Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Publication year range
1.
Z Literaturwissenschaft Linguist ; 53(3): 761-780, 2023.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38028130

ABSTRACT

With e­readers, smartphones, notebooks, and tablets, new reading media have emerged whose haptics, spatiality, visuality, and materiality differ fundamentally from those of the traditional book. Electronic reading devices are characterized by a range of different text representations and distinct associated reading practices. This article will address the question of the concrete practices of literary reading on screens and the specific literary reading experiences on the basis of a laboratory experiment (N=207), a focus group study (N=34), and a quota-based online survey (N=779). The synoptic evaluation of these three published studies shows that a praxeological perspective in particular can yield important insights for understanding the differences between reading printed books and e­books. The different material conditions of digitized and printed books result in different practices, both in terms of the quantity of what is read and the choice of text, the reading locations and reading situations, and the forms of acquisition and storage. However, both reading media fulfill different functions, go hand in hand with different reading practices, and complement rather than replace each other.

2.
Eur Union Polit ; 24(2): 327-347, 2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37207239

ABSTRACT

The rotating EU presidency's relevance for EU politics has decreased since the introduction of a permanent council president. However, news salience and framing of the own government acting as the EU presidency can amplify publicity for EU affairs. We, therefore, evaluate the visibility and framing of the EU presidency in 12 Austrian newspapers for 2009-2019. We conduct an automated text analysis of 22 presidencies over 11 years, testing several hypotheses statistically, and qualify results via manually coded frames of the Austrian EU presidency in 2018. The results confirm the crucial importance of the domestication of EU politics, underscoring the potential of the presidency to serve as a window of opportunity for public debate. We discuss our findings with reference to the EU's democratic deficit.

3.
J Res Read ; 44(2): 319-338, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33888920

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The digitalisation of literature is proliferating, and the increasing spread of digital reading devices and the availability of digital texts is likely to make books on screen a lasting phenomenon, but little attention has been paid to the consequences of digitalisation for the experience of narrative fiction. While on the one hand, reading literature on a digital reading device might trigger a superficial processing of the text, and problems regarding orientation within the narrative, the awareness of reading a literary text might, on the other hand, lead to more in-depth and complex processing, independent of reading medium. This study examines whether the reading performance and the emotional and cognitive experiences of the reception of a literary text vary between reading a printed book or an e-reader. METHODS: Using a between-subjects experimental design, 207 participants read the beginning of a novel either in a printed book or on an e-reader. They then completed a reading comprehension test and questionnaires about their cognitive and emotional experiences. RESULTS: Overall, the results do not suggest the clear superiority of either of the two reading media. Neither reading speed nor reading comprehension differed significantly between the two groups. Even though a broad range of reading experiences was measured, neither cognitive nor emotional reading experiences differed significantly between the groups. CONCLUSION: An e-reader does not affect either reading performance or cognitive and emotional experience of reading a narrative text, compared with a printed book.

4.
Commun Methods Meas ; 11(3): 191-209, 2017 Jul 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29118893

ABSTRACT

Crowdsourcing platforms are commonly used for research in the humanities, social sciences and informatics, including the use of crowdworkers to annotate textual material or visuals. Utilizing two empirical studies, this article systematically assesses the potential of crowdcoding for less manifest contents of news texts, here focusing on political actor evaluations. Specifically, Study 1 compares the reliability and validity of crowdcoded data to that of manual content analyses; Study 2 proceeds to investigate the effects of material presentation, different types of coding instructions and answer option formats on data quality. We find that the performance of the crowd recommends crowdcoded data as a reliable and valid alternative to manually coded data, also for less manifest contents. While scale manipulations affected the results, minor modifications of the coding instructions or material presentation did not significantly influence data quality. In sum, crowdcoding appears a robust instrument to collect quantitative content data.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...