They had Scientific American at the grocery store. I grabbed it for this article about advantages of reading on paper over a screen. The link is just a preview, SciAm would like you to pay for that particular content, but I wanted to point it out.

It's a subject that's rather near and dear to my heart as I steadfastly hold on to my dead tree books and refuse to buy an ereader or a tablet. Even if it would have been helpful for my "need book NOW" problem. I've had a hard time articulating what it is that is so preferable about paper books beyond "I like holding them and new book smell!" The article finally puts a finger on some of it. It talks about how books have spatial and sensory advantages over screens; for instance, you always have a very physical sense of where you are in a book that cannot be replicated by a progress bar. People also tend to remember a location on the page where they read something which makes it easier to go hunting for it (eg that conversation Tyrion and Pycelle had is important after all so I need to go back to it and it was on the bottom of the page of the left). It's also somewhat easier to concentrate on books and people tend to approach paper reading with more seriousness than screen reading. They cited a bunch of studies - I feel like the advantages were actually fairly mild, but I can very much relate to them.

Oddly, the author chose to wrap up with "but screens and computers are great and have other advantages that are great!" in the very last paragraph. It mentioned the tap essay by Robin Sloan which I'll need to check out if only because that guy is an out of touch semi-friend from college.

It's an interesting paper read if you happen to come across a SciAm issue.