changes. I might be wrong. The only disadvantage is not being able to find some places in the Bible the way by knowing "the place" in the book (paper). That's true.

What I found really less fixated in my memory is when I listen to the book and not read it with my eyes. Some books I have to listen twice to remember at least some of the content. I haven't noticed the same difference between reading paper versus digital.

Just my thoughts to the subject.

Robert M. Warren

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062544#Comment_1062544

The device I read the Bible on is the same device I use for reading the news, ,texting, checking email and FB. And somehow that feels less "sacred"

Hi Gerald:

What if the device is analogous to the paper Bible reading environment (desk, den chair, etc.) and the reading app itself analogous to the paper Bible? If you do family bookkeeping at the desk or read the newspaper in the den chair, would that change your perception?

Perk

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062693#Comment_1062693

Robert,

I agree with your analogy. Maybe "sacred" is not the right word. I do like the ability to have a multi-translation, parallel text, large print study bible in my shirt pocket.

I was thinking about the different motions used in electronic vs paper media. With electronics we "jump" to a passage, skipping everything in between. With paper we "turn" to a passage. When turning we see other passages, other underlining and does learning and remembering (however briefly) occur in that action?

BTW. I think a similar thing occurs when singing a song from a hymnal vs singing from a projection screen. With the hymnal I see the author, composer, other verses, musical notes, adjacent songs, etc. The screen provides more focus, but at the loss of visual information.

In the end the digital devices provide many benefits, but is anything lost? And are the things lost of any value, if so how do we get them back?

Gerald

Randy Lane

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062751#Comment_1062751

For some brain activity research to back all this up check out the book she references.

https://www.amazon.com/Reader-Come-Home-Reading-Digital/dp/0062388789/

Very well written - you don't need a scientific education - a very down-to-earth treatise.

Digital definitely is "different" to our brains, and mostly to our detriment.

It changed my reading habits a year ago.

Highly recommended. And arrives in lower priced paperback this week.

I now want to see similar research concerning how we process words when they are in verse vs. narrative, and especially when accompanied by music. I attribute a lot of the decline of cognitive abilities to the use of far too much music as reading accompaniment in the lower elementary and preschool grades.

(‾◡◝)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062812#Comment_1062812

Roy

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062544#Comment_1062544

The device I read the Bible on is the same device I use for reading the news, ,texting, checking email and FB. And somehow that feels less "sacred" (Hope that makes sense).

I remember reading somewhere where Catholic Priests are, I would say "forbidden", but I think a better word would be "discouraged" from using a digital device like an iPad for services like Mass as it (the tablet) is a device that can be used for other purposes other than the sacred (e.g. Mass). Watching movies or reading the newspaper etc.

I confess that my first response was "That's silly. It's just a computer." but in retrospect I think that I find some logic in that position. While I may not do that myself, I can respect the position.

Liam Maguire

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062868#Comment_1062868

This is a really interesting discussion and one thing I keep coming back to in my thinking is this: How might the headlines have read when affordable, physical bibles arrived on the scene? As a thought experiment, I tried to think up some new headlines and a 'key quote'.

"Studies show that personal bible reading is having a detrimental effect on scripture memorisation."

"Individual bible ownership reduces the value of the church community, experts say."

Maybe the key quote would read something like...

"Studies have shown that those who own a personal, physical copy of the bible noted an increase in engagement with the bible whilst showing a marked decline in bible memory. Experts suspect that being able to read the bible for themselves has meant that memorisation is no longer a necessity for them. This is a marked changed from even a generation ago. Moreover, other participants indicated that they began to give more weight to their own personal interpretations against the community consensus. One respondent said, 'I often find myself thinking, why do I even need to attend church anymore? I can have church at home now, just me, my bible and my God.' Several experts are concerned about how this new technology will impact our brains, our memories, and most of all, our church communities.
"Concerns, however, go beyond our minds. Rev. Green explains, 'Don't get me wrong, I am thankful that people have access to the Word of God in a way that we would not have imagined possible 50 years ago. But now that mass-printed bibles are cheaply available it seems as if peoples respect for the scriptures has decreased not increased, the bible has become a just another household object, less sacred perhaps?. Not to mention the many distractions that get in the way of bible reading in the home. Distractions such as family interruptions, housework, or an unexpected neighbour dropping by.'

The above is not supposed to be historically accurate; I had to play fast and loose with the history to make it 'work'. I do intend it to be tongue in cheek, and to that end, I've purposely written it to include several of the points made in this discussion. I did this not to mock those views (they're all very insightful) but I did want to raise the point that the emergence of the mass-produced printed bible dramatically changed how many people engaged with God's word since (once they could read) people no longer needed to pass it oral-community setting as they had before. Suddenly, people could interact with God's word without A. having to memorise it, B. Listening to someone who had memorised it, C. Attending a corporate worship service.

I suspect that were we to have performed the same modern scientific tests in the past as we can today, we would have found that over time, this development in modern technology also affected memory and neural-pathways, not to mention the social and religious implications.

Personally, I find it is easy to think of humans as fixed and unchanging and technology as malleable, so changes to technology are (all things being equal) good but changes to humans are concerning. However, I wonder if the relationship is more dialogical: As we shape technology it, in turn (and to varying degrees) shapes us back. However, I suspect that this has always been the case as newer and more powerful technological advances have effected how we engage with the world and information. Perhaps, it is simply that for the first time we have the technology to observably measure it, and so are being forced to integrate this into our grid of what it means to be creative human agents.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062874#Comment_1062874

I suspect that were we to have performed the same modern scientific tests in the past as we can today, we would have found that over time, this development in modern technology also affected memory and neural-pathways, not to mention the social and religious implications.

Liam, what a great post. I think you may be on to something. Certainly with changes in technology the neural pathways of learning must change. Just has they had to change from oral learning to reading on paper, so adjustment is necessary from paper to digital. I will have to reflect more on this.

Sean

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062888#Comment_1062888

Of course, there's also the flip side of contemporary literacy. I've done all my work on computers for a very long time, and while I can type like the wind, I can barely write by hand anymore. If I had to hand write an exam for longer than, say, 20 minutes, I would probably physically be unable to do it, and you certainly would be unable to read it. [:D]

Anthony Dowden

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062891#Comment_1062891

I can go along with that. I’ve been using computers since the early 80s and hardly touched a pen in the last twenty years. Now I struggle to even sign my signature. Anything else just looks like a spider trail across the paper.

Al Het

In a setting such as this forum, you are most likely to get answers based on preference, as few of us have been part of objective studies. However, there have now been numerous studies done on retention with regards to paper vs plastic (electronic). People in the field of learning/memory almost universally say the debate is over regarding which reading type leads to the best retention. Whether a person "grew up" with electronic formats, or books, the empirical evidence supports better retention with paper resources. Just how much better can depend on many variables, and can very greatly from person to person. The reason people do better with print is likely due to spacial orientation. The brain is good at keeping track where you are in a physical book, a chapter, or even a paragraph, and this seems to help retention or retrieval, often significantly. This becomes obvious on the extreme scale. Imagine reading something like War And Peace, if you could only get a few words at a time, reading on your phone or something. It would be really hard to digest large amounts of information in this manner.

Are there significant advantages to electronic media? Of course. You can carry thousands of books in one device, and search across all those materials. Might you retain the information better if you had a massive staff who could search and look up all those resources in seconds while you are studying Scripture, regardless of where you are? Maybe, but it's a moot argument.

All this to say, the reality is, we tend to prefer that which we are used to, and whether it objectively produces the best results or not, we tend to feel like it does. As technology moves forward, and we all embrace the numerous advantages of it, the disadvantages will be seen as less and less significant to us.

By the way, similar results are found with students taking notes during lectures with physical pen and paper. Regardless of what people are used to, studies are showing that students retain information better when using paper and pencil, not a computer. However, as a guy who went to Seminary before laptops were common in the classroom, I would have LOVED to have all my sermon notes in digital format today. I might have remembered the information better the way I did it, but in many classes, I can barely read my own handwriting, and I'm far less likely to go and search for notes on something when I have to take out physical notebooks to look stuff up.

Veli Voipio

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062978#Comment_1062978

I still think that communal reading is the way to go, and the Internet facilitates that, by social media, webinars etc., allowing discussion and feedback in a group spread over the world.

The Western concept of reading quietly alone is ok when in living in a cave in the desert, but we should also be aware of other possibilities.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062978#Comment_1062978

In a setting such as this forum, you are most likely to get answers based on preference, as few of us have been part of objective studies. However, there have now been numerous studies done on retention with regards to paper vs plastic (electronic). People in the field of learning/memory almost universally say the debate is over regarding which reading type leads to the best retention. Whether a person "grew up" with electronic formats, or books, the empirical evidence supports better retention with paper resources. Just how much better can depend on many variables, and can very greatly from person to person. The reason people do better with print is likely due to spacial orientation. The brain is good at keeping track where you are in a physical book, a chapter, or even a paragraph, and this seems to help retention or retrieval, often significantly. This becomes obvious on the extreme scale. Imagine reading something like War And Peace, if you could only get a few words at a time, reading on your phone or something. It would be really hard to digest large amounts of information in this manner.

Well said Al. I like the balance with which you wrote this paragraph. It does make me wonder if, over time we can retrain our brains for better retention when reading.

Obviously the people on this forum are committed to reading many of their resources digitally. Certainly there are a number of things that we can do to actually improve digital reading. I've been reflecting on what I can do. Here is the start of a list:

Choose to read in an environment with as few distractions as possible. This applies not only to where you read but also to the discipline of turning off notifications from your phone/computer and having the discipline not to jump to other apps or web pages
Engage with what you are reading
Pause to understand the context of what you are reading e.g. Check back to the table of contents often; research words or concepts you don't understand etc.
Take notes
Summarize what you have read to a friend
Read in community (see Veli's point in the post above)

Would anyone care to add to this list?

David Thomas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062456#Comment_1062456

preferring a paper bible for devotional reading and electronic formats for digging deeper and academic study

I'm sorry I don't have access to the source material, But I read in the last 2 years an article about how some schools are recoiling from e-books even though school districts can put iPads or Chromebooks in the hands of each student at a comparable cost to buying dead-tree books. As I recall, the article stated that e-reading has similar retention for FACTS (Science and Math), but dead-tree promotes better retention for IDEAS (Arts and Humanities). In my opinion, this supports Sue's affinity for paper when looking for inspiration, but electronic when searching for data.

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1063057#Comment_1063057

I'm sorry I don't have access to the source material, But I read in the last 2 years an article about how some schools are recoiling from e-books even though school districts can put iPads or Chromebooks in the hands of each student at a comparable cost to buying dead-tree books.

If it pops up and if you remember, would you mind coming back and posting a link?

My sons are perhaps the only two students without chrome books in their schools (elementary & middle school).

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1063032#Comment_1063032

Here is the start of a list:

Choose to read in an environment with as few distractions as possible. This applies not only to where you read but also to the discipline of turning off notifications from your phone/computer and having the discipline not to jump to other apps or web pages

Engage with what you are reading

Pause to understand the context of what you are reading e.g. Check back to the table of contents often; research words or concepts you don't understand etc.

Take notes

Summarize what you have read to a friend

Read in community (see Veli's point in the post above)

As you mentioned earlier, each person seems different. This will sound egoistic, but not intensionally. Using your list:

#1 My brain loves distractions. I work across 4 apps, a TV drama, and so forth. Per my brain books, it's the exciting of brain areas.

#2 Definitely. I need rabbit trails, and curious dissonances. The Egyptian army drowned, but the Sun god lived to see another day! Woo-hoo!

#4 Oh definitely. Not sure of Logos current note prowess, but my software allows automatically assigning a note to multiple locations. Then displays chronologically (by verse), showing my studies. Reminds me over and over.

#5-6 Probably works for many. I just don't have the patience. I notice other women are similar; work details alone, and summary devotional value in groups.

David Thomas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1063059#Comment_1063059

posting a link?

Here is one study I found quickly - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/figure/10.1080/00220973.2016.1143794?scroll=top&needAccess=true

Here is another source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kindle-nook-e-reader-books-the-best-way-to-read/

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1063069#Comment_1063069

[Y]

David A Egolf

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1062498#Comment_1062498

In Africa one person may read a book aloud and a group of people is sitting around listening and they comment the reading regularly (often together as a choir). That kind of process might be quite natural for humans and I just wonder how to apply it in our current digital environment.

I think you may be on to something here. Reading out loud definitely changes comprehension. For the last couple of years I've read my Greek NT out loud and this year I'm using the Logos voice of John Schwandt which I'm finding extremely helpful. When you think about it, in generations long ago most of Scripture was communicated orally as there were few copies and most did not read.

Right here Phoenix, my son and I meet on Monday's to study using Logos. We take turns reading the assignments from our Mobile ED Biblical Theology course. And we comment regularly. We are reading off of a digital screen. So I suppose this sub-thread has gone full circle! [:)]

Meanwhile, I am working with a small group of seminary students from our church in Phoenix to put together some curricula for a group of 30 Guatemalan pastors who have very little seminary training. We are not sure how literate their congregations are. The Guatemalan congregations may be aurally based and very similar to first century churches. We have plans to find out more before we produce our training material.