This study looked at college-age students' ability to comprehend and retain information learned from news articles depending on what platform they read from. Fifteen participants read three local New York Times articles on each of the platforms provided: iPad, laptop, and paper. They took one test immediately after to test comprehension and another two weeks later to test their retention. Participants were also asked if they found the articles interesting, enjoyable, clear, etc. Results showed that participants' views on each format had little, if any, affect on their number of correct responses. The most consistent results on the participants' perceptions of the formats came from the laptop and paper, whereas the iPad received a bimodal pattern of responses. Participants were also asked to share their news habits while taking the test by selecting how frequently they gain news from various sources such as social media or television. These habits also seemed to have very little effect on their scores.

This study looked at college-age students' ability to comprehend and retain information learned from news articles depending on what platform they read from. Fifteen participants read three local New York Times articles on each of the platforms provided: iPad, laptop, and paper. They took one test immediately after to test comprehension and another two weeks later to test their retention. Participants were also asked if they found the articles interesting, enjoyable, clear, etc. Results showed that participants' views on each format had little, if any, affect on their number of correct responses. The most consistent results on the participants' perceptions of the formats came from the laptop and paper, whereas the iPad received a bimodal pattern of responses. Participants were also asked to share their news habits while taking the test by selecting how frequently they gain news from various sources such as social media or television. These habits also seemed to have very little effect on their scores.

The mass media genre known as true crime is dismissed often as a more sensational, less reliable iteration of traditional crime journalism. Consumer and editorial confusion exists because there is no overarching criteria determining what is, and what is not, true crime. To that extent, the complete history of true crime’s origins and its best practitioners and works cannot be known with any certainty, and its future forms cannot be anticipated. Scholarship is overdue on an effective criteria to determine when nonfiction murder narratives cease to be long-form crime reporting and become something else. Against the backdrop of this long-evolving, multi-faceted literary/documentary genre, the researcher in this exploratory, qualitative study seeks to (a) examine the historical tension between formal journalism and true crime; (b) reveal how traditional journalism both reviles and plunders true crime for its rhetorical treasures; and (c) explain how this has destabilized the meaning of the term “true crime” to the degree that a more substantive understanding needs to be established. Through a textual analysis of the forms and functions of representative artifacts, the researcher will suggest that a Theory of True Crime could be patterned after time-tested analytic codes created for fiction, but structured in a simple two-stage examination that would test for dominant characteristics of established true crime texts.