Reading Habit in the Internet Era*


  • Former Head, Library and Documentation, U R Rao Satellite Centre, Bengaluru – 560017, Karnataka



Digital Documents, Internet Era, Reading Habit.


The Internet and the digital revolution have deeply and sharply divided users into ‘digital immigrants’ and ‘digital natives’ with linguistic whateverism. The society is more image based than text and chat-based than reading. Reading habit is neither unambiguously definable nor accurately measurable. Proxy measures like book-buying, visiting, and borrowing from library, citations and downloads, self-reporting opinion is used to assess reading habit. Aliteracy is a predominant characteristic of the Internet era. The digital technology and the Internet have substantially affected the reading process as well as reading habit. Our ability to concentrate and read or think deeply is destroyed by digital distractions. It looks like there is a decline in reading habit due to the onslaught of electronic media. Despite increase in leisure time and income as well as considerable increase in expenditure on other forms of entertainment there is no corresponding increase in the expenditure on reading materials. The typical nature of digital reading as against print reading is characterized by convenience, devoting less time, reading shorter texts, impatience, etc, with certain values of online users as well as cognitive behaviour of students. There is a need for continuing the reading habit of print era in the digital era. Even in scholarly reading, it is imminent that the thoroughness of reading is sacrificed for speed and quantity as more and more read only shorter articles or abstracts.


Download data is not yet available.


Metrics Loading ...


Arapakis, I. (17 March 2016). User Behaviour Modelling (ppt in slides hare by Ioannis Arapakis, Sr. Data Scientist, Eurecat). user-behaviour-modelling-online-and-offline-methodsmetricsand-challenges.

Brophy, P. (2001). The Library in the Twenty-First Century. Library Association Publishing, London; xv + p. 223.

Brophy, P. and Wynne, P. M. (1998). Management Information Systems and Performance Measurement for the Electronic Library, eLib/LITC Final Report, University of Central Lancashire: Preston; p. 1-89.

Brophy, P. Performance Measures for 21st Century Libraries. Centre for Research in Library and Information Management (CERLIM), The Manchester Metropolitan University, U.K.

Connaway, L. S. and Timothy, J. D. (2010). The digital information seeker: report of the findings from selected OCLC, RIN, and JISC user behaviour projects. OCLC Research, (A meta-analysis of twelve studies; individual studies are not cited).

Corall, S. Hybrid Roles and Blended Professionals. What Competencies are Needed? How can they be acquired? Unpublished paper given at the SCONUL 2009 Conference, Bournemouth.

Covey, D. T. (2002). Usage and usability assessment: Library practices and concerns. Digital Library federation and Council on Library and Information Resources.

The Economist (1998). Publishing, perishing, and peer review: Could new kinds of electronic publishing rescue academia from its long-running ‘journals crisis’? The Economist.

The Economist (2008). Our nomadic future: A wireless world. The Economist.

The Economist (2014). In search of lost time: Why is everyone so busy? The Economist, 87.

Firima Zona Tanjung, R. and Uli, A. G. (2017). Reading Habits in Digital Era: A Research on the Students in Borneo University. Language and Language Teaching Journal, LLT, 20(2): 147. e-ISSN 2579-9533, ISSN 1410-7201.

Frey, T. Future of libraries. Executive Director, DaVinci Institute.

Hellman, E. Why Libraries Exist.

Kellogg, C. (2013). An infographic of time spent reading around the world.

Los Angeles Times. (July 2, 2013). 11:56 AM PT.

Krotoski, A. (2 Dec 2010). Libraries of the Future. Nature, 468: 633.

Kurniawan, H and Panayiotis, Z. (August 2001). Reading Online or on Paper: Which is Faster?

Law, D. (2010). Waiting for the barbarians: Seeking Solutions or Awaiting Answers? In: Envisioning Future Academic Library Services: Initiatives, Ideas and Challenges. Facet, London.

Nicholas, D. et al. (2004). Re-appraising information seeking behaviour in a digital environment. Journal of Documentation, 60(1): 24-43.

Nicholas, D. et al. (2005). The digital information consumer in new directions in human information behaviour. Edited by A Spink and C Cole, Kluwer Academic.

Nicholas, D. and Ian, R. (Eds.). (2008). Digital Consumers Reshaping the Information Profession, Facet Publishing. London.

Nicholas, D. and Paul, H. If we do not understand our users, we will certainly fail. CIBER UCL Centre for Publishing, School of Library, Archive and Information studies.

Nilsen, K. (January 2004). The library visit study: user experiences at the virtual reference desk. Information Research, 9(2).

Phillip, A. Dept of Extension Studies, University of Papua New Guinea.

Prensky, M. (October 2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, MCB University Press, 9(5). internet-making-writing-worse/313199/.

Shumaker, D. and Mary, T. (June 30, 2009). Models of Embedded Librarianship. Final Report Prepared under the Special Libraries Association Research Grant 2007.

Sridhar, M. S. (December 1997). Are books ‘inferior goods’ of leisure industry? Library Science with a Slant to Documentation and Information Studies, 34(4): 159-162.

Verma, J. and Vijetacharya, M. The Impact of Internet and Digital Media on Reading Habit. XXIV National Seminar of the IASLIC, Vol. 50.

Ware, M. and Michael, M. (September 2009). The STM report: An overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing. STM: International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers.

Weinberger, D. (2007). Everything is Miscellaneous: The Power of the New Digital Disorder. New York: Times Books.

Wilson, T. D. (2000). Recent trends in user studies: Action research and qualitative methods. Information Research, 5(3). 28, 2012. December 17, 021.



How to Cite

Sridhar, M. S. (2021). Reading Habit in the Internet Era*. Journal of Information and Knowledge, 58(6), 371–376.
Received 2022-01-02
Accepted 2022-01-02
Published 2021-12-21