‘TL;DR’ (Too Long; Didn’t Read)? Cognitive Patience as a Mode of Reading: Exploring Concentration and Perseverance

Inge van de Ven; Frank Hakemulder; Anne Mangen

doi:10.61645/ssol.176

‘TL;DR’ (Too Long; Didn’t Read)? Cognitive Patience as a Mode of Reading: Exploring Concentration and Perseverance

Scientific Study of Literature

Volume 12 (2023): Issue 1

By: Inge van de Ven , Frank Hakemulder and Anne Mangen

Open Access

|Oct 2023

Abstract

Reading literature is often related to cognitive patience (i.e., the ability to read with focused and sustained attention and delay gratification, while refraining from multitasking or skimming over parts of the text). In this explorative, survey-based study, we investigate the relations between reading literature (especially longer texts) and concentration and perseverance, as well as the role of different modes of reading like skimming and skipping. Our measures include an adapted version of the Author Recognition Test (ART) and a new behavioral measure of cognitive patience, developed specifically for this study: the Unscrambling Sentence Test (UST). Our findings offer some preliminary support for the hypotheses that (1) Attentive reading of longer literary texts correlates with cognitive patience; (2) A preference for texts that require sustained attention correlates with cognitive patience; and (3) A preference to skim or skip text passages negatively predicts cognitive patience. We recommend further research to derive more insight in what modes of attention are employed in reading literature, beyond close or deep attention, and how readers modulate between them.

References

Acheson, D. J., Wells, J. B., & MacDonald, M. C. (2008). New and updated tests of print exposure and reading abilities in college students. Behavior Research Methods, 40(1), 278–289. DOI: 10.3758/BRM.40.1.278
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Allen, R. E., Kannangara, C., & Carson, J. (2021). True Grit: How Important is the Concept of Grit for Education? A Narrative Literature Review. International Journal of Educational Psychology (IJEP), 10(1), 73–87. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.02.043
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Annisette, L. E., & Lafreniere, K. D. (2017). Social media, texting, and personality: A test of the shallowing hypothesis. Personality and Individual Differences, 115, 154–158. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.02.043
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bálint, K., Hakemulder, F., Kuijpers, M., Doicaru, M., & Tan, E. S. (2016). Reconceptualizing foregrounding: Identifying response strategies to deviation in absorbing narratives. Scientific Study of Literature, 6(2), 176–207. DOI: 10.1075/ssol.6.2.02bal
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Baron, N. S. (2015). Words onscreen: The fate of reading in a digital world. Oxford University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Baron, N. S. (2021). Know what? How digital technologies undermine learning and remembering. Journal of Pragmatics, 175, 27–37. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2021.01.011
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Baron, N. S., & Mangen, A. (2021). Doing the reading: the decline of long long-form reading in higher education. Poetics Today, 42(2), 253–279. DOI: 10.1215/03335372-8883248
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Brysbaert, M., et al. (2020). Dutch Author Recognition Test. Journal of Cognition, 3(1), 6. 1–14. DOI: 10.5334/joc.95
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Busselle, R., & Bilandzic, H. (2009). Measuring narrative engagement. Media Psychol., 12, 321–347. DOI: 10.1080/15213260903287259
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Camus, A. (1989 [1942]). The Stranger. Trans. Matthew Ward. Vintage.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Carriere, J., Cheyne, J. A., Solman, G. J. F., & Smilek, D. (2010). Age Trends for Failures of Sustained Attention. Psychology and Aging, 25(3), 596–74. DOI: 10.1037/a0019363
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Carrier, L. M., Rosen, L. D., Cheever, N. A., & Lim, A. F. (2015). Causes, effects, and practicalities of everyday multitasking. Developmental Review (pp. 1–15). DOI: 10.1016/j.dr.2014.12.005
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Conners, F. A. (2009). Attentional control and the Simple View of reading. Reading and Writing, 22, 591–613. DOI: 10.1007/s11145-008-9126-x
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Culler, J. (2010). The Closeness of Close Reading. ADE Bulletin, 149, 20–25. DOI: 10.1632/ade.149.20
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Dames, N. (2007). The Physiology of the Novel: Reading, Neural Science, and the Form of Victorian Fiction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199208968.001.0001
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
De Mulder, H., Hakemulder, F., Claassen, F., Junge, C. M. M., Hoijtink, H., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2021). Figuring out what they feel: Exposure to eudaimonic narrative fiction is related to mentalizing ability. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. Advance online publication. DOI: 10.1037/aca0000428
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Delgado, P., & Salmerón, L. (2021). The inattentive on-screen reading: Reading medium affects attention and reading comprehension under time pressure. Learning and instruction, 71, 101396. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101396
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Delgado, P., Vargas, C., Ackerman, R., & Salmerón, L. (2018). Don’t throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension. Educational research review, 25, 23–38. DOI: 10.1016/j.edurev.2018.09.003
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Duckworth, A. L., & Quinn, P. D. (2009). Development and validation of the Short Grit Scale (Grit-S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 166–174. DOI: 10.1080/00223890802634290
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Duggan, G. B., & Payne, S. J. (2009). Text skimming: The process and effectiveness of foraging through text under time pressure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15(3), 228–252. DOI: 10.1037/a0016995
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Duggan, G. B., & Payne, S. J. (2011). Skim reading by satisficing: Evidence from eye tracking. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 7–12 (pp. 1141–1150). Vancouver, BC, Canada. DOI: 10.1145/1978942.1979114
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Edmond, J. (2018). How Scholars Read Now: When the Signal Is the Noise. Digital Humanities Quarterly, 12, 1.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Elfenbein, A. (2018). The gist of reading. Stanford University Press. DOI: 10.1515/9781503604100
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Faber, M., Mak, M., & Willems, R. (2020). Word skipping as an indicator of individual reading style during literary reading. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 13(3), 2. DOI: 10.16910/jemr.13.3.2
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Faulkner, W. (1992). The Sound and the Fury [1929]. London: Everyman.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Giambra, L. M. (1989). Task-unrelated thought frequency as a function of age: a laboratory study. Psychology and Aging, 4(2), 136–143. DOI: 10.1037/0882-7974.4.2.136
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Guillory, J. (2008). How Scholars Read. ADE Bulletin, 146, 8–17. DOI: 10.1632/ade.146.8
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Guillory, J. (2010). “Close Reading: Prologue and Epilogue.” ADE Bulletin, 149, 8–14. DOI: 10.1632/ade.149.8
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hakemulder, F., & Mangen, A. (2021). Literair lezen in het digitale tijdperk. In E. Segers and R. van Steensel (Eds.), De nieuwe lezer. Lezen in het digitale tijdperk. Eburon.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hakemulder, F., & Van Peer, W. (2015). Empirical Stylistics. In V. Sotirova (Ed.), A Companion to Stylistics (pp. 189–207). Continuum.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hayles, N. K. (2007). Hyper and Deep Attention: The Generational Divide in Cognitive Modes. Profession, 1, 187–99. DOI: 10.1632/prof.2007.2007.1.187
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hayles, N. K. (2012). How We Think: Digital Media and Contemporary Technogenesis. The University of Chicago Press. DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226321370.001.0001
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Herrnstein Smith, B. (2016). What was “close reading”? A century of method in literary studies. Minnesota Review, 87, 57–75. DOI: 10.1215/00265667-3630844
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hisgen, R., & Van der Weel, A. (2022). De Lezende Mens. De Betekenis van het Boek voor ons Bestaan. Amsterdam: Atlas Contact.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Johnson, B. (1986). Teaching Deconstructively. In D. Atkins & M. L. Johnson (Eds.), Writing and Reading Differently (pp. 140–48). University of Kansas Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Koopman, E. M. E. (2015a). Why do we read sad books? Eudaimonic motives and meta-emotions. Poetics, 52, 18–31. DOI: 10.1016/j.poetic.2015.06.004
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Koopman, E. M. E. (2015). Empathic reactions after reading: The role of genre, personal factors and affective responses. Poetics, 50, 62–79. DOI: 10.1016/j.poetic.2015.02.008
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kosch, L., Stocker, G., Schwabe, A., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2021). Reading fiction with an e-book or in print: Purposes, pragmatics and practices. A focus group study. Scientific Study of Literature, 11(2), 196–222. DOI: 10.1075/ssol.21012.kos
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kuijpers, M., Hakemulder, F, Tan, E., & Doicaru, M. (2014). Exploring absorbing reading experiences: Developing and validating a self-report scale to measure story world absorption. Scientific Study of Literature, 4(1), 89–122. DOI: 10.1075/ssol.4.1.05kui
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kuijpers, M. M. (2014). Absorbing stories: The effects of textual devices on absorption and evaluative responses. (Unpublished PhD Dissertation). Utrecht University.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lechner, C., Danner, D., & Ramstedt, B. (2019). A crossnational perspective on the associations of grit with career success. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education. DOI: 10.1080/03057925.2019.1617110
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lentricchia, F., & Dubois, A. (Eds.) (2003). Close Reading: The Reader. Durham: Duke University Press. DOI: 10.1215/9780822384595
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Linderholm, T., Virtue, S., Tzeng, Y., & Van den Broek, P. (2018). Fluctuations in the availability of information during reading: Capturing cognitive processes using the landscape model. Discourse processes, 37(2), 165–186. DOI: 10.1207/s15326950dp3702_5
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Liu, Z. (2005). Reading behavior in the digital environment: Changes in reading behavior over the past ten years. Journal of Documentation, 61(6), 700–712. DOI: 10.1108/00220410510632040
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mangen, A., & Van der Weel, A. (2016). The evolution of reading in the age of digitisation: an integrated framework for reading research. Literacy, 50(3), 116–124. DOI: 10.1111/lit.12086
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Brønnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper vs. computer screens: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 58, 61–68. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijer.2012.12.002
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mar, R. A., & Rain, M. (2015). Narrative fiction and expository nonfiction differentially predict verbal ability. Scientific Studies of Reading, 19, 419–433. DOI: 10.1080/10888438.2015.1069296
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Miall, D. S., & Kuiken, D. (1995). Aspects of Literary Response: A New Questionnaire. Research in the Teaching of English, 29(1), 37–58. DOI: 10.1177/1948550610376600
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Noyes, J. M., & Garland, K. J. (2008). ‘Computer- vs. paper-based tasks: Are they equivalent?’. Ergonomics, 51, 1352–1375. DOI: 10.1080/00140130802170387
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Rabinowitz, P. (1987). Before Reading. Narrative Conventions and the Politics of Interpretation. Ohio State University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Reader, W. R., & Payne, S. J. (2007). Allocating time across multiple texts: Sampling and satisficing. Human–Computer Interaction, 22(3), 263–298.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Richards, I. A. (2001. [1924]). Principles of Literary Criticism. Routledge.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Salinger, J. D. (1991 [1951]). The Catcher in the Rye. Little, Brown and Company.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sanford, A. J., & Emmott, C. (2012). Mind, Brain, and Narrative. Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139084321
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Schepers, J. N. (2007). The Construction and Evaluation of an Attention Questionnaire. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology 33(2), 16–24. DOI: 10.4102/sajip.v33i2.373
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Smallwood, J. (2011). Mind- Wandering While Reading: Attentional Decoupling, Mindless Reading and the Cascade Model of Inattention. Language and Linguistics Compass, 5(2), 63–77. DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2010.00263.x
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sosnoski, J. (1999). Hyper-Readings and Their Reading Engines. In G. E. Hawisher & C. L. Selfe (Eds.), Passions, Pedagogies, and Twenty-First Century Technologies (pp. 161–77). Utah State University Press. DOI: 10.2307/j.ctt46nrfk.12
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Spjeldnæs, K., & Karlsen, F. (2022). How digital devices transform literary reading: The impact of e-books, audiobooks and online life on reading habits. new media and society. DOI: 10.1177/14614448221126168
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 402–433. DOI: 10.2307/747605
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Van de Ven, I. (2023a). ‘Gonna Get You, Baby!’ A qualitative-empirical study of attentional modulation in reading a short story. Language & Literature. Prepub online Oct 17. DOI: 10.1177/09639470231202261
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Van de Ven, I. (2023b). Attentional Modulation in Literary Reading: A theoretical-empirical framework. Orbis Litterarum. Accepted, forthcoming.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Van den Broek, P. (2010). Using texts in science education: Cognitive processes and knowledge representation. Science, 328(5977), 453–456. DOI: 10.1126/science.1182594
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
van den Broek, P., Bohn-Gettler, C. M., Kendeou, P., Carlson, S., & White, M. J. (2011). When a reader meets a text: The role of standards of coherence in reading comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 123–139). IAP Information Age Publishing.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Van den Hoven, E., Hartung, F., Burke, M., & Willems, R. (2016). Individual Differences in Sensitivity to Style During Literary Reading: Insights from Eye-Tracking. Collabra, 2(1), 1–16. DOI: 10.1525/collabra.39
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Van Peer, Hakemulder, F., & Zyngier, S. (2007). Lines on feeling. Foregrounding aesthetics and meaning. Language and Literature, 16(2), 197–213. DOI: 10.1177/0963947007075985
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wimmer, L., & Ferguson, H. J. (2022). Testing the validity of a self-report scale, author recognition test, and book counting as measures of lifetime exposure to print fiction. Behavior Research Methods (pp. 1–32). DOI: 10.3758/s13428-021-01784-2
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wolf, M. (2016). Tales of Literacy for the 21^st Century: The Literary Agenda. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wolf, M. (2018a). Reader, come home: The reading brain in a digital world. New York: HarperCollins.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wolf, M. (2018b). Skim reading is the new normal. The effect on society is profound. Guardian, 25-08-2018.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article