Kelly Lawler

USA TODAY

Here's more fodder for the great paper vs. e-book debate.

A new study has found that readers using an e-reader were "significantly" worse than print book readers at remembering when events occurred in a story, The Guardianreports.

The study, which was presented at a conference in Italy in July, gave 50 readers the same Elizabeth George short story to read. Half read on a Kindle and half read a paperback. Afterward the readers were tested on plot, character, objects and settings.

"The Kindle readers performed significantly worse on the plot reconstruction measure, i.e., when they were asked to place 14 events in the correct order," Ann Mangen, a researcher on the study told The Guardian.

The research suggests that the physical experience of holding a Kindle does not provide the same support for remembering the order of events in a story as a print book does.

"When you read on paper you can sense with your fingers a pile of pages on the left growing, and shrinking on the right," Mangen said. "You have the tactile sense of progress, in addition to the visual."

Mangen chairs a European research network which looks at the effects of digital text on reading. "We need to provide research and evidence-based knowledge to publishers on what kind of devices (iPad, Kindle, print) should be used for what kind of content," she said.