Scientiic Study of Literature 4:2 (2014), 150–177. doi 10.1075/ssol.4.2.02man issn 2210–4372 / e-issn 2210–4380 © John Benjamins Publishing Company Lost in an iPad Narrative engagement on paper and tablet Anne Mangen 1,2 and Don Kuiken 3 1 Department of Archivistics, Library and Information Studies, Oslo & Akershus University College, Norway / 2 he Reading Centre, University of Stavanger, Norway / 3 Department of Psychology, University of Alberta, Canada he purpose of this study was to examine the efects of reading medium and a paratext manipulation on aspects of narrative engagement. In a 2 (medium: booklet vs. iPad) by 2 (paratext: iction vs. noniction) between-subjects factorial design, the study combined state oriented measures of narrative engagement and a newly developed measure of interface interference. Results indicated that, independently of prior experience with reading on electronic media, readers in the iPad condition reported dislocation within the text and awkwardness in handling their medium. Also, iPad readers who believed they were reading non- iction were less likely to report narrative coherence and transportation, while booklet readers who believed they were reading noniction were, if anything, more likely to report narrative coherence. Finally, booklet (but not iPad) readers were more likely to report a close association between transportation and empa- thy. Implications of these indings for cognitive and emotional engagement with textual narratives on paper and tablet are discussed. Keywords: emotion, new media, media efects, narrative, reading, paratext Regardless of what we read (news, expository texts, or literature), how we read is shaped by the technologies with which we read (Mangen, 2008; Manguel, 1996). As we increasingly engage narratives and news stories on tablets (e.g., iPad) and e- readers (e.g., Kindle), psychological and psychobiological aspects of the transition from paper- to screen-based reading merit closer theoretical and empirical scruti- ny. Although both audiovisual and ergonomic afordances of the digital “page” (on screen) difer from those of the paper page (in books), research on textual read- ing has proceeded as though the physical medium and its visual and ergonomic features are transparent (cf. Kamil, Pearson, Moje, & Alerbach, 2011). Because