Adolescents' Understanding of Electronic Educational Hypertext (in Comparison with Printed Hypertext)

The article presents the results of a study comparing reading and understanding of two identical versions of educational hypertext – electronic and printed. The relevance of the work is determined by the important role of hypertext structures in the system of modern digital technologies, the need to teach schoolchildren effective strategies for navigation, search and analysis of hypertext information. The study involved 108 students in grades 7-8 of secondary schools in Moscow and the Moscow region. A specially designed educational hypertext of humanitarian content was used as a stimulus material. A comparative analysis of electronic and printed hypertext was carried out according to the following parameters: understanding of the general content of the text, understanding of conceptual and factual information. It was found that students who worked with electronic hypertext coped with the diagnostic test in general and with understanding factual information in particular significantly better (p <0.05) than those who worked with the paper version. Conceptual information understanding was also more successful when reading from the screen, although the differences were insignificant (p>0.05). However, regardless of the reading format, most students demonstrated superficial comprehension: only 9.7% of them were able to fully correctly understand and formulate the main idea of ​​the text, and about half (50.5%) failed to complete the task. The data obtained allow us to conclude that, although working with hypertext is more successful in a digital environment, the prevalence of incomplete and inaccurate understanding indicates the need for special regular work in schools to teach students effective strategies for interacting with hypertext both from screens and from paper.

1. Astaf'yeva G.A., Borzova T.V. Ispol'zovaniye giperteksta dlya formirovaniya ponimaniya v obuchenii studentov vuza [Using hypertext to form understanding in teaching university students]. Uchenyye zametki TOGU [Scientific notes of Tomsk State University], 2022. Vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 83–89. Available at: http://pnu.edu.ru/media/ejournal/articles-2022/TGU_13_13.pdf (Accessed 28.10.2024) (In Russ.).
2. Borisenko N.A., Mironova K.V., Shishkova S.V. Vklad nauchnoi shkoly G.G. Granik v psikhologiyu ponimaniya: ot bumazhnogo teksta k elektronnomu [The contribution of the scientific school of G.G. Granik to the psychology of understanding: from paper text to electronic]. Teoreticheskaya i eksperimental'naya psikhologiya [Theoretical and experimental psychology], 2022. Vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 170–186. DOI:10.24412/2073-0861-2022-3-170-186 (In Russ.).
3. Voiskunskii A.E. Internet kak prostranstvo poznaniya: psikhologicheskie aspekty primeneniya gipertekstovykh struktur [The Internet as a space of knowledge: psychological aspects of the use of hypertext structures]. Sovremennaya zarubezhnaya psikhologiya = Modern foreign psychology, 2017. Vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 7–20. DOI:10.17759/jmfp.2017060401 (In Russ.).
4. Gal'perin I.R. Tekst kak ob"ekt lingvisticheskogo issledovanija [Text as an object of linguistic research]. 5th ed. erased: Moscow: KomKniga, 2007. 144 p. (In Russ.).
5. Gornyakova T.A. Lingvisticheskiye osobennosti giperteksta kak faktor yego vospriyatiya [Linguistic features of hypertext as a factor in its perception]. Nauka i shkola [Science and School], 2021, no. 5, pp. 224–231. DOI:10.31862/1819-463X-2021-5-224-231 (In Russ.).
6. Granik G.G., Kontsevaya L.A., Mironova K.V. A.S. Pushkin, ego druz'ya i sovremenniki [A.S. Pushkin, his friends and contemporaries]. 2-e izd. Moscow: Mnemozina, 2022. 488 p. (In Russ.).
7. Dedova O.V. Lingvosemioticheskii analiz elektronnogo giperteksta (na materiale russkoyazychnogo Interneta). Avtoref. diss. dokt. filol. nauk. [Semio-linguistic analysis of electronic hypertext (based on the Russian-language Internet). Dr. Sci. (Philology) Thesis]. Moscow, 2006. 52 p. (In Russ.).
8. Korobov E.T. Ponimanie kak didakticheskaya problema [Understanding as a didactic problem]. Moskovskii psikhologicheskii zhurnal [Moscow Psychological Journal], 2005, no. 11. Available at: http://magazine.mospsy.ru/nomer11/s10.shtml (Accessed 16.09.2024). (In Russ.).
9. Kulikova I.V. Uchebnyi gipertekst kak sredstvo obucheniya postroeniyu vyskazyvaniya (angliiskii yazyk, neyazykovoi vuz): Avtoref. diss. … kand. ped. nauk. [Educational hypertext as a means of teaching the construction of statements (English language, non-linguistic university). Ph.D. (Pedagogy) Thesis]. Tambov, 2007. 21 p. (In Russ.).
10. Mironova K.V., Borisenko N.A., Shishkova S.V. Vozrastnaya dinamika ponimaniya teksta podrostkami 11–16 let v protsesse smyslovogo chteniya s ekrana i s lista [Age dynamics of text comprehension in adolescents aged 11-16 in the process of semantic reading from screen and from paper]. Voprosy psikhologii [Questions of psychology], 2023, no. 1, pp. 27–39. (In Russ.).
11. Mosunova L.A. Riski tsifrovizatsii obrazovaniya [Risks of digitalization of education]. Nauchno-tekhnicheskaya informatsiya. Seriya 1 [Scientific and technical information. Series 1], 2020, no. 7, pp. 14–18. DOI:10.36535/0548-0019-2020-07-2 (In Russ.).
12. Ryazantseva T.I. Gipertekst i elektronnaya kommunikatsiya [Hypertext and Electronic Communication]. Moscow: LKI, 2010. 256 p. (In Russ.).
13. Ryazantseva T.I. O kategoriyakh giperteksta [Elektronnyi resurs] [About hypertext categories]. Medialingvistika [Medialinguistics], 2019. Vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 327–340. DOI:10.21638/spbu22.2019.304 (Accessed 16.09.2024). (In Russ.).
14. Sapukh T.V., Khuzina A.Kh. Giperchteniye kak novaya strategiya chteniya [Hyperreading as a new reading strategy]. Vestnik Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Orenburg State University], 2021, no. 1(229), pp. 91–97. DOI:10.25198/1814-6457-229-91 (In Russ.).
15. Stroikov S.A. Angloyazychnyi elektronnyi gipertekst kak ob"ekt lingvosemioticheskogo issledovaniya. Avtoref. diss. dokt. filol. nauk [English-language electronic hypertext as an object of linguosemiotic research. Dr. Sci. (Philology) Thesis]. Volgograd, 2024. 42 p. (In Russ.).
16. Shuler I.V. Problema ponimaniya elektronnogo uchebnogo teksta studentami vuza [The problem of understanding electronic educational text by university students]. Mezhdunarodnyi nauchno-issledovatel'skii zhurnal [International Research Journal], 2020, no. 10(100). Available at: https://research-journal.org/archive/10-100-2020-october/problema-ponimaniya-elektronnogo-uchebnogo-teksta-studentami-vuza. DOI:10.23670/IRJ.2020.100.10.047 (Accessed 16.09.2024). (In Russ.).
17. Soldatova G.U., et al. Effekt Yuliya Tsezarya: tipy mediamnogozadachnosti u detei i podrostkov [The Julius Caesar Effect: Types of Media Multitasking in Children and Teens]. Voprosy psikhologii [Questions of psychology], 2020. Vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 54–69. (In Russ.).
18. Al-Seghayer K. Comparative efficacy of digital and nondigital texts on reading comprehension and EFL learners’ perceptions of their merits. Learning & Technology, 2024. Vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 1–30. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10125/73589 (Accessed 16.09.2024).
19. Salmerón L., Strømsø H.I., Kammerer Y., Stadtler M., van den Broek P. Comprehension processes in digital reading. In M. Barzillai, J. Thomson, S. Schroeder, P. van den Broek (ed.). Learning to read in a digital world. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2018, pp. 91–120. DOI:10.1075/swll.17.04sal
20. Coolican H. Research methods and statistics in psychology (7th Edition). London & New York: Routledge, 2019. 826 p.
21. Ettinger K., Cohen A. Patterns of multitasking behaviours of adolescents in digital environments. Education and Information Technologies, 2020. Vol. 25, pp. 623–645. DOI:10.1007/s10639-019-09982-4
22. Foltz P.W. Comprehension, coherence, and strategies in hypertext and linear text. Hypertext and cognition. Routledge, 2012, pp. 109–136.
23. Kaufman G., Flanagan M. High-low split: Divergent cognitive construal levels triggered by digital and nondigital platforms. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2016. New York, NY: ACM, 2016, pp. 2773–2777. DOI:10.1145/2858036.2858550
24. Kazazoğlu S. Is printed-text the best choice? A mixed-method case study on reading comprehension. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 2020. Vol. 1, pp. 458–473. DOI:10.17263/jlls.712879
25. Lim F.V., Toh W. How to teach digital reading? Journal of Information Literacy, 2020. Vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 24–43. DOI:10.11645/14.2.2701
26. Mangen А., Walgermo B., Brønnick K. Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 2013. Vol. 58, pp. 61–68. DOI:10.1016/j.ijer.2012.12.002
27. Nanda D.S., Susanto S. The emergence of cyber literature: a challenge to teach literature from text to hypertext. Proceedings “Netizens of the World #NOW: Еlevating critical thinking through language and literature”, 2020, pp. 6–10. DOI:10.35542/osf.io/q8psj
28. Hahnel C., Ramalingam D., Kroehne U., Goldhammer F. Patterns of reading behaviour in digital hypertext environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 2023. Vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 737–750. DOI:10.1111/jcal.12709
29. Singer L.M., Alexander P.A. Reading on paper and digitally: What the past decades of empirical research reveal. Review of educational research, 2017. Vol. 87, no. 6, pp. 1007–1041. DOI:10.3102/0034654317722961
30. Skulmowski A., Xu K.M. Understanding cognitive load in digital and online learning: a new perspective on extraneous cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 2022. Vol. 34, pp.171–196. DOI:10.1007/s10648-021-09624-7
31. Taky-eddine O., Madaoui R. Cognitive Overload in the Hypertext Reading Environment. International Journal of English Language Studies, 2024. Vol. 6(2), pp. 94–100. DOI:10.32996/ijels.2024.6.2.13