Open Access
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 52, 2018
ICODOC 2017 : Les ressources mobilisées en interaction
Article Number 02001
Number of page(s) 19
Section Les ressources au prisme des interfaces numériques
Published online 16 October 2018
  1. Ackerman R. & Goldsmith M. (2011). Metacognitive Regulation of Text Learning: On Screen Versus on Paper. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, Vol. 17, p. 18-32. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Anstey M. & Bull G. (2006). Teaching and Learning Multiliteracies: Changing times, changing literacies. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. [Google Scholar]
  3. Boroughs D. (2010). Bye the Book: In educational publishing, the only certainty is change. PRISM. Retrieved from [Google Scholar]
  4. Calcuttawala Z. (2016). 2016 ANRT Survey: Nearly Half of All Moroccans Own a Smartphone. Retrieved from [Google Scholar]
  5. Creel S. (2008). Young Teens on Reading and e-Reading: A Survey. Youth Voice Advocates, Vol. 31, No. 3, p. 201-207. [Google Scholar]
  6. de Argaez E. (Ed.) (2006). Internet world stats news, No. 14. Retrieved from [Google Scholar]
  7. Dilevko J. & Gottlieb L. (2002). Print Sources in an Electronic Age: A Vital Part of the Research Process for Undergraduate Students. Journal of Academic Librarianship, Vol. 28, No. 6, p. 381-392. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. Dillon I. F. & Hahn K. L. (2002). Are Researchers Ready for the Electronic-Only Journal Collection? Libraries and Academy, Vol. 2, No. 3, p. 375-390. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Eveland W. P. & Dunwoody S. (2001). User Control and Structural Isomorphism or Disorientation and Cognitive Load? Learning from the Web Versus Print. Communication Research, Vol. 28 No. 1, p. 48-78. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Foasberg N. M. (2014). Student Reading Practices in Print and Electronic Media. College & Research Libraries, Vol. 75, No. 5, p. 705-723. []. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. Friedlander A. (2002). Dimensions and Use of the Scholarly Information Environment: Introduction to a Data Set Assembled by the Digital Library Federation and Outsell, Inc., CLIR Report 11/02. Retrieved from [Google Scholar]
  12. Grabe W. (2009). Reading in a Second Language: Moving from theory to practice, New York: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  13. Greene J. A., Yu S. B. & Copeland D. Z. (2014). Measuring Critical Components of Digital Literacy and their Relationships with Learning, Computers & Education, Vol. 76, p. 55-69. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. Hillesund T. (2010). Digital Reading Spaces: How expert readers handle books, the Web and electronic paper. First Monday, Vol. 15, No. 4. Available at [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Kintsch W. & Kintsch E. (2005). Comprehension. In S. G. Paris & S. A. Stahl (Eds), Children's reading: Comprehension and assessment, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, p. 71-92. [Google Scholar]
  16. Landow G. P. (1992). Hypertext: The Convergence of Contemporary Critical Theory and Technology, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. [Google Scholar]
  17. Lanham R. A. (1993). The Electronic Word: Democracy, Technology, and the Arts, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. Lenares, D. (1999). Faculty Use of Electronic Journals at Research Institutions. In H. A. Thompson (Ed.), Racing Toward Tomorrow: Proceedings of the 9th National Conference of the Association of College and Research Libraries. Available at [Google Scholar]
  19. Liew C. L., Foo S. & Chennupati K. R. (2000). A Study of Graduate Student End-Users' Use and Perception of Electronic Journals. Online Information Review, Vol. 24, No. 4, p. 302-315. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. Liu A., Aamodt S., Wolf M., Gelernter D. & Mark G. (2009). Does the Brain Like EBooks? New York Times, October 14 2009, p. 17. []. [Google Scholar]
  21. Liu Z. (2005). Reading Behavior in the Digital Environment: Changes in Reading Behavior over the Past Ten Years. Journal of Documentation, Vol. 61, No. 6, p. 700-712. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Liu Z. (2006). Print vs. Electronic Resources: A Study of User Perceptions, Preferences and Use. Information Processing and Management, Vol. 42, No. 2, p. 583-92. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. Mangen A. (2008). Hypertext Fiction Reading: Haptics and Immersion. Journal of Research in Reading, Vol. 31, No. 4, p. 404-419. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. Mangen A. (2010). Point and Click: Theoretical and Phenomenological Reflections on the Digitization of Early Childhood Education. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, Vol. 11, No. 4, p. 415-431. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. Martin A. (2006). A European Framework for Digital Literacy, Digital Kompetanse, Vol. 2, p. 151-161. [Google Scholar]
  26. McKnight C. (1997). “Electronic Journals: What Do Users Think of Them?”, In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Research, Development and Practice in Digital Libraries. Tsukaba, Japan: University of Library and Information Science. Retrieved from [Google Scholar]
  27. McNamara D. S. (Ed.) (2012). Reading Comprehension Strategies: Theories, Interventions, and Technologies, New York, NY: Psychology Press. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  28. Miall D. S. & Dobson T. (2006). Reading Hypertext and the Experience of Literature. Journal of Digital Information, Vol. 2, No. 1. Retrieved from [Google Scholar]
  29. Murray J. H. (1997). Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace, Boston, MA: MIT Press. [Google Scholar]
  30. Poynter Institute (2000). Eye-tracking study conducted by the Poynter Institute and Stanford University. [Google Scholar]
  31. Prensky M. (2013). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. In K. L. Blair, J. Almjeld & R. M. Murphy (Eds.), Cross Currents: Cultures, Communities, Technologies, Boston, MA: Wadsworth, p. 45-51. [Google Scholar]
  32. Reinking D., McKenna M. C., Labbo L. D. & Kieffer R. F. (Eds.) (1998). Handbook of Literacy and Technology: Transformations in a Post-Typographic World, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  33. Rideout V. J., Foehr U. G., & Roberts D. F. (2010). Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds. Menlo Park, CA: Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. []. [Google Scholar]
  34. Ross C. S. (2002). Reading in a Digital Age. In G. E. Gorman (Ed.), The Digital Factor in Library and Information Services. International Yearbook of Library and Information Management 2002/2003, Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, p. 91-111. [Google Scholar]
  35. Rowlands I., Nicholas D., Williams P., Huntington P., Fieldhouse M., Gunter B., Withey R., Jamali H. R., Dobrowolski T. & Tenopir C. (2008). The Google Generation: The Information Behavior of the Researcher of the Future. Aslib Proceedings, Vol. 60, No. 4, 290-310. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  36. Sathe N. A., Grady J. L. & Giuse N. B. (2002). Print versus Electronic Journals: A Preliminary investigation into the Effect of Journal Format on Research Processes. Journal of the Medical Library Association, Vol. 90, No. 2, p. 235-243. [Google Scholar]
  37. Siebenberg T. R., Galbraith B. & Brady E. E. (2004). Print versus Electronic Journal Use in Three Sci/Tech Disciplines: What's Going on Here? College & Research Libraries, Vol. 65, No. 5, p. 427-438. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  38. Singer M. L. & Alexander P. A. (2016): Reading Across Mediums: Effects of Reading Digital and Print Texts on Comprehension and Calibration. The Journal of Experimental Education, Vol. 85, No. 1, p. 155-172. []. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  39. Smith E. T. (2003). Changes in Faculty Reading Behaviors: The impact of electronic journals on the University of Georgia. Journal of Academic Librarianship, Vol. 29, No. 3, p. 162-168. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  40. Stephens W. S. (2010). Books are more than files: teens skeptical about ereading. Voice of Youth Advocates, June 2010, p. 124-125. [Google Scholar]
  41. Ting Y.-L. (2015). Tapping into Students' Digital Literacy and Designing Negotiated Learning to Promote Learner Autonomy, The Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 26, p. 25-32. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  42. Wallis C. (2010). The Impacts of Media Multitasking on Children's Learning and Development: Report from a research seminar. New York, NY: The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop, January 2010 []. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.