Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
273
The Interplay between Anxiety and Comprehension in EFL
Digital Reading Contexts
Mona Alshehri
Assistant professor at the Educational Sciences, Taif University, Saudi Arabia
mona.sh@tu.edu.sa
DOI: http://doi.org/ 10.36892/ijlls.v7i1.2006
APA Citation: Alshehri, M. (2025). The Interplay between Anxiety and Comprehension in EFL Digital Reading
Contexts. International Journal of Language and Literary Studies. 7(1).273-286.
http://doi.org/10.36892/ijlls.v7i1.2006
1. INTRODUCTION
The relationship between anxiety and reading comprehension, particularly in the context of a
foreign language, is a complex issue that involves cognitive, emotional, and contextual factors.
Anxiety can arise from various sources, including personal characteristics, text features, and
the reading environment itself. One significant factor is the format of the text, whether digital
or printed. Studies indicate that students held positive attitudes toward digital reading and
wanted to continue to read from mobile phones due to their convenient built-in functions and
portability; these positive attitudes do not always lead to effective reading practices or
improved comprehension (Clinton, 2019; Yu et al., 2022).
Digital texts offer unique benefits and challenges for English as a Foreign Language (EFL)
readers. Research indicates notable differences in students’ reading comprehension
performance when comparing digital devices to printed materials (Park & Lee, 2021; Yu et al.,
2022; Florit et al., 2023; Al-Seghayer, 2024). EFL participants demonstrated significantly
better understanding of printed texts over e-texts across literal, inferential, and evaluative
reading comprehension levels (Al-Seghayer, 2024). This finding is further corroborated by the
study conducted by Yu et al. (2022), which revealed that EFL learners achieved higher reading
comprehension accuracy when engaging with printed materials versus mobile phones.
Conversely, research by Park and Lee (2021) suggests that EFL learners experienced an
Abstract
This study explores the impact of digital reading anxiety on the reading comprehension
of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. While it is established that reading
anxiety can impede EFL learners' comprehension—especially when using digital
devices—there is limited research on this issue's extent. To fill this gap, the study
assessed 152 first-year university EFL students. Participants completed a background
questionnaire, a reading comprehension test that included literal, inferential, and
evaluative comprehension levels, and a digital reading anxiety scale specifically
designed for EFL learners. This scale measured digital reading anxiety across seven
dimensions: cognitive challenges, emotional responses, technological issues, physical
discomforts, language-related anxiety, confidence, and task management. The results
revealed that students generally experience moderate anxiety when reading on digital
devices. Notably, students with stronger comprehension skills reported lower levels of
digital reading anxiety, particularly in relation to inferential comprehension. However,
no significant relationship was found between evaluative comprehension and anxiety.
An independent samples t-test demonstrated that students with higher comprehension
scores experienced significantly lower digital reading anxiety compared to those with
lower scores. These findings provide valuable insights into the role of digital devices
in EFL reading instruction and suggest that addressing anxiety may enhance reading
comprehension outcomes.
Received:
08/12/2024
Accepted:
20/01/2025
Keywords:
English as a
Foreign
Language
(EFL), Reading
Comprehension
, Reading
Anxiety, Digital
Reading,
Higher and
Lower Levels of
Reading
Comprehension
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
Volume
7, Issue 1, 2025
Homepage : http://ijlls.org/index.php/ijlls
The Interplay between Anxiety and Comprehension in EFL Digital Reading Contexts
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
274
improvement in literal reading comprehension when utilising tablets compared to printed texts.
However, inferential reading comprehension and grammatical knowledge advancements were
greater among those reading printed books than those using tablets. Al-Obaydi et al. (2024)
further demonstrate that online oral reading activities can improve comprehension by reducing
anxiety and fostering a positive classroom climate, suggesting the value of integrating such
practices into digital learning environments. While reading on digital devices provides
accessibility and convenience, it also presents challenges related to focus and sustained
engagement (Hargreaves et al., 2022).
Despite the growing prevalence of digital reading in education, studies suggest that digital texts
might heighten reading anxiety. Dunifa (2023) points out that certain features of digital texts,
such as their complexity and unfamiliarity, can raise anxiety levels among readers. Kesson
(2020) further explains that while digital environments provide opportunities for extensive
reading, they also need effective engagement strategies to alleviate the discomfort and
disorientation often reported by readers. Numerous links in web text led to cognitive overload
and increased frustration (Al-Seghayer, 2024). This discomfort can impede comprehension.
For example, findings by Bakkaloglu (2023) prove a significant negative relationship between
reading anxiety and comprehension, indicating that higher levels of anxiety correlate with
lower comprehension levels. Dang and Nguyen (2023) add that while reading anxiety is
prevalent among most EFL learners, its relationship with performance outcomes may depend
on specific demographic and contextual factors. This relationship highlights the importance of
addressing emotional factors such as anxiety in educational settings, especially as students meet
the challenges posed by digital texts.
Given the increasing use of digital texts in education, exploring the underlying factors
contributing to reading anxiety among EFL learners with varying reading comprehension levels
is crucial. Zhang (2023) underscores the importance of digital literacy, noting that teachers’
attitudes toward and skills with technology significantly influence their effectiveness in
supporting learners’ comprehension. Understanding how anxiety differs between higher- and
lower-ability EFL readers is particularly important, as there is a notable gap in the literature
regarding these aspects. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the underlying factors of
reading anxiety experienced by EFL learners when reading from digital devices, measure their
levels of digital reading anxiety, and examine the differences in digital reading anxiety between
higher and lower-proficiency readers in digital contexts.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Integrating digital texts into English as a Foreign Language (EFL) education has significantly
affected reading comprehension and learner anxiety. The Broaden-and-Build Theory of
Positive Emotions and Cognitive Load Theory provide a relevant framework for examining the
relationship between digital reading anxiety and reading comprehension in EFL learners.
The Broaden-and-Build Theory of Positive Emotions (Fredrickson, 2001) suggests that
positive emotions expand an individual's cognitive and attentional resources, while negative
emotions, such as anxiety, tend to narrow them. When applying this theory to EFL learners,
anxiety stemming from digital reading can restrict cognitive resources, making it more difficult
for them to process and understand texts. This framework proves how emotional responses to
digital reading environments—such as frustration or stress—can impede comprehension.
On the other hand, Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 2011) emphasises the mental effort needed
to process information. Digital texts, with their non-linear structures, multimedia elements, and
potential distractions (e.g., scrolling, hyperlinks, pop-ups), can increase cognitive load. This
heightened load can further complicate learners' ability to comprehend texts effectively,
especially with language difficulties in EFL contexts. The role of EFL teachers' digital literacy,
including attitudes toward technology, skills to use technology, and access to digital tools, also
intersects with the cognitive and emotional aspects of reading comprehension (Zhang, 2023).
Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
275
The interaction between the emotional aspects highlighted in the Broaden-and-Build Theory
and the cognitive demands outlined in Cognitive Load Theory offers a comprehensive
framework for exploring how anxiety affects digital reading comprehension. While anxiety can
limit cognitive ability, the design and complexity of digital texts also elevate cognitive
demands, intensifying the challenges EFL learners encounter. Research emphasises that
fostering digital literacy skills among students and teachers can alleviate cognitive load and
support reading comprehension (Zhang, 2023). This integrated framework allows for a
thorough analysis of not only the emotional impact of anxiety but also the structural and
cognitive obstacles presented by digital texts in EFL education.
2.1.Reading Anxiety and Reading Performance
Recent studies have increasingly highlighted the significant impact of Foreign Language
Reading Anxiety (FLRA) on the reading comprehension abilities of EFL learners. Research
consistently proves that elevated levels of FLRA correlate with poorer reading comprehension
outcomes. For instance, Tarigan (2023) emphasises that FLRA is a critical barrier for EFL
students, inhibiting their ability to grasp reading material effectively, thus leading to
diminished comprehension performance (Tarigan, 2023). This aligns with findings from
(Hamada & Takaki, 2022), who confirm the psychometric properties of the Foreign Language
Reading Anxiety Scale (FLRAS) and confirm that psychological factors measured by the
FLRAS are closely related to foreign language reading proficiency (Hamada & Takaki, 2022).
Conversely, recent studies also suggest that managing anxiety can lead to improved reading
outcomes. For example, Smith et al. (2022) found that inducing positive affective states during
reading can enhance comprehension by fostering deeper connections with the text (Smith et
al., 2022). This suggests that interventions to reduce anxiety, such as mindfulness practices or
positive reinforcement, may benefit EFL learners. Additionally, Mohammed (2023) highlights
the role of speed-reading techniques in enhancing reading comprehension, suggesting that
effective strategies can mitigate the adverse effects of anxiety (Mohammed, 2023). Notably,
studies exploring the effects of online oral reading interventions show that reducing classroom
and reading anxiety can significantly improve reading comprehension scores, as demonstrated
by Al-Obaydi et al. (2024). Their findings underscore the importance of personalised, anxiety-
reducing practices in EFL classrooms.
2.2.Digital Reading Environment and Reading Performance
The transition to digital texts in assessing reading comprehension has introduced unique
benefits. Digital texts can promote engagement and interactivity, which may improve
comprehension. For example, Park and Lee (2021) found that multimedia elements in e-books
provided contextual support that enhanced EFL learners’ comprehension. Similarly,
Rochanaphapayon (2024) argued that digital literacy skills, such as navigating and using digital
tools, significantly improved reading comprehension among EFL learners. Digital texts also
offer adaptive features that can support individual learner needs, especially helping learners
with disabilities or visual impairments.
The digital environment can also introduce challenges that exacerbate anxiety and hinder
comprehension. Tsai and Lee (2018) noted that unfamiliar vocabulary and complex text
structures increase FLRA, and these difficulties are often amplified in digital formats due to
factors like hyperlinks and multimedia elements. Furthermore, Al-Seghayer (2024) found that
digital features such as scrolling and links further limit focused reading time, impair
comprehension, prove distracting, increase frustration, and intensify anxiety. Mudra and
McKinnon (2022) underscore the importance of fostering a positive attitude toward digital
reading to address these challenges. They suggest that a well-designed digital text, including a
thoughtful layout and interactive features, can help learners manage their anxiety. Mudra and
McKinnon (2022) emphasise the importance of fostering a positive attitude toward digital
reading to address these challenges. Their findings suggest that well-designed digital texts,
including thoughtful layouts and interactive features, can help learners manage their anxiety
(Mudra & McKinnon, 2022).
The Interplay between Anxiety and Comprehension in EFL Digital Reading Contexts
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
276
2.3.Digital Reading Anxiety and Differences in Reading Comprehension
Digital reading anxiety has appeared as a notable concern in EFL education, particularly
regarding its effects on reading comprehension. Studies suggest that digital reading anxiety
levels vary significantly between learners of different ability levels, impacting comprehension
abilities. However, the literature lacks studies addressing the relationship between digital
reading anxiety and proficiency-based comprehension levels. While some studies explore
digital reading across various learner groups, few examine how anxiety interacts with ability
levels in EFL contexts. For example, Dang and Nguyen (2023) revealed that while 96.6% of
students experience moderate reading anxiety, no statistically significant correlation between
FLRA and reading test scores was observed in their Vietnamese context (Dang & Nguyen,
2023). Chow et al. (2017) found that higher EFL ability correlates with lower reading anxiety,
suggesting that more proficient learners experience reduced anxiety. This finding aligns with
Zhang’s (2019) meta-analysis, which shows that although anxiety persists across proficiency
levels, its intensity differs.
As digital texts become increasingly important in education, there are both benefits and
challenges associated with their use. However, there is a gap in the literature concerning how
reading ability impacts digital reading anxiety in EFL settings. This study aims to investigate
the underlying factors contributing to digital reading anxiety among EFL learners and to
examine how this anxiety varies among students with distinct levels of reading comprehension
ability. Specifically, this study addresses the following research questions:
• RQ1: What are the underlying factors of EFL digital reading anxiety experienced by EFL
learners?
• RQ2: What are learners’ levels of EFL digital reading anxiety?
• RQ3: Do learners with distinct levels of reading comprehension ability exhibit similar
levels of EFL digital reading anxiety?
3. METHODS
3.1.Participants
Data were collected from 193 Arabic-speaking first-year female students at a university
in Saudi Arabia. Their ages ranged from 17 to 23, with seven participants older than 23 (M =
19 years). Forty-one students were excluded from the analyses and reported later because they
missed one or more of the measures due to withdrawal. All participants were enrolled in an
English course for academic purposes. The choice to focus on female students was influenced
by the fact that the researcher is female, and in the context of a Saudi university, the female
campus is separate from the male campus. The participants came from various undergraduate
majors, including Chemistry, Biology, Physics, Mathematics, and Early Childhood Education.
They used different types of digital devices: 75% used cell phones, 24.3% used tablets, and
0.7% used computers.
3.2.Measures
The participants completed measures to gather data on their demographic information,
EFL Digital Reading Anxiety, and EFL passage comprehension at three levels (i.e., literal,
inferential and evaluative). Before implementing these measures on a larger scale, they were
piloted with 10 first-year students from the same university who did not later participate in the
study. Participants were asked to comment on difficulties they met while completing the
measures. The piloting stage aimed to assess the clarity and relevance of each question, test
internal consistency (i.e., using Cronbach's alpha), and refine or reword any items based on
feedback from the learners.
3.2.1. Background questionnaire
The researcher designed a background questionnaire to gather demographic information about
the participants, including their age, gender, significance, and year in college. The
Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
277
questionnaire was distributed to participants via digital devices and took less than five minutes
to complete.
3.2.2. Reading comprehension Test
The Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests, Fourth Edition (Form S) (MacGinitie, MacGinitie,
Maria, & Dreyer, 2000) were used to measure reading comprehension. This test was chosen
because it includes distinct texts and questions measuring literal, inferential and evaluative
comprehension. Two reading passages were selected from Level 5 of the test, based on the
researcher’s expertise in local students’ reading ability and findings from a pilot study. One
passage was informational, while the other was narrative, ensuring a balanced representation
of text types.
Each passage included ten multiple-choice questions, resulting in 20 questions (10 for literal
comprehension, 6 for inferential comprehension, and 4 for evaluative comprehension). The test
was administered in a 45-minute session. Participants received one point for each correct
answer and zero points for incorrect or missing responses. The Cronbach’s alpha for reliability
was .756.
The total reading comprehension score is decided by summing the scores of all 20 items,
resulting in a maximum possible score of 20. Based on the mean score, a cutoff point
categorises responses into "high" and "low" reading comprehension levels. Participants were
divided into two groups according to their reading comprehension test scores, with the mean
score (M = 11.28) serving as the cutoff point. Scores equal to or below the mean were
categorised as 'low proficiency,' while scores above the mean were categorised as 'high
proficiency.' This method allowed for a comparative analysis of digital reading anxiety across
distinct levels of comprehension ability.
3.2.3. EFL Digital Reading Anxiety Scale
The Foreign Language Reading Anxiety Scale (FLRAS) is widely used for measuring reading
anxiety among language learners. It has been specifically adapted for digital reading contexts
by incorporating questions related to seven themes:
1. Cognitive Challenges in Understanding and Retaining Information
2. Emotional Responses and Anxiety in Digital Reading
3. Technological and Interface-Related Issues
4. Physical and Environmental Discomforts
5. Grammar, Vocabulary, and Pronunciation-Related Anxiety
6. General Confidence, Enjoyment, and Interest
7. Task and Time Management Anxiety
The scale comprises 35 items, with five dedicated to each theme. Participants respond using a
five-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Three
items (numbers 26, 27, and 28) are coded reversely.
The total anxiety score is calculated by summing the ratings of all 35 items, resulting in possible
scores that range from 35 to 175. Based on cumulative scores, a cutoff point categorises the
responses into "high" and "low" anxiety levels. A high score shows a high level of reading
anxiety, while a low score reflects a low level of reading anxiety. Each item has a minimum
score of 1 and a most significant score of 5, culminating in a total possible score of 175 points.
The midpoint of the scale, which ranges from 1 to 5, is 3, representing a "neutral" level of
anxiety for each item. Therefore, a midpoint score across all items would be 105. Scores from
35 to 105, where most responses are below the midpoint for each item, show low levels of
The Interplay between Anxiety and Comprehension in EFL Digital Reading Contexts
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
278
reading anxiety. In contrast, scores from 106 to 175, where most responses are above the
midpoint per item, show high levels of reading anxiety.
The researcher developed the scale, a language learning expert, based on a review of existing
literature and the FLRAS measure. Adding themes and items tailored to digital reading sent
the scale to two language learning experts for evaluation and feedback before the pilot study.
The input from these experts helped refine the scale further, and adjustments were made
following the pilot study. A translation professor translated The final scale versions into Arabic
to increase participation rates, as students are generally more comfortable responding in
Arabic. Completing the scale takes approximately 10 minutes, with an average time of 6
minutes reported. The scale's reliability, as measured by Cronbach’s α, was .943, showing that
the instrument is a highly reliable measure of reading anxiety.
3.3.Procedure
The researcher was invited into EFL classes to explain the research to potential participants
and outline their roles in the study. Data was collected using the participants’ digital devices
like cell phones, tablets, and computers. Participants scanned a QR code on their devices to
access the forms. The data collection was divided into two sessions. The first session began
with a background questionnaire and a reading comprehension test that lasted approximately
one hour. The second session, scheduled for a different time, involved completing an anxiety
scale and took about 20 minutes. The entire data collection process was completed over one
month.
Ethical approval was obtained from Taif University's research department. A statement
explaining the participants' ethical considerations was included at the beginning of the online
questionnaire. This statement provided details about the study, emphasised that participation
was voluntary, explained the right to withdraw at any time, and outlined measures to ensure
confidentiality and anonymity, such as not requiring participants to provide their names or
university identification numbers.
4. DATA ANALYSIS
Descriptive statistics were employed to summarise the participants' responses and analyse the
collected data. Bivariate correlations between the variables were examined. Additionally, an
independent t-test was conducted to find any statistically significant differences between the
anxiety scores of participants with higher and lower levels of reading proficiency.
5. RESULTS
5.1.Descriptive Statistics
As proved in Table 1, all measures were normally distributed, as indicated by skewness and
kurtosis estimates falling within the rule-of-thumb values of ±2 for univariate normality. The
Comprehension Level measures displayed slightly lighter tails, suggesting fewer extreme
values than a normal distribution. In contrast, the Reading Anxiety scale appeared to have an
approximately normal distribution. Overall, the measures are nearly symmetric, with Anxiety,
Total Reading, Literal Comprehension, and Inferential Comprehension exhibiting nearly
perfect symmetry. However, Evaluative Comprehension showed a slight left skew.
5.2.The Underlying Factors of EFL Digital Reading Anxiety
The Reading Anxiety Scale was used to examine distinct aspects of reading anxiety among
EFL learners when reading from digital devices. The scale included seven themes, each a
unique factor contributing to reading anxiety. These themes are:
1. Cognitive Challenges in Understanding and Retaining Information
2. Emotional Responses and Anxiety in Digital Reading
3. Technological and Interface-Related Issues
Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
279
4. Physical and Environmental Discomforts
5. Grammar, Vocabulary, and Pronunciation-Related Anxiety
6. General Confidence, Enjoyment, and Interest
7. Task and Time Management Anxiety
Table 1 summarizes the descriptive statistics of the Reading Anxiety Scale and each theme.
The mean scores for the themes ranged from 12.44 for Enjoyment and Interest (Theme 6) to
16.13 for General Confidence (Theme 5). The standard deviations showed moderate variability
around the mean, with Theme 1 (Cognitive Challenges) having a standard deviation of 4.53
and Theme 6 (Enjoyment and Interest) having a standard deviation of 2.94. These findings
show that all these factors contribute to reading anxiety among EFL learners. While most
learners generally reported similar anxiety levels, there were some individual differences,
particularly about enjoyment and interest in digital reading.
5.3.EFL Digital Reading Anxiety Levels
Overall, participants proved relatively low levels of EFL digital reading anxiety, with a mean
score of 102.6 out of 175, as shown in Table 1. The distribution of scores across each theme in
the EFL Digital Reading Anxiety scale was approximately normal, with skewness values
generally close to zero for most themes, indicating a symmetrical distribution of data. However,
Theme 6, which focuses on Enjoyment and Interest, displayed a positive skewness of 0.753.
This suggests that a more significant number of participants reported lower anxiety levels
related to enjoyment and interest, while fewer experienced higher levels of anxiety.
The kurtosis values for most themes fell within the expected range for a normal distribution,
except for Theme 6, which had a kurtosis value of 1.361. This shows a slightly peaked
distribution, meaning that responses in this theme were more concentrated around the mean.
As a result, most participants reported low anxiety related to enjoyment and interest in digital
reading.
Table 1.
Measures and Descriptive Statistics
N
Mean
SD
Rel.
(α)
Skewness
Kurtosis
Statisti
cs
Std.
Error
Statistic
s
Std.
Error
Reading
comprehension
20
11.28
3.9
.756
-.001
.197
-.632
.391
Literal
comprehension
10
6.30
2.33
-
-.140
.197
-.798
.391
Inferential
comprehension
6
2.97
1.55
-
.022
.197
-.810
.391
Evaluative
comprehension
4
1.98
1.11
-
-.217
.197
-.651
.391
Anxiety scale
35
102.6
23.22
.943
.094
.197
-.156
.391
Theme 1
5
15.02
4.52
-
-.063
.197
-.500
.391
Theme 2
5
14.26
4.67
-
.394
.197
-.201
.391
Theme 3
5
14.69
4.23
-
.076
.197
-.439
.391
Theme 4
5
14.51
4.61
-
.167
.197
-.271
.391
Theme 5
5
16.13
4.70
-
-.093
.197
-.425
.391
Theme 6
5
12.44
2.94
-
.753
.197
1.361
.391
Theme 7
5
15.54
4.05
-
-.038
.197
-.133
.391
Reading Time
-
20.51
8.40
-
1.122
.198
.937
.394
Note. N = number of test items; SD = standard deviation; Rel. (α) = Reliability (Cronbach’s
α).
The Interplay between Anxiety and Comprehension in EFL Digital Reading Contexts
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
280
In conclusion, the descriptive statistics show that, while General Confidence (Theme 5) was
linked to higher levels of anxiety compared to Enjoyment and Interest (Theme 6), most learners
showed moderate and relatively consistent levels of anxiety across the different themes. There
was variability in their emotional and cognitive experiences during digital reading.
5.4.Higher and Lower EFL Reading Comprehension Levels and Digital Reading Anxiety
The participants showed low levels of EFL reading comprehension overall and in its
subcategories: literal comprehension, inferential comprehension, and evaluative
comprehension. Their scores were as follows: 11.28 out of 20 for overall reading
comprehension, 6.30 out of 10 for literal comprehension, 2.97 out of 6 for inferential
comprehension, and 1.98 out of 4 for evaluative comprehension. Based on the percentage of
correct answers, it is unsurprising that participants performed significantly better in literal
comprehension than inferential and evaluative comprehension (see Table 1). Table 3 illustrates
the differences in mean EFL Digital Reading Anxiety scores between groups with higher and
lower reading comprehension, with scores of 97 and 107, respectively.
Table 2.
Bivariate Correlations Between All Measured Competences
1
2
3
4
5
Reading comprehension
_
Literal comprehension
.881**
_
Inferential
comprehension
.770**
.472**
_
Evaluative
comprehension
.667**
.409**
.382**
_
EFL Digital Reading
Anxiety
-.235**
-.164*
-.267**
-.127
_
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
Table 2 presents the bivariate correlations among the variables of reading comprehension,
literal comprehension, inferential comprehension, and evaluative comprehension. Notably,
reading comprehension is positively and significantly correlated with literal comprehension (r
= .881), inferential comprehension (r = .770), and evaluative comprehension (r = .667), all with
p-values less than .01. Furthermore, literal comprehension is positively and significantly
correlated with inferential comprehension (r = .472) and evaluative comprehension (r = .409),
both also with p-values less than .01. Additionally, inferential comprehension is positively and
significantly correlated with evaluative comprehension (r = .382) at p < .01, showing that
students who excel in inferential comprehension also tend to perform better in evaluative
comprehension.
Moreover, reading comprehension is negatively and significantly correlated with EFL Digital
Reading Anxiety (r = −.235) at p < .01. Although this correlation is weak, it suggests that
students with higher reading comprehension generally experience lower anxiety levels. This
finding is further supported by the correlation between literal comprehension and anxiety (r =
−.164) at p < .05. The relationship becomes more assertive with inferential comprehension and
anxiety (r = −.267) at p < .01, suggesting that higher inferential comprehension is associated
with lower anxiety. However, the correlation between evaluative comprehension and anxiety
is negative and not significant (r = −.127), implying no meaningful relationship between
evaluative comprehension and anxiety.
Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
281
An independent samples t-test was conducted to compare EFL Digital Reading Anxiety scores
between students with higher and lower reading comprehension.
As shown in Table 4, Levene’s test for equality of variances was insignificant, F(1, 150) =
0.842, p = .360, indicating that the assumption of equal variances was met. The t-test for
equality of means revealed a significant difference between the groups, t(150) = 2.664, p =
.009 (two-tailed). The mean difference was 9.85 (95% CI: 2.54 to 17.15), suggesting that one
group had a significantly higher EFL Digital Reading Anxiety score. These results show a
statistically significant difference in EFL Digital Reading Anxiety scores between the two
groups, with the mean score in the lower reading comprehension group being notably higher
(see Table 3).
6. DISCUSSION
Table 4
Independent Test Results
Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F
Sig.
T
Df
Significance
Mean
Differe
nce
Std. Error
Differenc
e
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
One-
Sided
p
Two-
Sided
p
Lower
Upper
Anxiet
y
Equal
variances
assumed
.842
.360
2.66
4
150
.004
.009
9.848
3.696
2.544
17.152
Equal
variances
are not
assumed.
2.67
3
149
.9
.004
.008
9.848
3.684
2.568
17.128
Table 3
Descriptive Statistics of EFL Digital Reading Anxiety
Reading
comprehension
N
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
EFL Digital Reading
Anxiety
Lower
79
107.341
23.645
2.660
Higher
73
97.493
21.779
2.549
The Interplay between Anxiety and Comprehension in EFL Digital Reading Contexts
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
282
6.1. The Underlying Factors of EFL Digital Reading Anxiety
The study found specific factors associated with digital texts that can increase reading anxiety
among EFL learners. These factors include cognitive challenges, emotional responses,
technological issues, physical discomforts, language-related concerns, lack of general
confidence, and difficulties in task management. Each plays a crucial role in shaping EFL
learners' experiences of digital reading anxiety.
This finding supports earlier research. Studies have shown that complex text structures and
unfamiliar vocabulary, often found in digital formats, can contribute to reading anxiety (Tsai
& Lee, 2018; Pardede, 2019; Kesson, 2020). Additionally, the nonlinear nature of digital texts,
combined with distractions typical of digital environments—such as notifications and pop-
ups—can further increase cognitive load and anxiety (Nur Asima Sidabutar et al., 2022;
Haddock et al., 2020). This aligns with cognitive load theory, which posits that when learners
are overwhelmed by cognitive demands, their ability to process information effectively
declines (Sweller, 2011).
Moreover, Al-Seghayer (2024) highlights that features like scrolling and hyperlinks exacerbate
anxiety by increasing distractions. This aligns with the study's finding that technological
challenges majorly contribute to EFL digital reading anxiety (Al-Seghayer, 2024).
Additionally, studies have emphasised the importance of digital literacy among both learners
and teachers in reducing anxiety levels by improving familiarity with digital tools (Zhang,
2023). This suggests that targeted training in digital literacy could be an effective intervention
to mitigate anxiety.
The results of this study, along with earlier findings, show that reading anxiety in digital
formats does not stem from a single factor. Instead, the combined effect of cognitive
challenges, emotional responses, technological issues, physical discomfort, language-related
concerns, lack of self-confidence, and difficulties in task management all contribute to digital
reading anxiety among English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. This multifaceted
perspective underscores the need for holistic approaches to address these interconnected issues
in EFL contexts.
6.2.EFL Digital Reading Anxiety and Reading Performance
The current study results show that reading anxiety significantly affects comprehension,
especially in digital contexts. Although EFL learners in this study showed moderate levels of
digital reading anxiety, this anxiety negatively correlated with their overall reading
comprehension performance and with two specific levels of comprehension: literal and
inferential understanding. These findings align with earlier research that has found a negative
correlation between reading anxiety and comprehension outcomes, particularly in foreign
language settings (Soomro et al., 2019; Bakkaloglu, 2023).
In contrast, Dang and Nguyen (2023) observed no significant correlation between reading
anxiety and test scores in their study, suggesting that the relationship between these variables
may vary based on context and participant characteristics (Dang & Nguyen, 2023). Another
study by Kartika and others (2023) revealed no significant correlation between students'
reading anxiety and reading comprehension with the correlation coefficient or R-value. These
differences highlight the complexity of the relationship between anxiety and performance,
particularly in digital contexts.
Integrating oral reading interventions into online classrooms, as demonstrated by Al-Obaydi et
al. (2024), can help reduce reading anxiety and enhance comprehension performance. This
suggests that classroom strategies could minimise anxiety and significantly benefit EFL
learners in digital environments.
6.3.Higher and Lower Reading Comprehension and EFL Digital Reading Anxiety
Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
283
The data showed that when EFL learners were divided into higher and lower groups based on
their reading comprehension levels, there were significant differences in their levels of digital
reading anxiety. The group with better reading comprehension reported lower digital reading
anxiety scores, while the lower comprehension group experienced higher anxiety. This
suggests that anxiety may hinder cognitive processing and comprehension abilities. These
findings align with other studies (e.g., Bakkaloglu, 2023). Additionally, they support the
Broaden-and-Build Theory, which asserts that anxiety restricts cognitive resources, thereby
impairing comprehension (Fredrickson, 2001).
Chow et al. (2017) further confirm this relationship, finding that more proficient EFL learners
experience reduced anxiety, facilitating better comprehension. Similarly, Zhang (2019)
observed that while anxiety persists across all proficiency levels, its intensity is significantly
lower in more advanced learners. This suggests that improving reading proficiency may be a
viable strategy to reduce anxiety and enhance overall comprehension.
6.4.Implications
The findings of this study emphasize the critical role of reading anxiety in shaping EFL
learners' comprehension abilities, particularly in digital reading contexts. Digital reading
anxiety is multifaceted, encompassing factors such as cognitive load, emotional responses,
technological challenges, and confidence-related issues. Educators and curriculum designers
should address these factors when developing digital reading tasks. Strategies such as using
user-friendly platforms and minimising distractions can help reduce students' anxiety and
enhance their comprehension, especially at literal and inferential levels. The negative
correlation between anxiety and comprehension underscores the importance of alleviating
digital reading anxiety to improve overall reading outcomes. Additionally, the significant
differences in anxiety levels between high- and low-comprehension groups highlight the need
for tailored interventions. Learners with lower reading ability may benefit from more intensive
support, including scaffolded learning experiences that build confidence and reduce anxiety.
For instance, tutorials and practice sessions can help students navigate digital texts effectively.
Jeong's (2012) study found that familiarity with digital reading environments reduces anxiety
and improves comprehension. Integrating digital literacy training into EFL curricula is
essential to equip learners with the skills to engage with digital texts confidently. By reducing
the novelty effect and associated anxiety, digital literacy activities can foster positive reading
attitudes and enhance comprehension outcomes for all learners, particularly those with lower
ability levels.
6.5.Limitation and Future Direction
This study has several limitations that should be acknowledged when interpreting the results.
Firstly, the sample size and demographic characteristics may restrict the generalizability of the
findings, as they are a specific group of EFL learners in particular contexts. Future research
could address this limitation by examining more diverse populations to decide whether these
patterns are consistent across various cultural and educational settings. Secondly, the reliance
on self-reported measures of reading anxiety introduces potential biases, such as social
desirability effects. Employing more objective methods, such as eye-tracking or physiological
measures like skin conductance, could offer deeper insights into digital reading anxiety.
Furthermore, longitudinal studies tracking changes in reading anxiety and comprehension over
time would be particularly valuable, as they could provide insights into how digital reading
anxiety evolves with increased digital literacy and familiarity. These findings could guide
educators in developing effective, long-term strategies to support EFL learners in digital
reading environments.
7. CONCLUSION
This study aimed to explore the underlying factors of reading anxiety experienced by EFL
learners when reading from digital devices. It examined the learners’ levels of digital reading
anxiety. It analysed the differences in anxiety levels between those with higher proficiency and
The Interplay between Anxiety and Comprehension in EFL Digital Reading Contexts
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
284
those with lower proficiency in reading comprehension in digital contexts. The research
contributes to our understanding of how anxiety affects reading comprehension among EFL
learners in digital environments.
The findings indicate that reading anxiety significantly hinders comprehension, particularly for
learners with lower ability levels. The unique characteristics of digital texts, including their
complexity and the cognitive demands they impose, can exacerbate anxiety and impede
effective reading practices.
To tackle these challenges, educators must implement strategies that enhance digital literacy
and create a positive reading environment. Providing scaffolded learning experiences and
integrating digital literacy into the curriculum can help empower learners to navigate digital
texts with greater confidence, ultimately leading to improved reading comprehension. Future
research should continue investigating the intricate relationship between anxiety,
comprehension, and digital reading, especially within diverse educational contexts.
Availability of data and materials
The data is available upon request by contacting the author.
Acknowledgements
The author expresses deep gratitude to the participants for their involvement in the current
study.
Funding
This research is not funded.
Author Contributions
Mona Alshehri was the principal investigator of the study. The author confirms full
responsibility for the following: study conception and design, data collection, analysis,
interpretation of results, and manuscript preparation.
REFERENCES
Al-Obaydi, L.H., Rahul, D.R. & Pikhart, M. The effect of online oral reading on reading
comprehension, reading anxiety, and classroom anxiety among EFL learners. Educ Inf
Technol 29, 2841–2855 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11950-y
Al-Seghayer, K. (2024). Comparative efficacy of digital and nondigital texts on reading
comprehension and EFL learners’ perceptions of their merits. Language Learning &
Technology, 28(1), 1–31. https://hdl.handle.net/10125/73589
Bakkaloglu, S. (2023). Relationships between digital reading motivation, Turkish lesson
attitude, reading anxiety and reading comprehension of fourth-grade primary school
students. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 11(4), 31-42.
https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.11n.4p.31
Chow, B., Chiu, H., & Wong, S. (2017). Anxiety in reading and listening english as a foreign
language in chinese undergraduate students. Language Teaching Research, 22(6), 719-
738. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817702159
Clinton, V. (2019). Reading from paper compared to screens: a systematic review and meta‐
analysis. Journal of Research in Reading, 42(2), 288-325. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-
9817.12269
Dang, V.T.T., Nguyen, T. (2023). Foreign Language Reading Anxiety and Its Correlation with
Reading Test Scores. In: Cheng, E.C.K., Wang, T., Schlippe, T., Beligiannis, G.N. (eds)
Artificial Intelligence in Education Technologies: New Development and Innovative
Practices. AIET 2022. Lecture Notes on Data Engineering and Communications
Volume 7, Issue 1, 2025
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
285
Technologies, vol 154. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8040-
4_13
Dunifa, L. (2023). Factors affecting students’ reading anxiety in efl teaching and learning.
English Education Journal, 55-63. https://doi.org/10.55340/e2j.v9i1.1246
Florit, E., De Carli, P., Lavelli, M., & Mason, L. (2023). Digital reading in beginner readers:
Advantage or disadvantage for comprehension of narrative and informational linear
texts?. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(2), 432-445.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12754
Fredrickson B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-
and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218–
226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218
Haddock, G., Foad, C., Saul, V., Brown, W., & Thompson, R. (2020). The medium can
influence the message: Print‐based versus digital reading influences how people
process distinct types of written information. British Journal of Psychology, 111(3),
443-459.
Hamada, A., & Takaki, S. (2022). Psychometric assessment of individual differences in second
language reading anxiety for identifying struggling students in classrooms. Frontiers in
Psychology, 13, 938719.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.938719
Hargreaves, H., Robin, S., & Caldwell, E. (2022). Student perceptions of reading digital texts
for university study. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, (24).
https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi24.817
Jeong, H. (2012), A comparison of the influence of electronic books and paper books on
reading comprehension, eye fatigue, and perception, The Electronic Library, 30(3),
390-408. https://doi.org/10.1108/02640471211241663
Kartika, Y., Ilma, R., & Sari, R. K. (2023). Reading Anxiety and Reading Comprehension in
Senior High School Students. Didascein: Journal of English Education, 4(2), 76-82.
https://doi.org/10.52333/djoee.v4i2.203
Kesson, H. (2020). Reading digital texts: obstacles to using digital resources. English Teaching
Practice & Critique, 19(2), 155-168. https://doi.org/10.1108/etpc-02-2019-0019
MacGinitie, W., MacGinitie, R., Maria, R. K., & Dreyer, L. G. (2000). Gates-MacGinitie
reading tests (4th ed.). Chicago, IL: Riverside Publishing Co.
Mohammed, S., & Hasan, F. (2023). Investigating kurdish efl students’ speed reading and
reading comprehension levels at the university of duhok. Humanities Journal of
University of Zakho, 11(3), 643-652. https://doi.org/10.26436/hjuoz.2023.11.3.1091
Mudra, H., & Mckinnon, T. (2022). Reading anxiety of efl learners in Indonesian rural schools:
A quantitative study. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language
Teaching, 25(2), 739-753. https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v25i2.5221
Nur Asima Sidabutar, M., Theruvil Sayed, B., Ismail, S. M., Teves Quispe, J., Yangali Vicente,
J. S., Suardi Wekke, I., ... & Nourabadi, S. (2022). Reading Digital Texts vs. Reading
Printed Texts: Which One Is More Effective in Iranian EFL Context?. Education
Research International, 2022(1), 7188266. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7188266
Pardede, P. (2019). Print vs Digital Reading Comprehension in EFL. Journal of English
Teaching, 5(2), 77-90.https://doi.org/10.33541/jet.v5i2.1059
The Interplay between Anxiety and Comprehension in EFL Digital Reading Contexts
International Journal of Language and Literary Studies
286
Park, J., & Lee, J. (2021). Effects of E-Books and Printed Books on EFL Learners' Reading
Comprehension and Grammatical Knowledge. English Teaching, 76(3), 35-61.
https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.76.3.202109.35
Rochanaphapayon, T. (2024). Digital Literacy: Enhancing English Reading Comprehension
Among Foreign Language Students. English Language Teaching, 17(1), 1-26.
Smith, S. L., Ward, R. T., Allen, L. K., Wormwood, J. B., & Mills, C. (2022). Mind your words:
Affective experience during reading mediates the effect of textual valence on
comprehension. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 36(5), 1131-1141.
https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3983
Soomro, A. H., Khan, I., & Younus, M. (2019). Top down, bottom up and classroom reading
anxiety and their effect on reading performance of undergraduate engineering students
in Pakistan. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 11(3), 590-603.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-07-2018-0138
Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. In J. P. Mestre & B. H. Ross (Eds.), The psychology
of learning and motivation: Cognition in education (pp. 37–76). Elsevier Academic
Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00002-8
Tarigan, F. N., Heriani, D., Simanjuntak, A. A., & Hasibuan, S. A. (2023). Exposing EFL
Students’ FLRA in Reading Section: The Case of TOEFL Course. SALTeL Journal
(Southeast Asia Language Teaching and Learning), 6(2), 9-16.
https://doi.org/10.35307/saltel.v6i2.103
Tsai, Y. R., & Lee, C. Y. (2018). An exploration into factors associated with reading anxiety
among Taiwanese EFL learners. TEFLIN Journal: A Publication on the Teaching &
Learning of English, 29(1).
Yu, J., Zhou, X., Yang, X., & Hu, J. (2022). Mobile-assisted or paper-based? The influence of
the reading medium on the reading comprehension of English as a foreign
language. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(1-2), 217-245.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.2012200
Zhang, J. (2023). EFL teachers’ digital literacy: the role of contextual factors in their literacy
development. Frontiers in psychology, 14, 1153339.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1153339
Zhang, X. (2019). Foreign language anxiety and foreign language performance: a meta‐
analysis. Modern Language Journal, 103(4), 763-781.
https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12590
