/lit/ - Literature

>>11073852
no, the study that claimed that had college kids read an article from huffington post and then quiz them to see how much they remembered, it was in a web browser so it wasn't even really an "e-reader", stupid study, but it got published and is now widely cited so the professor made their tenure bones, mission accomplished, even if our knowledge base is now polluted with junk

e-readers are a baby formula in a breast feeders world. You need the tactile sensations of paper to truly bond with the book.
I'm just blowing smoke - there's nothing wrong with e-readers.

>>11073852
>Is there any actual, credible evidence that supports the notion that reading from an e-reader causes you to retain less?

Yeah mate Dave down the local said he read about a scientifical booklet proving so on his alt-right facebook group

when i clicked into here i thought, the one thing this thread needs is an epic parody of the alt reich, out of nowhere, unsolicited, from some dipshit

When I clicked into here I thought, "The one thing this thread needs is a tripfag."

>>11073852
I doubt it considering my e-reader was probably one of the best purchases I ever made.

>>11074093
Close enough

e-readers are likely to cause you to skip pages

>>11073882
>Dave
isn't that the fella from /brit/?

>>11074093
youre right