Abstract

This study investigated how reading medium (print vs. digital) and communicative purpose (informative vs. persuasive) shape writing processes and outcomes in integrative academic tasks. Eighty-one university students read three source texts in print or digitally and, after random assignment, produced either an informative or persuasive synthesis within a 2×2 between-subjects design. Keystroke logging recorded pausing across three writing stages, indexing planning, translation, and revision. Text quality was scored with holistic rubrics capturing discourse features and integration of sources. Reading medium significantly influenced pausing: students who read in print paused longer during writing, yet medium had no effect on overall text quality. Task purpose mattered: persuasive tasks yielded higher-quality formal writing, whereas scores reflecting level of source integration did not differ. No interaction between reading medium and task purpose emerged. When controlling for reading comprehension, working memory, and planning ability, the main effects of medium and task purpose remained, but period-specific pausing effects were no longer significant. Findings highlight distinct roles for reading medium and task purpose in shaping writing behavior and performance. The results support cautious causal interpretations and suggest that incorporating digital reading and varying task types may enhance academic writing in higher education, informing curriculum design and assessment.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2026-02-26
DOI
10.1177/07410883251409662
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (6)

  1. Written Communication
  2. Written Communication
  3. Computers and Composition
  4. Written Communication
  5. Written Communication
Show all 6 →
  1. Research in the Teaching of English
Also cites 83 works outside this index ↓
  1. Ackerman R. Lauterman T. (2012). Taking reading comprehension exams on screen or on paper? A metacognitive an…
  2. Alves R. A. Castro S. L. Olive T. (2008). Execution and pauses in writing narratives: Processing time cogniti…
  3. Annisette L. E. Lafreniere K. D. (2017). Social media texting and personality: A test of the shallowing hypot…
  4. Arce T. McMullen K. (2021). The Corsi block-tapping test: Evaluating methodological practices with an eye tow…
  5. Barzilai S. Ka’adan I. (2017). Learning to integrate divergent information sources: The interplay of epistemi…
  6. Beers S. F. Nagy W. E. (2011). Writing development in four genres from grades three to seven: Syntactic compl…
  7. Boccia M. Marin D. D’Antuono G. Ciurli P. Incoccia C. Antonucci G. Guariglia C. Piccardi L. (2017). The Tower…
  8. Braasch J. L. G. Bråten I. (2017). The discrepancy-induced source comprehension (D-ISC) model: Basic assumpti…
  9. Braasch J. L. G. Haverkamp Y. E. Latini N. Shaw S. Arshad M. S. Bråten I. (2022). Belief bias when adolescent…
  10. Bråten I. Haverkamp Y. E. Latini N. Strømsø H. I. (2023). Measuring multiple-source based academic writing se…
  11. 10.1017/CBO9781139048224.017
  12. Brossart D. F. Laird V. C. Armstrong T. W. (2018). Interpreting Kendall’s Tau and Tau-U for single-case exper…
  13. Brunetti R. Del Gatto C. Delogu F. (2014). eCorsi: Implementation and testing of the Corsi block-tapping task…
  14. Brysbaert M. (2019). How many words do we read per minute? A review and meta-analysis of reading rate. Journa…
  15. 10.1007/s11145-024-10621-9
  16. Casado-Ledesma L. Cuevas I. Van den Bergh H. Rijlaarsdam G. Mateos M. Granado-Peinado M. Martín E. (2021). Te…
  17. Castells N. Minguela M. Nadal E. (2023). Writing a synthesis versus reading: Strategies involved and impact o…
  18. Castells N. Minguela M. Nadal E. Cuevas I. (2022). Learning through reading and writing tasks in higher educa…
  19. Castillo-Martínez I. M. Cerros Regalado C. P. Glasserman-Morales L. D. Ramírez-Montoya M. S. (2023). Academic…
  20. Clinton V. (2019). Reading from paper compared to screens: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of …
  21. Collins P. Tate T. P. won Lee J. Krishnan J. A. Warschauer M. (2021). A multi-dimensional examination of adol…
  22. Conijn R. Roeser J. van Zaanen M. (2019). Understanding the keystroke log: The effect of writing task on keys…
  23. De La Paz S. Swanson P. N. Graham S. (1998). The contribution of executive control to the revising by student…
  24. Delgado P. Salmerón L. (2021). The inattentive on-screen reading: Reading medium affects attention and readin…
  25. Delgado P. Serrano-Mendizábal M. Gómez-Merino N. Pi-Ruano M. Rubio A. Skrobiszewska N. Salmerón L. (2023). Ch…
  26. Delgado P. Vargas C. Ackerman R. Salmerón L. (2018). Don’t throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on …
  27. Diamond A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology 64(1) 135–168. https://doi.org/10.1146/an…
  28. Du H. List A. (2020). Researching and writing based on multiple texts. Learning and Instruction 66 101297. ht…
  29. Escorcia D. Passerault J.-M. Ros C. Pylouster J. (2017). Profiling writers: Analysis of writing dynamics amon…
  30. Follmer D. J. Tise J. (2022). Effects of an executive function-based text support on strategy use and compreh…
  31. Furenes M. I. Kucirkova N. Bus A. G. (2021). A comparison of children’s reading on paper versus screen: A met…
  32. Georgiou G. K. Li J. Das J. P. (2017). Tower of London: What level of planning does it measure? Psychological…
  33. Gil L. Bråten I. Vidal-Abarca E. Strømsø H. I. (2010a). Summary versus argument tasks when working with multi…
  34. Gil L. Bråten I. Vidal-Abarca E. Strømsø H. I. (2010b). Understanding and integrating multiple science texts:…
  35. Graham S. Liu X. Bartlett B. Ng C. Harris K. R. Aitken A. Barkel A. Kavanaugh C. Talukdar J. (2018). Reading …
  36. Granado-Peinado M. Cuevas I. Olmos R. Martín E. Casado-Ledesma L. Mateos M. (2022). Collaborative writing of …
  37. Granado-Peinado M. Mateos M. Martín E. Cuevas I. (2019). Teaching to write collaborative argumentative synthe…
  38. Hall S. Baaijen V. M. Galbraith D. (2022). Constructing theoretically informed measures of pause duration in …
  39. Humphry S. Heldsinger S. (2019). Raters’ perceptions of assessment criteria relevance. Assessing Writing 41 1…
  40. Ke Y. (2024). Examining simultaneous pausing on the cognitive writing process: A micro-formative writing asse…
  41. Latini N. Bråten I. Anmarkrud Ø. Salmerón L. (2019). Investigating effects of reading medium and reading purp…
  42. Latini N. Bråten I. Salmerón L. (2020). Does reading medium affect processing and integration of textual and …
  43. List A. Alexander P. A. (2017). Analyzing and integrating models of multiple text comprehension. Educational …
  44. List A. Alexander P. A. (2019). Toward an integrated framework of multiple text use. Educational Psychologist…
  45. López P. Fidalgo R. (2018). Análisis de pausas y ejecuciones para el estudio de procesos de escritura. Intern…
  46. Mangen A. Olivier G. Velay J.-L. (2019). Comparing comprehension of a long text read in print book and on kin…
  47. McCarthy K. S. Yan E. F. Allen L. K. Sonia A. N. Magliano J. P. McNamara D. S. (2022). On the basis of source…
  48. Medimorec S. Risko E. F. (2016). Effects of disfluency in writing. British Journal of Psychology 107(4) 625–6…
  49. Medimorec S. Risko E. F. (2017). Pauses in written composition: On the importance of where writers pause. Rea…
  50. Moreno C. Korzeniowski C. Espósito A. (2022). Procesos cognitivos y ejecutivos asociados a la expresión escri…
  51. Muñoz Martín R. Apfelthaler M. (2022). A task segment framework to study keylogged translation processes. Tra…
  52. Naumann A. B. Wechsung I. Krems J. F. (2009). How to support learning from multiple hypertext sources. Behavi…
  53. Nelson N. King J. R. (2023). Discourse synthesis: Textual transformations in writing from sources. Reading an…
  54. Olive T. (2021). Executive functions in skilled writers. In Limpo T. Olive T. (Eds.) Executive functions and …
  55. Olos L. Hoff E.-H. (2006). Gender ratios in European psychology. European Psychologist 11(1) 1–11. https://do…
  56. Parodi G. Ibáñez R. Venegas R. (2009). El Corpus PUCV-2006 del Español: Identificación y definición de los gé…
  57. Parodi G. Moreno-de-León T. Julio C. Burdiles G. (2019). Google or Gutenberg Generation: Chilean university s…
  58. Primor L. Katzir T. (2018). Measuring multiple text integration: A review. Frontiers in Psychology 9(2294) 1–…
  59. Primor L. Yeari M. Katzir T. (2021). Choosing the right question: The effect of different question types on m…
  60. Rossetti A. Van Waes L. (2022). It’s not just a phase: Investigating text simplification in a second language…
  61. Rosu M. M. Cosmoiu A. Ianole-Călin R. Podina I. R. (2023). When is reliable data effective? The role of media…
  62. Rouet J. F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to web-based learning (1st ed.). Erlb…
  63. Rouet J. F. Britt M. (2011). Relevance processes in multiple document comprehension. In Mccrudden M. T. Magli…
  64. Rouet J. F. Britt M. A. Durik A. M. (2017). RESOLV: Readers’ representation of reading contexts and tasks. Ed…
  65. Salmerón L. Altamura L. Delgado P. Karagiorgi A. Vargas C. (2024). Reading comprehension on handheld devices …
  66. Salmerón L. Arfé B. Avila V. Cerdán R. De Sixte R. Delgado P. Fajardo I. Ferrer A. García M. Gil L. Gómez-Mer…
  67. Salmerón L. Delgado P. (2019). Critical analysis of the effects of the digital technologies on reading and le…
  68. Schaefer S. Y. Hooyman A. Haikalis N. K. Essikpe R. Lohse K. R. Duff K. Wang P. (2022). Efficacy of Corsi Blo…
  69. Schoor C. Rouet J. F. Britt M. A. (2022). Effects of context and discrepancy when reading multiple documents.…
  70. Singer A. R. Cassin S. E. Dobson K. S. (2005). The role of gender in the career aspirations of professional p…
  71. 10.1017/CBO9780511609664.008
  72. 10.1598/RRQ.24.1.1
  73. Tabullo Á. J. Chiófalo M. F. Wainselboim A. J. (2023). Reading comprehension in undergraduates during the COV…
  74. Torrance M. Johansson R. Johansson V. Wengelin Å. (2016). Reading during the composition of multi-sentence te…
  75. Valenzuela Á. (2022). ¿Escribo siempre igual?: Efectos de los propósitos comunicativos de las tareas en la or…
  76. Valenzuela Á. Castillo R. D. (2023). The effect of communicative purpose and reading medium on pauses during …
  77. Van Waes L. Leijten M. Pauwaert T. Van Horenbeeck E. (2019). A multilingual copy task: Measuring typing and m…
  78. Van Waes L. Leijten M. Roeser J. Olive T. Grabowski J. (2021). Measuring and assessing typing skills in writi…
  79. Vandermeulen N. van den Broek B. Van Steendam E. Rijlaarsdam G. (2020). In search of an effective source use …
  80. Vandermeulen N. Van Steendam E. De Maeyer S. Lesterhuis M. Rijlaarsdam G. (2024). Learning to write syntheses…
  81. Wu L. (2025). Remodeling reading-to-write process: A response writing task for Chinese English learners. Fron…
  82. Zheng Y. Yu S. (2019). What has been assessed in writing and how? Empirical evidence from Assessing Writing (…
  83. Zhu M. Zhang M. Deane P. (2019). Analysis of keystroke sequences in writing logs. ETS Research Report Series …
CrossRef global citation count: 0 View in citation network →