HOW DO WE READ? 

LET’S COUNT THE WAYS

Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 

HOW DO WE READ? 

LET’S COUNT THE WAYS

Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 
March 2020

NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS

400 7th Street, SW

Washington, D.C. 20506

202-682-5400

arts.gov

Mary Anne Carter, Chairman

Prepared by James Murdoch, PhD, 2M Research, with: Mark Bauerlein, PhD; Marie Halverson; Natalie Morrissey; and Esther Galadima

Produced by the Office of Research & Analysis

Sunil Iyengar, Director

Patricia Moore Shaffer, Deputy Director

Bonnie Nichols, Operations Research Analyst

Patricia Germann, Research Administrative Officer

Melissa Menzer, Program Analyst

Editorial assistance by Don Ball and Rebecca Sutton

Designed by Kelli Rogowski

202-682-5496 Voice/TTY

(a device for individuals who are deaf or hearing-impaired)

Individuals who do not use conventional print materials may contact the Arts Endowment’s Accessibility Office at 202-682-

5532 to obtain this publication in an alternate format.

This publication is available free of charge as a downloadable PDF at arts.gov
About the Report

This report analyzes data from the 2017 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts (SPPA), which the National Endowment for the Arts 

conducted in partnership with the U.S. Census Bureau. It gives a statistical overview of how the nation’s adults engage with leisure 

reading and other literary activities, such as author readings, book clubs, and creative writing. The survey identifies three groups of 

adults: nonreaders, print-only readers, and digital/audio readers. (The latter category describes adults who read e-books or listened to 

audiobooks, but who also may have read books in print.) 

Previous reports from the National Endowment for the Arts have shown long-term declines in book-reading and in the reading of 

literary texts—e.g., novels and short stories. For those who care about the future of books and literature, the new report attests to the 

vitality of digital and audio platforms in today’s literary culture. For example, when we account for adults who listen to audiobooks, the 

total number of adults who engage with books is more comparable to figures from previous years. Also, the data show that while older 

readers read books at higher rates than do younger adults, digital/audio reading is more common among younger than older readers. 

Indeed, digital/audio readers consume more books on average and engage in other cultural activities at higher rates than do print-only 

readers. 

Results in Brief

1. More than half of all U.S. adults (55 percent, or 132 million) engage in some form of book-reading, whether via print or digital 

media, or listening to audiobooks.

• Digital/audio readers now represent a larger share of adults than do print-only readers.

• Previous research has shown a decline in the percentage of adults who read books. However, when the 2017 

percentage is adjusted to include adults who listen to audio-books, the overall rate of book-reading is somewhat 

closer to those in previous years.

2. Younger readers, especially 18-24-year-olds, are more likely than older adults to be digital/audio readers who also may be 

reading print books.

• Digital/audio readers consume more books per year than do other types of readers.

• Adults aged 65 and older are more likely than other age groups to be print-only readers. 

3. Readers of poetry and graphic novels are more likely to be digital/audio readers than print-only readers.

• By contrast, readers of novels or short stories or works of biography, history, and religion, are more likely to be printonly readers.

4. Digital/audio readers frequently engage in other cultural activities and support the arts.

• Print-only readers engage with and support the arts more than nonreaders do, but they consistently report lower 

levels of support than digital/audio readers. 

For decades, the Arts Endowment has enriched the literary arts in America by funding projects such as online journals, literary 

websites, author readings, and print publications. The agency sponsors two national literary initiatives: NEA Big Read and Poetry Out 

Loud. Additionally, the Arts Endowment supports American literature through creative writing fellowships and brings foreign works of 

literary excellence to American readers through translation fellowships.

Preface

This report is designed to improve public understanding of how Americans from various backgrounds engage with books and literature. 

Using nationally representative data, the report looks at who is reading books in print and who is reading in digital formats. It also 

considers whether reading on different platforms is linked with other forms of literary and arts participation. Greater awareness of 

these factors and relationships can enable cultural service providers to reach into segments of the U.S. population that are more 

disposed to reading or art-going than otherwise may be apparent.

The primary data source for this report is the 2017 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts (SPPA). The SPPA, which is conducted 

periodically by the Arts Endowment in partnership with the U.S. Census Bureau, was also the source for three previous reports on 

reading: Reading at Risk (2004), To Read or Not To Read (2007), and Reading on the Rise (2008).

Those earlier reports chronicled persistent declines in book-reading and in the reading of specific literary genres, notwithstanding 

a small gain for fiction-reading in 2007. More recent SPPA data suggest that book-reading rates are holding flat, while the reading 

of fiction (novels and short stories) is occurring at an even lower rate than before. On the other hand, in 2017, for the first time in the 

survey’s history, the poetry-reading rate actually doubled.

The present report examines how this story is affected by the rise of new digital platforms for engaging with literature. In particular, 

the report considers how smartphones, tablets, e-readers, and online reading in general are affecting the total composition of bookreaders in this country and their other literary and cultural practices. This analysis is possible largely because of question-items unique 

to the 2017 SPPA. By including the share of U.S. adults who listened to audio-books, as well as those who read via digital platforms, a 

new picture of the contemporary reader begins to emerge. 

Office of Research & Analysis

National Endowment for the Arts

March 2020
Table of Contents

Terms and Definitions ........................................................................................................................................................... 7

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................................. 9

Chapter 1: How We ReadToday .............................................................................................................................................. 17

Print-only readers, digital/audio readers, and nonreaders ............................................................................................................19

Americans who read more overall ................................................................................................................................................ 20

Print-only vs. digital/audio readers ...............................................................................................................................................21

Types of digital/audio readers...................................................................................................................................................... 25

Frequency of reading ................................................................................................................................................................... 26

Genres of reading......................................................................................................................................................................... 27

Chapter 2: Participation in Other Literary Activity ................................................................................................................ 29

Chapter 3: The Relationship of Literary Participation to an Engaged Society ......................................................................... 33

Engagement in literary activity ....................................................................................................................................................33

Engagement in cultural activity....................................................................................................................................................34

Support for the arts ..................................................................................................................................................................... 36

Chapter 4: Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................ 37

Limitations of the work................................................................................................................................................................ 37

Directions for future research...................................................................................................................................................... 38

Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................................................ 39

Appendix A: Tables ............................................................................................................................................................ 40

Appendix B: Detailed Regression Results ............................................................................................................................. 44

Appendix C: Methods .......................................................................................................................................................... 54

Analytical variables ..................................................................................................................................................................... 54

Sample weights ........................................................................................................................................................................... 58

Missing data................................................................................................................................................................................. 59

Variance and standard error estimation....................................................................................................................................... 60

Methods to test statistical significance.........................................................................................................................................61
Contents

Terms and Definitions ........................................................................................................................................................... 7

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................................. 9

Chapter 1: How We Read Today ............................................................................................................................................. 17

Print-only readers, digital/audio readers, and nonreaders ............................................................................................................19

Americans who read more overall ................................................................................................................................................ 20

Print-only vs. digital/audio readers ...............................................................................................................................................21

Types of digital/audio readers...................................................................................................................................................... 25

Frequency of reading ................................................................................................................................................................... 26

Genres of reading......................................................................................................................................................................... 27

Chapter 2: Participation in Other Literary Activity ................................................................................................................ 29

Chapter 3: The Relationship of Literary Participation to an Engaged Society ......................................................................... 33

Engagement in literary activity ....................................................................................................................................................33

Engagement in cultural activity....................................................................................................................................................34

Support for the arts ..................................................................................................................................................................... 36

Chapter 4: Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................ 37

Limitations of the work................................................................................................................................................................ 37

Directions for future research...................................................................................................................................................... 38

Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................................................ 39

Appendix A: Tables ............................................................................................................................................................ 40

Appendix B: Detailed Regression Results ............................................................................................................................. 44

Appendix C: Methods .......................................................................................................................................................... 54

Analytical variables ..................................................................................................................................................................... 54

Sample weights ........................................................................................................................................................................... 58

Missing data................................................................................................................................................................................. 59

Variance and standard error estimation....................................................................................................................................... 60

Methods to test statistical significance.........................................................................................................................................61
List of Figures and Tables

Figure 1. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported reading in the preceding 12 months: 1992-2017 ...................................................... 18

Figure 2. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported reading outside school or work in the past 12 months: 2008-2017 ......................... 19

Figure 3. Percentage of U.S. adults are digital/audio readers, print-only readers, and nonreaders, by education level: 1992-2017 ........... 21

Figure 4. Percentage of digital/audio readers, print-only readers, and nonreaders, by age group: 2017 ............................................ 22

Figure 5. Percentage of adults that reported reading a book outside school or work in the past 12 months by age group: 1992-2017 ..... 23

Figure 6. Percentage of U.S. adults who are digital/audio readers, print-only readers, and nonreaders, income category: 2017 ............ 24

Figure 7. Percentage of U.S. adults who are digital/audio readers, print-only readers, and nonreaders, by disability category: 2017 ...... 25

Figure 8. Percentage of digital/audio readers who are eBook readers, audiobook listeners, and digital readers and listeners: 2017 ...... 26

Figure 9. Median number of books read outside school or work in the past 12 months, by type of media used: 2017 ......................... 27

Figure 10. Percentage of U.S. adults reading in various genres, by type of media used: 2017.............................................................. 28

Figure 11. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported participation in literary activities: 2012-2017 ........................................................ 30

Figure 12. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported participation in literary activities, by reader type: 2017........................................ 34

Figure 13. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported participation in cultural activities, by reader type: 2017....................................... 35

Figure 14. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported support for the arts, by reader type: 2017 ........................................................... 36

Table 1. Percentage of U.S. adults who are nonreaders, print-only readers, and digital/audio readers, by demographic 

subgroup: 2017 .............................................................................................................................................................................. 40

Table 2. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported different literary activities, by demographic subgroup: 2017 ................................. 42

Table B-1. Multinomial logit estimating the likelihood of being each reader type, by demographic subgroup ..................................... 44

Table B-2. Logits estimating the likelihood of participation in literary activities, by demographic subgroup .................................... 46

Table B-3. Logits estimating the likelihood of participation in cultural activities, by demographic subgroup .................................... 47

Table B-4. Logits estimating the likelihood of participation in literary activities by reader type, reading frequency, and demographic 

subgroup ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 48

Table B-5. Logits estimating the likelihood of participation in cultural activities by reader type, reading frequency, and demographic 

subgroup ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 50

Table B-6. Logit estimating the likelihood of support for the arts by reader type, reading frequency, and demographic subgroup ......... 52

Table C-1. Categories of analytical variable Read_type that measure reader types ........................................................................... 54

Table C-2. Categories of analytical Variable Read_type2 that measure digital reader types .............................................................. 55

Table C-3. Survey variables that define analytical variables of reading genres ................................................................................. 55

Table C-4. Survey variables that define analytical variables of literary activities .............................................................................. 56

Table C-5. Survey variables that define analytical variables of cultural activities ............................................................................... 57

Table C-6. Survey variables that define analytical variable of support for the arts ............................................................................ 58

Table C-7. Sample weights used for each analytical variable ............................................................................................................. 59

Table C-8. SPPA 2017 Supplement weighting factors ......................................................................................................................... 60

Table C-9. SPPA 2012 Supplement weighting factors ........................................................................................................................ 60
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 7

Terms and Definitions

Technology has expanded the range of opportunities for Americans to read books and engage with other types of literary activity. In this 

analysis, based on question-items from the 2017 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts (SPPA),1 we identify three categories of adults 

according to whether they reported reading or listening to books in the prior 12 months:

	 Nonreaders

o Did not read any books outside work or school, whether print or digital, and . . . 

	 . . . did not listen to audiobooks

	 Print-only readers

o Read books outside work or school, but . . . 

	 . . . did not use an electronic device to read or listen to books

	 Digital/audio readers

o Read books outside work or school, and . . .

	 . . . used an electronic device to read and/or listen to books

	 . . . may have read print books as well

For the third category (digital/audio readers), the 2017 SPPA allows us to delve more deeply and arrive at three subgroup 

classifications: 

	 eBook readers

o Used an electronic device to read books, but . . .

	 . . . did not listen to audiobooks

	 . . . may have read print books as well

	 Audiobook listeners 

o Listened to audiobooks, but . . .

	 . . . did not use an electronic device to read books

	 . . . may have read print books as well

	 Digital readers and listeners

o Used an electronic device to read books, and . . .

	 . . . listened to audiobooks

	 . . . may have read print books as well

Using these reader categories, we can compare various characteristics of digital/audio readers with those of print-only readers and 

nonreaders. Among those characteristics are demographic traits, frequency of reading, preferences for different literary genres, and 

levels of engagement with other literary and cultural activities. For information on the historical background for this analysis, see 

Appendix A.

1The analysis incorporates responses to three different survey questions: one that asks respondents whether they read books outside work or school; anothe

that asks adults who responded affirmatively to that question whether any books were read with electronic devices, and another that asks respondents (no matter 

whether they responded affirmatively to the first question) whether they listened to audiobooks (see the Technical Appendix p. 54 for more details). The question about 

audiobooks does not ask respondents to exclude audiobooks that may have been required for work or school.
8 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 9

Executive Summary

1. More than half of U.S. adults (55 percent, or 131.8 million) read books in some format, whether through digital/audio or print-only 

media. Digital/audio readers now represent a larger share of adults than do print-only readers. 

Percentage of U.S. adults who are digital/audio readers, print-only readers, 

and nonreaders: 2017

Total number

of book-readers: 

55.5%, or 131.8 million

105.8 Million, 

44.5%

72.2 Million, 

30.4%

59.6 Million, 

25.1%

Digital/audio readers Print-only readers Nonreaders

Notes: Digital/audio readers may have read books in print. Detail may not add to total due to rounding.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA
10 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

2. The overall percentage of U.S. adults who read books in 2017 is more comparable to the 2012 and 2008 rates when audiobooklistening is counted, as it was in 2017.

Percentage of U.S. adults who reported reading outside school or work in 

the past 12 months: 2008-2017

54.3%

54.6%

55.5%

52.7%

2008 2012 2017

Read any book, not including audiobooks

Read any book, including audiobooks (2017 only)

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, SPPA
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 11

3. Among all digital/audio readers, just over half read ebooks. Adults who digitally engage with reading only by listening to 

audiobooks are far less common.

Percentage of digital/audio readers who are eBook readers, audiobook 

listeners, and digital readers and listeners: 2017

35.6%

50.6%

13.8%

Digital readers and listeners eBook readers Audiobook listeners

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA
12 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

4. Older Americans (aged 65 and older) are more likely than other age groups to be print-only readers. Younger readers, especially 

those aged 18-24, are more likely to be digital/audio readers who also may be reading print books. 

Percentage of digital/audio readers, print-only readers, and nonreaders, by 

age group: 2017

Digital/audio readers Print-only readers Nonreaders

All ages

75 and over

65 to 74

55 to 64

45 to 54

35 to 44

25 to 34

18 to 24

30.4%

19.1%

27.0%

27.8%

31.8%

33.2%

33.9%

33.2%

25.1%

38.3%

32.1%

28.0%

22.0%

22.6%

21.8%

18.6%

44.5%

42.7%

40.9%

44.3%

46.1%

44.2%

44.3%

48.2%

Notes: Digital/audio readers may have read books in print. Detail may not add to total due to rounding.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 13

5. Regardless of the format they use, older Americans read books at generally higher rates than younger readers. This was not 

always the case. Before 2012, greater proportions of adults aged 18–24 consistently reported reading a book in the past 12 months 

than did adults aged 65 and older.

Percentage of adults that reported reading a book outside school or work 

in the past 12 months by age group: 1992-2017

63.6%

49.6%

59.2%

56.1%

52.7%

51.2%

54.2%

57.2% 56.6%

52.5%

50.5%

56.0%

1992 2002 2008 2012 2017

18 to 34 35 to 64 65 and over

49.4%

62.6%

53.6%

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, SPPA
14 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

6. Digital readers and listeners (those who both read eBooks and listen to audiobooks) consume the most books per year, relative 

to other types of readers. 

Median number of books read outside school or work in the past 12 

months, by type of media used: 2017

Digital readers and listeners

Digital/audio readers

eBook readers

Audiobook listeners

Print-only readers

10

7

6

5

4

Note: eBook readers, audiobook listeners, and digital readers and listeners may have read books in print.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 15

7. Digital/audio readers make up a far greater share of the readership for poetry, plays, and graphic novels than for novels, 

biography, history, and religion.

Percentage of U.S. adults reading in various genres, by type of media used: 

2017

Digital readers and listeners Audiobook listeners eBook readers Print-only readers

Novels and short stories

Poetry

Plays

Biography

Graphic novels

History books

Religious books

Scientic books

20.9%

32.6%

35.9%

24.4%

31.0%

24.6%

23.5%

30.6%

7.6%

9.9%

12.4%

8.2%

7.8%

8.8%

7.7%

7.3%

28.7%

28.2%

32.6%

26.9%

32.2%

29.2%

24.9%

28.5%

42.9%

29.3%

19.2%

40.4%

29.1%

37.4%

43.9%

33.6%

Notes: eBook readers, audiobook listeners, and digital readers and listeners may have read some books in print. Detail may not 

add to total due to rounding.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA
16 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

8. Adults who are digital/audio readers frequently engage in cultural activities and support the arts (i.e., volunteering, subscribing 

to arts organizations, donating to arts organizations, or purchasing works of art).

Percentage of U.S. adults reporting literary and cultural engagement and 

support for the arts, by reader type: 2017

Digital readers and listeners Print-only readers

Visited an art fair or festival

Attended a live performance

Supported the arts

Visited a museum or art gallery

Visited a place for its historic

or design value

Participated in book clubs

or reading groups

Participated in creative writing

50.8%

27.1%

56.7%

34.0%

61.2%

39.2%

53.7%

26.2%

62.7%

32.5%

16.0%

2.6%

19.4%

6.7%

Note: eBook readers, audiobook listeners, and digital readers and listeners may have read books in print.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 17

Chapter 1: How We Read Today

Americans have access to a growing range of devices that facilitate engagement with long-form literary content—from computer 

laptops and tablets to e-readers and smartphones. For the purpose of analysis, this chapter groups individuals who reported reading 

(or not reading) at least one book over a recent (2017) 12-month period, and it distinguishes them by three broad categories:

• Nonreaders—Adults who did not read a book outside work or school, and who did not listen to an audiobook, in the past 12 

months;

• Print-only readers—Adults who read a book outside work or school in the past 12 months but did not use an electronic device 

to read,2 and who did not listen to an audiobook; and

• Digital/audio readers—Adults who read a book outside work and school in the past 12 months and used an electronic device to 

read, and/or who listened to audiobooks. Note: these adults may have read print books as well.3

The SPPA clearly shows that since 1992, the percentage of American adults who report they have read outside of school or work in 

the past 12 months has consistently fallen, though in recent years the change has not been statistically significant (Figure 1). In 1992, 

the share of the adult population that reported reading books, when not asked specifically about audiobooks, was 60.9, while the 

comparable rate in 2017 was lower, at 52.7 percent. 

The same trend applies to the reading of novels and short stories. In 1992, 52.1 percent of Americans reported reading novels or short 

stories in the past 12 months, and that percentage was 41.8 in 2017. A much smaller percentage of U.S. adults read plays; however, even 

this figure declined from 5.3 percent in 1992 to 3.7 percent in 2017. The only genre that has experienced a substantial increase since 

1992 is poetry. In 2012, the percentage of Americans who reported reading poetry in the past 12 months was 6.7 percent, the lowest 

number since 1992; however, the current 2017 estimate is much higher—at 11.7 percent. 

2 Electronic devices can include eReaders, tablets, laptops, computers, and cell phones.

3 It is important to note that digital/audio readers may also read printed materials. The SPPA does not include a question about reading printed material only versu

digital material only. Rather, the survey asks whether individuals read any books in the past 12 months and, if yes, whether the respondent read using an electronic 

device. Thus, if a respondent answers “no” to using an electronic device (and “no” to listening to audiobooks), we assume the respondent only read printed materials. If a 

respondent answers “yes” to reading an electronic device, we do not know whether the respondent only read with electronic devices. See Appendix C for more details on 

how we define the reader types.
18 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Figure 1. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported reading in the preceding 

12 months: 1992-2017

60.9%

52.1%

17.0%

5.3%

56.6%

45.1%

12.1%

3.6%

54.3%

47.0%

8.3%

2.6%

54.6%

45.2%

6.7%

2.9%

52.7%

41.8%

11.7%

3.7%

1992 2002 2008 2012 2017

Any book Novels Poetry Plays

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, SPPA

An important question we address below is whether digital engagement with literature helps to explain these trends in reading. In 

particular, is the decline in the percentage who report reading books of any kind, as well as novels and plays, truly a decline, or is it a 

reflection of readers’ growing engagement with literature by digital means? The literature suggests print-based readers are listening 

to audiobooks and reading other forms of digital literature but not substituting digital platforms for print-based books (Sweney, 2019; 

Perrin 2016). Secondly, does the recent, promising increase in rates of reading poetry reflect a greater likelihood among readers in a 

digital environment to engage with poetry than in previous years? 
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 19

Print-only readers, digital/audio readers, and 

nonreaders 

Figure 2 shows the number and percentage of U.S. adults categorized as print-only readers or digital/audio readers, as well as U.S 

adults who were deemed “nonreaders,” based on responses to the 2017 SPPA. This figure shows that more adults are digital/audio 

readers (72.2 million, 30.4 percent) than print-only readers (59.6 million, 25.1 percent). 

Moreover, if we combine digital/audio readers (including those who listen to audiobooks) and print-only readers, the percentage of 

Americans who reported reading or listening to any book is about 55.5. This number is comparable to estimates of the percentage, 

from past surveys, of the population that reported reading books in general. In particular, this number is higher than the 2008 rate (54.3 

percent) but slightly lower than the 2002 rate (56.6 percent) and substantially lower than the 1992 rate (60.9 percent). Even when we 

consider digital participation, however, about 44.5 percent of the population (105.8 million people) still reported no reading in the past 12 

months. 

Figure 2. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported reading outside school or 

work in the past 12 months: 2008-2017

Total number

of book-readers: 

55.5%, or 131.8 million

105.8 Million, 

44.5%

72.2 Million, 

30.4%

59.6 Million, 

25.1%

Digital/audio readers Print-only readers Nonreaders

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, SPPA
20 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Table 1 (Appendix A) explores differences, by demographic subgroup, in the percentage of U.S adults who are nonreaders, print-only 

readers, and digital/audio readers, using 2017 SPPA data. There are several notable differences shown in the table—for example, the 

large number of men versus women who are non-readers (53 percent of men and 37 percent of women). Nonetheless, we single out four 

main findings for discussion below, based on results from the table and underlying regression model (Table B-1 in Appendix B):

1. Adults with higher education levels reported higher levels of both digital/audio reading and print-only reading. 

2. Older adults more often reported print-only reading, while younger adults more often reported digital reading and audiolistening. Despite this difference, older adults report reading more often than younger adults.

3. Adults who have a higher income more often reported digital/audio reading, while print-only reading does not seem to vary by 

income group. 

4. Adults who have serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions and adults who are blind or have serious 

difficulty seeing are more likely to be nonreaders than readers (of any type). However, among adults with these disabilities who 

do read, those who have serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions are more likely to be digital/audio 

readers than print-only readers, while adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing are equally as likely to be digital/

audio readers as print-only readers. The other disability types in the SPPA have no association with reading one way or the 

other after controlling for other demographic factors (e.g., age, education).

Americans who read more overall

Figure 3 provides a snapshot, by education level, of the percentage of U.S. adults who are nonreaders, print-only readers, and digital/

audio readers, using data from the 2017 SPPA. Only 19.5 percent of Americans with an advanced graduate degree did not report any 

reading in the past 12 months, compared to 79.4 percent of Americans who have less than a ninth-grade level of education. More than 70 

percent of Americans with a college degree and with an advanced graduate degree reported either print or digital reading and listening 

in the past 12 months. Although Figure 1 confirms that reading overall is decreasing in prevalence, Figure 3 shows that it is still a very 

popular activity for Americans with higher education levels.

Figure 3 also shows that adults with more education are more likely to be digital/audio readers than print-only readers. A full 55.8 

percent of people with an advanced graduate degree reported digital reading and audiobook listening, while only 24.7 percent reported 

print-only reading. For adults with a high school education or less, this finding is reversed; about 23.7 percent of adults with a high 

school education report print-only reading, while 17.7 percent report digital reading and/or audiobook listening.

The findings by education level remain statistically significant in a regression model that controls for associated demographic factors, 

such as age and income (see Table B-1 in Appendix B). Therefore, strong evidence shows that education is an important pathway to 

discovering and engaging with literature in print and digitally. The regression model also shows that gender and race/ethnicity remain 

significant factors after controlling for other demographic variables; however, the findings by education level are much stronger and 

more substantive. 
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 21

Figure 3. Percentage of U.S. adults are digital/audio readers, print-only 

readers, and nonreaders, by education level: 1992-2017

Digital/audio readers Print-only readers Nonreaders

All education levels

Advanced graduate degree

College graduate

Some college

High school graduate

Some high school

Less than 9th grade

30.4%

55.8%

42.3%

32.1%

17.7%

13.6%

7.0%

25.1%

24.7%

29.1%

27.5%

23.7%

16.6%

13.6%

44.5%

19.5%

28.6%

40.4%

58.6%

69.9%

79.4%

Note: Detail may not add to total due to rounding.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA

Print-only vs. digital/audio readers

Figure 4 shows the percentage of U.S. adults who are nonreaders, print-only readers, and digital/audio readers by age group. The figure 

shows a generational difference in how Americans read. The percentage of adults who are print-only readers rises to more than 30 

percent for adults aged 65–74 and aged 75 and older. For those aged 75 and older, 38.3 percent reported print-only reading—double the 

percentage that reported digital reading and audiobook listening (19.1 percent). These numbers contrast with numbers for adults aged 

18–24 years, of whom 18.6 percent are print-only readers and 33.2 percent are digital/audio readers. These findings remain statistically 

significant in a regression model that controls for other demographic factors (see Table B-1 in Appendix B). The 2017 SPPA shows that 

older adults are more likely to report print-only reading, while younger adults are more likely to report digital/audio reading. 
22 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Figure 4. Percentage of digital/audio readers, print-only readers, and 

nonreaders, by age group: 2017

Digital/audio readers Print-only readers Nonreaders

All ages

75 and over

65 to 74

55 to 64

45 to 54

35 to 44

25 to 34

18 to 24

30.4%

19.1%

27.0%

27.8%

31.8%

33.2%

33.9%

33.2%

25.1%

38.3%

32.1%

28.0%

22.0%

22.6%

21.8%

18.6%

44.5%

42.7%

40.9%

44.3%

46.1%

44.2%

44.3%

48.2%

Notes: Digital/audio readers may have read books in print. Detail may not add to total due to rounding.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA

The figure also suggests that adults aged 65 and older may generally read more than younger adults. Nonreaders make up 48.2 percent 

of adults aged 18–24, while 40.9 percent of adults aged 65–74 and 42.7 percent of adults aged 75 and older are nonreaders. Figure 5 

investigates these numbers further, showing the percentages of Americans aged 18–34, 35–65, and 65 and older who reported reading a 

book outside work or school from 1992 to 2017. Figure 5 confirms that since 2012, adults aged 65 and older have reported reading more 

often than younger adults. This is a reversal from previous years. In 1992, 62.6 percent of adults aged 18–34, 63.6 percent of adults aged 

35–64, and 49.6 percent of adults aged 65 and older reported reading. By 2017, only 50.5 percent of adults aged 18–34 and 52.5 percent 

of adults aged 35–64 reported reading. On the other hand, the percentage of adults aged 65 and older who reported reading was higher, 

at 56.5 percent, than in 1992 (49.6 percent).
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 23

Figure 5. Percentage of adults that reported reading a book outside school 

or work in the past 12 months by age group: 1992-2017

62.6%

63.6%

49.6%

59.2%

56.1%

52.7%

51.2%

54.2%

57.2% 56.6%

52.5%

50.5%

56.0%

1992 2002 2008 2012 2017

18 to 34 35 to 64 65 and over

49.4%

53.6%

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, SPPA

Although there is a generational difference in who reads printed material, the oldest adults are reading more than ever and still reported 

digital reading and listening in significant numbers. While younger adults are reading less, when they do read, they often utilize digital 

technologies to read and listen to books. These trends show the prevalence of various forms of engagement with literature in the Digital Age.

Using the 2017 SPPA data, Figure 6 shows differences in the percentage, by income category, of U.S. adults in the three reading 

categories.4 The findings show that, in addition to there being a generational shift in the way adults engage with reading, wealthier 

adults are more likely to report digital reading and listening. Nearly half (46.4 percent) of adults with annual household incomes of 

$150,000 or more reported digital reading and/or listening, compared to just 18.5 percent of Americans with household incomes of less 

than $20,000. These findings remain statistically significant in the regression model shown in Table B-1 in Appendix B. The findings are 

not driven by other factors associated with income, such as education level. 

4 For more information about how the SPPA defines income, see the basic CPS items booklet https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/techdoc

questionnaires/Labor%20Force.pdf
24 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Figure 6. Percentage of U.S. adults who are digital/audio readers, print-only 

readers, and nonreaders, income category: 2017

Digital/audio readers Print-only readers Nonreaders

All income levels

$150,000 and over

$100,000 to $149,000

$75,000 to $99,999

$50,000 to $74,999

$20,000 to $49,999

Less than $20,000

30.4% 25.1% 44.5%

46.4% 24.3% 29.3%

37.2% 25.8% 37.0%

36.7% 25.1% 38.2%

30.3% 25.3% 44.3%

22.6% 24.7% 57.2%

18.5% 25.7% 55.8%

Note: Detail may not add to total due to rounding.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA

Interestingly, the percentage of Americans who reported print-only reading stays roughly the same, at about 25 percent across all the 

income categories. Only the percentage that reported digital reading and/or listening changed significantly. 

Figure 7 shows the percentage of U.S. adults who are nonreaders, print-only readers, and digital/audio readers, by disability categories. 

The figure shows that most adults with disabilities are equally as likely to be nonreaders as they are to be readers; for most disability 

categories, the percentage of nonreaders is about 50 percent. One exception is that adults with blindness or serious difficulty seeing 

were more likely to report no reading. (The same applies for adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making 

decisions.) Moreover, most U.S. adult readers with disabilities were as likely to be print-only readers as digital readers. There is some 

evidence that individuals with deafness or serious difficulty hearing are more likely to be print-only readers than digital readers (31.4 

percent compared to 22.3 percent); however, this finding is not statistically significant in a regression model that controls for other 

demographic factors (see Table B-1 in Appendix B). Only U.S. adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making 

decisions were more likely to be digital/audio readers than print-only readers (24.9 percent compared to 17.2 percent). This finding is 

statistically significant in a regression model that controls for other factors (see Table B-1 in Appendix B).

These findings suggest that adults with memory problems or difficulty concentrating or difficulty making decisions may have an 

easier time engaging with literature using digital technology. Prior research (e.g., Wolf, 2018) suggests that print reading requires more 

concentration and focus than digital reading or listening. The advent of new digital technologies may lead to increased engagement 

with literature among populations with disabilities, especially individuals with concentration, memory, or decision-making difficulties. 
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 25

Figure 7. Percentage of U.S. adults who are digital/audio readers, print-only 

readers, and nonreaders, by disability category: 2017

Digital/audio readers Print-only readers Nonreaders

Deaf or serious diculty hearing 22.3% 31.4% 46.3%

Blind or serious diculty seeing, 

even when wearing glasses 20.7% 18.9% 60.4%

Serious diculty concentrating, remembering, 

or making decisions 24.9% 17.2% 57.9%

Serious diculty walking or climbing stairs 22.8% 27.8% 49.3%

Diculty dressing or bathing 25.8% 25.7% 48.5%

Diculty doing errands alone such as 

visiting a doctor’s oce or shopping 22.7% 24.8% 52.5%

All individuals 30.4% 25.1% 44.5%

Note: Detail may not add to total due to rounding.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA

Types of digital/audio readers

The results above seem to confirm that many Americans are reading digitally and that there is variation across demographic subgroups 

(such as education, age, and income) in terms of who reads and listens digitally. Two additional questions emerge: (1) How do digital/

audio readers engage with literature? (2) Is this different from how print-only readers engage? To answer these questions, we further 

break down the definition of digital/audio readers into more nuanced categories:

	 eBook readers—individuals who used an electronic device to read but did not listen to any audiobooks in the past 12 months 

and may have read print books as well

	 Audiobook listeners—individuals who listened to audiobooks but did not read with an electronic device in the past 12 months 

and may have read print books as well

	 Digital readers and listeners—individuals who both listened to audiobooks and read with an electronic device in the past 12 

months and may have read print books as well
26 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Figure 8 shows the percentage of digital/audio readers who are eBook readers, audiobook listeners, and digital readers and listeners. 

Slightly more than half (50.6 percent) are eBook readers, while audiobook listeners are less common (13.8 percent). Digital readers and 

listeners comprise a little more than a third of digital/audio readers (35.6 percent). Below, we review how each of the digital reader types 

compare to each other and to print-only readers in terms of reading frequency and genres of reading.

Figure 8. Percentage of digital/audio readers who are eBook readers, 

audiobook listeners, and digital readers and listeners: 2017

35.6%

50.6%

13.8%

Digital readers and listeners eBook readers Audiobook listeners

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA

Frequency of reading

Figure 9 shows the median reported number of books read in the past 12 months for print-only readers, eBook readers, audiobook 

listeners, and digital readers and listeners. The figure shows that digital readers and listeners were found to read the most (a median 

of 10 books in the past 12 months), followed by eBook readers (6 books). Print-only readers were found to read the least (4 books), and 

audiobook listeners ranked second to last (5 books). Statistical tests show no significant difference in the median number of books read 

in the past 12 months for audiobook listeners and eBook readers or for audiobook listeners versus print-only readers. The findings show 

digital/audio readers, especially those who are digital readers and listeners, read at higher frequencies. There is some evidence that 

although reading rates have fallen overall, Americans who read and listen digitally are doing so frequently. 
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 27

Figure 9. Median number of books read outside school or work in the past 

12 months, by type of media used: 2017

Digital/audio readers

eBook readers

Audiobook listeners

Print-only readers

10

6

5

4

Note: eBook readers, audiobook listeners, and digital readers and listeners may have read books in print.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA

Genres of reading

Other questions are whether print-only and digital/audio readers differ in the genres of literature they read and, in particular, whether 

the recent rise in poetry-reading (see Figure 1) implies that poetry is especially conducive to digital/audio reading. Figure 10 shows the 

percentage who are digital readers and listeners, audiobook listeners, eBook readers, and print-only readers among U.S. adults who 

reported reading several different genres in the past 12 months. The findings show almost a third of poetry readers (32.6 percent) are 

digital readers and listeners, 9.9 percent are audiobook listeners, and 28.2 percent are eBook readers, while 29.3 percent are print-only 

readers. Digital/audio readers (digital readers and listeners, audiobook listeners, and eBook readers combined) thus compose more 

than two thirds (70.7 percent) of all poetry-readers.  
28 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Figure 10. Percentage of U.S. adults reading in various genres, by type of 

media used: 2017

Digital readers and listeners Audiobook listeners eBook readers Print-only readers

Novels and short stories

Poetry

Plays

Biography

Graphic novels

History books

Religious books

Scientic books

20.9%

32.6%

35.9%

24.4%

31.0%

24.6%

23.5%

30.6%

7.6%

9.9%

12.4%

8.2%

7.8%

8.8%

7.7%

7.3%

28.7%

28.2%

32.6%

26.9%

32.2%

29.2%

24.9%

28.5%

42.9%

29.3%

19.2%

40.4%

29.1%

37.4%

43.9%

33.6%

Notes: eBook readers, audiobook listeners, and digital readers and listeners may have read some books in print. Detail may not 

add to total due to rounding.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA

Readers of plays are even more likely to be digital/audio readers than poetry readers are. Digital readers and listeners make up 35.9 

percent of play readers and eBook readers make up 32.6 percent. Only 19.2 percent of play readers are print-only readers, and this 

percentage is not statistically different, with at least 90 percent confidence, from the percentage of play readers who are audiobook 

listeners (12.4 percent). Similar to poetry, digital/audio readers (digital readers and listeners, audiobook listeners, and eBook readers 

combined) are much more common among graphic novel readers than print-only readers (71 percent compared to 29.1 percent).

Figure 10 also shows that print-only readers are more common among the religious genre (43.9 percent), novels and short stories (42.9 

percent), the biography genre (40.4 percent), and the history genre (37.4 percent) than are digital readers and listeners, audiobook 

listeners, or eBook readers. Thus, there is some evidence to indicate that print-only readers tend to prefer novels, religious texts, 

and nonfiction including biography and history. The science genre is more evenly distributed, as 30.6 percent are digital readers and 

listeners, 28.5 percent are eBook readers, and 33.6 percent are print-only readers, with audiobook listeners making up 7.3 percent. 

In summary, Figure 10 shows that while digital/audio readers are the most common reader type, there is some variation in terms of what 

different reader types tend to read. Play readers are more likely to be digital readers and listeners and eBook readers than print-only 

readers, while religious genre readers, novel readers, biography readers, and history readers are more likely to be print-only readers. 

Digital/audio readers as a whole are more likely to be poetry readers and graphic novel readers than print-only readers. Science readers 

are about as likely to be print-only readers as digital/audio readers. 
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 29

Chapter 2: Participation in Other 

Literary Activity

The SPPA permits analysis of adult participation in several types of literary activity, in addition to reading books and literature. These 

data can be analyzed in tandem from at least two other federal data sources, the Arts Basic Survey (ABS) and the American Time Use 

Survey (ATUS). Together, such activities include:

• attending an event featuring a poet or writer,5

• doing creative writing,

• taking a class in creative writing,

• participating in book clubs or reading groups, and

• writing for personal interest on a typical day.6

Figure 11 shows the percentage of U.S. adults who reported participation in each of the above literary activities in 2017, 2015, and 2012. 

Overall, participation in these literary activities is very low compared to rates of reading, and the activities show little change over time. 

Although the percentage of adults who reported creative writing increased from 5.7 percent in in 2014 to 6.5 percent in 2017, the change 

was not statistically significant. Only the percentage who reported participation in book clubs or reading groups increased significantly, 

from 3.6 percent in 2012 to 4.9 percent in 2017. 

5 We do not compare this activity over time due to changes in the survey question from year-to-yea

6 The data for writing for personal interest comes from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ American Time Use Surve
30 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Figure 11. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported participation in literary 

activities: 2012-2017

2012 2014/2015 2017

5.9%

1.7%

2.1%

1.9%

5.7%

6.5%

3.6%

4.2%

4.9%

0.4%

Participated in Creative Writing

Participated in Book Clubs 

or Reading Groups

Wrote for Personal Interest 

on a Typical Day

Took a Class in Creative Writing

0.2% 0.3%

Note: The 2014/2015 estimate shown for participating in book or reading groups was derived by averaging the 2012 and 2017 

SPPA estimates of this activity.

Sources: Survey of Public Participation in the Arts (2012 and 2017); Arts Basic Survey (2015); and American Time Use Survey 

(2012, 2014, 2015, 2017).
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 31

Table 2 (see Appendix A) delineates the 2017 SPPA rates of participation by demographic subgroup. The table shows that younger adults 

aged 18–24 reported participation in creative writing more than older adults aged 75 or older (11.7 percent compared to 3.1 percent, 

respectively). This additional evidence complements the finding in Chapter 1 that young adults are more likely to be digital/audio 

readers—that young adults do engage in literature, just in different ways than older adults. Another finding that complements Chapter 1 

is that adults with higher education levels report much higher participation in specific literary activities. Specifically, 

• 2.4 percent of adults with a high school degree or less reported attending an event featuring a poet or writer compared to 14 

percent of those with a graduate degree; 

• 3.1 percent of adults with a high school degree or less reported participating in creative writing compared to 12.7 percent of 

those with a graduate degree; and

• 3.2 percent of adults with a high school degree or less reported participating in book clubs or reading groups compared to 9.5 

percent of those with a graduate degree.

Women and men report participation in literary activities at roughly the same rates, apart from participation in book clubs or reading 

groups, which a regression model (see Table B-2 in Appendix B) confirms is significantly higher for women (6.9 percent compared to 2.8 

percent). Similarly, adults with different levels of income reported participation in literary activities at roughly the same rate across all 

income levels. The regression models (see Table B-2 in Appendix B) show that once other demographic factors are controlled for, there 

is no significant difference in the percentage of adults of different income levels who reported attending an event featuring a poet or 

writer. 

Of note, adults in the middle income categories—earning $55,000 to $74,999 and $75,000 to $99,999—reported slightly higher 

participation in creative writing classes, compared to adults in the lowest income category (2.8 and 3.0 percent compared to 0.8 

percent). Participation in book clubs or reading groups was the only literary activity for which adults with higher incomes consistently 

reported higher rates of attendance. This category ranged from 2.6 percent for those earning less than $20,000 per year to 8.3 percent 

for those earning $150,000 or more per year.

Finally, most literary activity participation did not vary across race/ethnicity categories. For example, 7.1 percent of non-Hispanic, 

non-white Americans attended an event featuring a poet or writer; that share was similar to the 6.6 percent of non-Hispanic whites 

attending. One difference of note, however, was that non-Hispanic whites reported the highest level of participation in creative writing 

(7.6 percent.)

All other differences across race/ethnicity categories were insignificant, after accounting for other demographic and socioeconomic 

factors.
32 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 33

Chapter 3: The Relationship 

of Literary Participation to an 

Engaged Society

This chapter analyzes the relationship between print-only or digital/audio reading and several types of engagement in literary and 

cultural life. Those activities include:

• Doing creative writing and participating in book clubs or reading groups;7

• Attending live performances, visiting museums or art galleries, visiting fairs or festivals, and visiting places for their historic or 

design value; and

• Supporting the arts, as evidenced by 

□ volunteering for arts organizations, groups, or projects; 

□ subscribing to arts organizations; 

□ donating money, goods, or services to arts organizations, groups, or projects; or

□ purchasing or acquiring artworks such as paintings, drawings, sculpture, pottery, or other visual art pieces.

Engagement in literary activity

Figure 12 shows the percentage, by reader type, of U.S. adults who reported participation in book clubs or reading groups and creative 

writing. The findings clearly show that digital/audio readers are much more likely than print-only readers to report participation in 

literary activities overall. The percentage of digital readers and listeners who reported participation in book clubs or reading groups 

is 16.0, compared to only 2.6 percent for print-only readers, and the percentage of digital readers and listeners who reported doing 

creative writing is 19.4, compared with only 6.7 percent of print-only readers. The results are similar for audiobook listeners, compared 

with print-only readers, and for eBook readers, compared with print-only readers. Digital readers and listeners also seem to have higher 

participation rates than eBook readers.

7 We were not able to test the relationship of reading types to participation in events featuring poets or writers because the survey question for the events questio

comes from Core II of the survey, while the reading types come from Core I. No respondent answered both Cores. In addition, we were not able to test the relationship of 

reading types to participation in creative writing classes. The sample sizes for the estimates are so small that any reported estimates would have large amounts of error 

and would therefore be unreliable.
34 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Figure 12. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported participation in literary 

activities, by reader type: 2017

Participated in creative writing Participated in book clubs or reading groups

19.4%

16.0%

15.4%

14.8%

10.7%

9.6%

6.7%

2.6%

1.9%

1.1%

Digital readers and listeners

Audiobook listeners

Ebook readers

Print-only readers

Nonreaders

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA

However, earlier results discussed in this report show that digital/audio readers have higher general reading rates than print-only 

readers and, in some cases, different demographic makeups. These differences may be driving the results in Figure 12. To assess this 

possibility, we specified a regression model that accounted for the differences in reading frequency and demographic factors among 

the different reading types. The results of the model are in Table B-4 in Appendix B. The findings show that even when controlling 

for reading frequency and demographic factors, digital readers and listeners and audiobook listeners are more likely to report doing 

creative writing than print-only readers, and all three types of digital/audio readers are more likely to report attending book clubs or 

reading groups than are print-only readers. There is thus good evidence that digital/audio readers participate more in other literary 

activity than print-only readers. 

Engagement in cultural activity

Figure 13 shows the percentage of U.S. adults who reported participation in cultural activities. Similar to the results for literary activity, 

the findings show that digital/audio readers, especially digital readers and listeners and audiobook listeners, report higher levels of 

engagement in cultural activity than print-only readers. The biggest difference is in the percentage who report visiting a historic park 

or monument or a neighborhood or building for historic design value; 62.7 percent of digital readers and listeners and 56.5 percent of 

audiobook listeners reported this activity, compared to only 32.5 percent of print-only readers. Similar differences exist between digital 

readers and listeners and audiobook listeners and print-only readers for the other cultural activities in the figure. 
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 35

Figure 13. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported participation in cultural 

activities, by reader type: 2017

Visited a historic park, monument, neighborhood, or building

Visited an art fair or a festival

Attended a live performance

Visited a museum or an art gallery

Digital readers and listeners

Audiobook listeners

eBook readers

Print-only readers

Nonreaders

62.7%

61.2%

56.7%

53.7%

56.5%

59.8%

60.6%

54.6%

47.8%

52.6%

48.7%

42.8%

32.5%

39.2%

34.0%

26.2%

10.0%

16.8%

15.4%

7.2%

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA

EBook readers and print-only readers are more similar in terms of participation in cultural activities, but there are still large differences. 

For example, 42.8 percent of eBook readers reported visiting a museum or art gallery, compared to 26.2 percent of print-only readers. 

Additionally, the regression models (see Table B-5 in Appendix B) show that these differences remain statistically significant, even when 

controlling for reading frequency and demographic factors. 

The results are clear. Digital/audio readers have more engagement with cultural activity and literary activity. This difference is 

especially true for digital readers and listeners and audiobook listeners, although eBook readers also have more engagement than printonly readers. Print-only readers do have more engagement than nonreaders, but less than do digital/audio readers. 
36 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Support for the arts

Figure 14 shows the final comparison between nonreaders, print-only readers, and the types of digital/audio readers: how each group 

reports support for the arts. Again, the differences between nonreaders, print-only readers, and digital/audio readers are large. Only 

8.9 percent of nonreaders reported support for the arts. A higher percentage of print-only readers reported support for the arts (27.1 

percent). Large percentages of digital/audio readers reported support for the arts: specifically, 41.9 percent of eBook readers, 50.7 

percent of audiobook listeners, and 50.8 percent of digital readers and listeners. Moreover, as with the results for literary activities and 

cultural activities, the difference between print-only readers and digital/audio readers remains statistically significant in a regression 

model that controls for reading frequency and demographic factors (see Table B-6 in Appendix B). 

Figure 14. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported support for the arts, by 

reader type: 2017

Nonreaders

eBook readers

Audiobook listeners

Print-only readers

Digital readers and listeners 50.8%

50.7%

41.9%

27.1%

8.9%

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, 2017 SPPA

The findings in this chapter suggest that U.S. adults who are digital/audio readers generally report more engagement in cultural society 

as well. Adults who report reading only printed materials generally report lower levels of engagement, and adults who report no reading 

reported the lowest levels of engagement. 
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 37

Chapter 4: Conclusions

Taken as a whole, the findings in this report tell a story more nuanced than one of declining reading rates. We confirm that U.S. 

adults reported less reading in 2017 than in previous years; however, if we add together digital/audio readers and print-only readers, 

the percentage of adults engaging with books is more comparable to the percentage who reported reading books in 2008 and 2012. 

Moreover, we find that digital/audio readers report more reading and engagement in cultural life overall. Many adults still read books and 

are actively engaged in other literary and cultural activities.

Several findings in this report also shed light on findings from previous Arts Endowment reports. In Reading at Risk, the Arts Endowment 

reported that the reading decline was most prominent among young Americans aged 18–24. Notwithstanding this decline, we find 

that that same age group is more likely to report digital reading and audiobook listening, and we find that digital/audio readers are 

more likely to report reading a larger number of books than print-only readers. We also confirm the finding from the recent Arts 

Endowment (2018) report that the reading of poetry has increased since 2012. We add that digital/audio readers are more likely to report 

reading poetry than print-only readers and suggest that the increase in reading poetry could, in part, be explained by an expansion of 

technologies available to people engaging with literature. 

We further find that participation in other forms of literary engagement have remained relatively stable over time. Perhaps the most 

intriguing finding in this report is that, compared with print-only readers, digital/audio readers (who also may have read books in print) 

report much higher levels of engagement in literary activity, cultural activity, and support for the arts. This finding suggests that a 

strong association between literary reading and cultural engagement (one documented in the 2007 Arts Endowment report To Read or 

Not To Read) exists even when Americans read both print and digital materials. 

Limitations of the work

An important limitation of this research is that we are unable to distinguish between individuals who read only, or predominantly, using 

digital technology and individuals who read a blend of print and digital material. Our measure of digital/audio reading includes people 

who reported reading books and reading or listening with an electronic device, but it can include people who read or listen to only digital 

materials and people who read both printed materials and digital materials. In addition, our results could be interpreted as showing 

that survey respondents who read both print and digital material drive the association with higher reading frequency, more literary and 

cultural engagement, and support for the arts. We are not certain whether the reading of digital material itself is associated with more 

engagement; we only know that reading print-only is associated with less engagement, and not reading at all is associated with even 

less engagement. 

It is also possible that respondents whom we classify as digital/audio readers are more predisposed to participate in multiple activities, 

and that is why they answered “yes” to reading a book in the past 12 months, reading using an electronic device, and listening to 

audiobooks in the past 12 months. In addition to showing a preference for digital engagement, the measure could also reflect a 

preference for engagement in social/cultural activities overall. We do attempt to mitigate this issue by controlling for the number of 

books read in the past 12 months with a regression model and determining whether the findings remain statistically significant. 

A third limitation of this work is that we are unable to assess whether the quality of the reading experience is the same when an 

individual read with an electronic device or listened to an audiobook, compared to when an individual read printed material. If the 

reading experience is less rich when using digital technology, there could be important consequences considering the large number of 

Americans who engage with literature digitally. As the SPPA evolves, it may more clearly distinguish different types of readers and more 

fully answer questions about what impact digital/audio reading continues to have on American society.
38 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Directions for future research

The findings and limitations of this research led to some follow-up questions, which additional research efforts may seek to answer.

• How many adults engage with literature either exclusively or primarily through the use of digital technology? Do findings of 

increased engagement still hold for these individuals when compared to print-only readers or individuals who read both print 

and digital material? Are differences in genres more apparent when comparing digital-only to print-only readers? As digitalonly participation increases, are certain literary genres more likely to decline than others?

• How does the quality of the reading experience using digital technology compare to reading printed material? Is there an 

association between increased literacy and other educational or academic outcomes and reading predominantly through the 

use of digital technology? What can/should be done to ensure high-quality literature continues to be read in the Digital Age?

• If education and income predict more digital reading and listening, what can be done to reduce income barriers to digital 

literary engagement and increase reading among both less-educated and lower-income individuals?
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 39

Works Cited

National Endowment for the Arts. Reading at Risk: A Survey of Literary Reading in America. Washington, D.C.: National Endowment for 

the Arts, 2004. https://www.arts.gov/publications/reading-risk-survey-literary-reading-america-0

National Endowment for the Arts. Reading on the Rise: A New Chapter in American Literacy. Washington, D.C.: National Endowment for 

the Arts, 2009. https://www.arts.gov/publications/reading-rise-new-chapter-american-literacy

National Endowment for the Arts. To Read or Not To Read: A Question of National Consequence. Washington, D.C.: National Endowment 

for the Arts, 2007. https://www.arts.gov/publications/read-or-not-read-question-national-consequence-0

Perrin, A. “Book Reading 2016.” Pew Research Center. Accessed May 2019. https://www.pewinternet.org/2016/09/01/book-reading-2016/

Sweney, M. “New Chapter? UK Print Book Sales Fall While Audiobooks Surge 43%.” The Guardian, June 25, 2019. https://www.

theguardian.com/books/2019/jun/26/new-chapter-uk-print-book-sales-fall-while-audiobooks-surge-43

Wolf, M. “The Future of the Reading Brain in an Increasingly Digital World.” WBUR On Point. Accessed May 2019. https://www.wbur.org/

onpoint/2018/08/21/reader-come-home-maryanne-wolf
40 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Appendix A: Tables 

Table 1. Percentage of U.S. adults who are nonreaders, print-only readers, and 

digital/audio readers, by demographic subgroup: 2017

Demographic Subgroup

Total 

Population 

(Millions)

Nonreaders

Printonly 

Readers

Digital/ 

Audio 

Readers

Total 246.7 44.5% 25.1% 30.4%

Age

18 to 24 29.7 48.2% 18.6% 33.2%

25 to 34 44.0 44.3% 21.8% 33.9%

35 to 44 40.0 44.2% 22.6% 33.2%

45 to 54 41.8 46.1% 22.0% 31.8%

55 to 64 41.7 44.3% 28.0% 27.8%

65 to 74 29.4 40.9% 32.1% 27.0%

75 and older 20.1 42.7% 38.3% 19.1%

Education

Less than 9th grade 9.1 79.4% 13.6% 7.0%

Some high school 16.5 69.9% 16.6% 13.6%

High school graduate 72.4 58.6% 23.7% 17.7%

Some college 69.2 40.4% 27.5% 32.1%

College graduate 51.2 28.6% 29.1% 42.3%

Advanced graduate degree 28.4 19.5% 24.7% 55.8%

Employment status

Not in labor force 85.7 44.5% 29.2% 26.2%

Unemployed 7.0 49.3% 23.5% 27.2%

Employed 154.0 44.3% 22.9% 32.8%

Sex

Female 127.7 36.9% 28.0% 35.1%

Male 119.0 52.7% 22.0% 25.3%
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 41

Demographic Subgroup

Total 

Population 

(Millions)

Nonreaders

Printonly 

readers

Digital/

Audio 

readers

Income

Less than $20,000 32.6 55.8% 25.7% 18.5%

$20,000 to $49,999 70.9 52.7% 24.7% 22.6%

$50,000 to $74,999 48.4 44.3% 25.3% 30.3%

$75,000 to $99,999 31.0 38.2% 25.1% 36.7%

$100,000 to $149,999 34.8 37.0% 25.8% 37.2%

$150,000 and over 29.0 29.3% 24.3% 46.4%

Race/ethnicity

Non-Hispanic white 157.6 37.8% 28.8% 33.4%

Non-Hispanic black 29.1 51.4% 23.2% 25.4%

Non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander 15.3 49.4% 17.4% 33.2%

Non-Hispanic other 5.2 42.7% 27.1% 30.2%

Hispanic, any race 39.4 64.8% 14.2% 20.9%

Disability

Deaf or serious difficulty hearing 8.2 46.3% 31.4% 22.3%

Blind or serious difficulty seeing even when 

wearing glasses 4.1 60.4% 18.9% 20.7%

Serious difficulty concentrating, 

remembering, or making decisions 9.3 57.9% 17.2% 24.9%

Serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs 17.2 49.3% 27.8% 22.8%

Difficulty dressing or bathing 4.9 48.5% 25.7% 25.8%

Difficulty doing errands alone such as 

visiting a doctor’s office or shopping 10.4 52.5% 24.8% 22.7%

Note: Digital/audio readers may also read books in print.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, SPPA, 2017, Core I.
42 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Table 2. Percentage of U.S. adults who reported different literary activities, by 

demographic subgroup: 2017

Demographic Subgroups

Attended 

an Event 

Featuring a 

Poet or Writer

Participated 

in Creative 

Writing

Took a 

Creative 

Writing 

Class

Participated in 

a Book Club or 

Reading Club

Total 6.0% 6.5% 1.9% 4.9%

Age

18 to 24 6.5% 11.7% 29.5% 6.5%

25 to 34 6.8% 9.2% 2.2% 4.4%

35 to 44 6.7% 7.1% 0.8% 4.6%

45 to 54 4.5% 4.3% 0.3% 4.5%

55 to 64 5.5% 5.0% 1.1% 4.5%

65 to 74 7.2% 4.4% 0.8% 5.3%

75 and older 4.9% 3.1% 0.6% 5.7%

Education

High school or less 2.4% 3.1% 0.8% 3.2%

Some college 5.2% 7.3% 3.3% 4.3%

College graduate 9.4% 9.1% 1.8% 6.8%

Graduate degree 14.0% 12.7% 2.0% 9.5%

Employment statusa

Unemployed or not in the labor 

force 5.6% 5.3% 1.5% 5.4%

Employed 6.3% 7.3% 2.1% 4.7%

Sex

Female 7.0% 7.3% 1.8% 6.9%

Male 5.0% 5.8% 1.9% 2.8%

Income

Less than $20,000 4.2% 5.7% 0.8% 2.6%

$20,000 to $49,999 4.7% 5.1% 1.2% 3.8%

$50,000 to $74,999 6.9% 6.4% 2.8% 5.1%

$75,000 to $99,999 5.6% 8.1% 3.0% 5.1%

$100,000 to 149,999 8.0% 8.2% 1.8% 6.3%

$150,000 and over 8.1% 7.4% 1.8% 8.3%
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 43

Demographic Subgroups

Attended 

an Event 

Featuring a 

Poet or Writer

Participated 

in Creative 

Writing

Took a 

Creative 

Writing 

Class

Participated in 

a Book Club or 

Reading Club

Race/ethnicity

Non-Hispanic, white 6.6% 7.6% 1.8% 5.2%

Non-Hispanic, non-white only 7.1% 5.3% 2.8% 4.9%

Hispanic, any race 2.1% 3.9% 0.8% 3.9%

a To improve the accuracy of the estimates, demographic subgroups were combined in cases for which the coefficient of variation was 

greater than 30 percent. 

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, SPPA, 2017, Core II, Module C, Module D, and Module E.
44 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Appendix B: Detailed Regression 

Results

Table B-1. Multinomial logit estimating the likelihood of being each reader type, 

by demographic subgroup

Independent variables

Log odds of being 

a print-only reader 

compared to a 

nonreader

Log odds 

of being 

a digital/

audio reader 

compared to a 

nonreader

Log Odds of 

being a digital/

audio reader 

compared to a 

print-only reader

Age (base = 18 to 24)

25 to 34 0.071 -0.277* -0.347**

35 to 44 0.104 -0.359** -0.463**

45 to 54 0.025 -0.418** -0.443**

55 to 64 0.252* -0.509** -0.761**

65 to 74 0.397** -0.486** -0.883**

75 and older 0.626** -0.664** -1.29**

Education (base = Less than 9th grade)

Some high school 0.154 0.572* 0.418

High school graduate 0.54** 0.834** 0.294

Some college 1.087** 1.738** 0.65*

College graduate 1.459** 2.305** 0.846**

Advanced graduate degree 1.657** 2.993** 1.336**

Employment status (base = Not in labor force)

Unemployed -0.08 -0.144 -0.063

Employed -0.162 -0.122 0.04

Sex (base = Female)

Male -0.608** -0.753** -0.145*
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 45

Independent variables

Log odds of being 

a print-only reader 

compared to a 

nonreader

Log odds 

of being 

a digital/

audio reader 

compared to a 

nonreader

Log Odds of 

being a digital/

audio reader 

compared to a 

print-only reader

Income (base = Less than $20,000)

$20,000 to $49,999 -0.087 0.157 0.244**

$50,000 to $74,999 -0.062 0.316** 0.378**

$75,000 to $99,999 -0.003 0.512** 0.515**

$100,000 to $149,999 -0.022 0.388** 0.409**

$150,000 and over 0.08 0.691** 0.611**

Race/ethnicity (base = Non-Hispanic white only)

Non-Hispanic black only -0.342** -0.334** 0.008

Non-Hispanic Asian or Hawaiian/Pacific Islander -0.88** -0.618** 0.262

Non-Hispanic other -0.021 -0.094 -0.073

Hispanic, any race -0.898** -0.599** 0.299**

Disability (base = Not having the disability category)

Deaf or serious difficulty hearing 0.127 0.113 -0.014

Blind or serious difficulty seeing even when wearing 

glasses -0.558** -0.366 0.193

Serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or 

making decisions -0.618** 0.054 0.673**

Serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs -0.109 -0.059 0.05

Difficulty dressing or bathing 0.048 0.268 0.22

Difficulty doing errands alone such as visiting a 

doctor’s office or shopping 0.008 -0.131 -0.139

Note: The symbols ** and * represent significance values of p ≤ 0.05 and p ≤ 0.1, respectively. Numbers are coefficients from the model that represent 

the difference in log odds of a respondent being the reader type for the particular subgroup compared to the base subgroup.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, SPPA, 2017, Core I.
46 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Table B-2. Logits estimating the likelihood of participation in literary activities, 

by demographic subgroup

Independent Variables Attended 

an Event 

Featuring a 

Poet or Writer

Participated 

in Creative 

Writing

Took a 

Creative 

Writing Class

Participated in 

a Book Club or 

Reading Club

Age (base = 18 to 24)

25 to 34 -0.359 -0.614** -3.024** -0.68*

35 to 44 -0.409* -0.926** -3.999** -0.694**

45 to 54 -0.735** -1.399** -4.852** -0.689**

55 to 64 -0.506** -1.241** -3.644** -0.667**

65 to 74 -0.301 -1.488** -3.931** -0.518

75 and older -0.585** -1.746** -4.159** -0.335

Education (base = High school or less)

Some college 0.686** 0.798** 0.949** 0.191

College graduate 1.388** 1.162** 0.770* 0.728**

Advanced graduate degree 1.902** 1.681** 1.241** 1.08**

Employment status (base = Not in labor force or unemployed)

Employed -0.050 -0.038 -0.0603 -0.171

Sex (base = Female)

Male 0.359** -0.219 -0.00254 -0.958**

Income (base = Less than $20,000)

$20,000 to $49,999 -0.015 -0.224 0.498 0.372

$50,000 to $74,999 0.183 -0.232 1.033* 0.582**

$75,000 to $99,999 -0.147 -0.0797 1.369** 0.537*

$100,000 to $149,999 0.032 -0.201 0.641 0.766**

$150,000 and over -0.155 -0.515** 0.667 0.888**

Race/ethnicity (base = Non-Hispanic white only)

Hispanic, any race 0.856** -0.621** 0.349 -0.0250

Non-Hispanic non-white only 0.111 -0.462** 0.368 -0.0243

Note: The symbols ** and * represent significance values of p ≤ 0.05 and p ≤ 0.1, respectively. Numbers are coefficients from the model that represent 

the difference in log odds of a respondent participating in the literary activity for the particular subgroup compared to the base subgroup.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, SPPA, 2017, Core II, Module C, Module D, and Module E.
Table B-3. Logits estimating the likelihood of participation in cultural activities, 

by demographic subgroup

Independent Variables Attended a Live 

Performance 

Visited a 

Museum or Art 

Gallery

Attended an Art 

Fair or Festival

Visited a Historical 

Monument, Park, 

Neighborhood, or 

Building

Age (base = 18 to 24)

25 to 34 -0.462** -0.381** -0.109 -0.104

35 to 44 -0.396** -0.332** -0.34** -0.042

45 to 54 -0.402** -0.514** -0.316** -0.063

55 to 64 -0.35** -0.542** -0.311** -0.165

65 to 74 -0.076 -0.42** -0.185 -0.049

75 and older -0.345** -0.538** -0.663** -0.445**

Education (base = Less than high school)

High school graduate 0.354** 0.541** 0.629** 0.608**

Some college 0.929** 1.41** 1.149** 1.077**

College graduate 1.488** 2.124** 1.486** 1.632**

Advanced graduate degree 1.724** 2.49** 1.733** 2.018**

Employment status (base = Not in labor force)

Unemployed 0.024 -0.198 -0.244 -0.095

Employed 0.084 -0.033 0.067 0.091

Sex (base = Female)

Male -0.416** -0.31** -0.255** -0.191**

Income (base = Less than $20,000)

$20,000 to $49,999 0.147 0.148 0.247** -0.011

$50,000 to $74,999 0.408** 0.227 0.441** 0.309**

$75,000 to $99,999 0.748** 0.355** 0.682** 0.622**

$100,000 to $149,999 0.734** 0.516** 0.659** 0.686**

$150,000 and over 0.963** 0.825** 0.725** 0.812**

Race/ethnicity (base = Non-Hispanic white only)

Non-Hispanic black only -0.094 -0.245* -0.395** -0.504**

Non-Hispanic Asian or 

Hawaiian/Pacific Islander

-0.781** -0.282** -1.122** -0.645**

Non-Hispanic other -0.312 -0.21 -0.369 -0.185

Hispanic, any race 0.231** -0.131 -0.31** -0.442**

Note: The symbols ** and * represent significance values of p ≤ 0.05 and p ≤ 0.1, respectively. Numbers are coefficients from the model 

that represent the difference in log odds of a respondent participating in the cultural activity for the particular subgroup compared to 

the base subgroup.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, SPPA, 2017, Core I.
48 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Table B-4. Logits estimating the likelihood of participation in literary activities by 

reader type, reading frequency, and demographic subgroup

Independent Variables Participated in 

Creative Writing

Participated in Book 

Clubs or Reading 

Groups

Reader type (base = Print-only readers)

eBook readers 0.291 1.261**

Audiobook listeners 0.715* 1.871**

Digital readers and listeners 0.919** 1.774**

Reading frequency

Number of books read 0.006 0.019**

Age (base = 18 to 24)

25 to 34 -0.73* -0.235

35 to 44 -0.876** -0.268

45 to 54 -1.44** -0.324

55 to 64 -1.061** -0.553

65 to 74 -1.789** 0.044

75 and older -1.939** 0.442

Education (base = High school or less)

Some college 0.45 0.131

College graduate 0.809** 0.282

Advanced graduate degree 1.123** 0.412

Employment status (base = Not in labor force or unemployed)

Employed -0.253 -0.449*

Sex (base = Female)

Male 0.053 -0.788**

Income (base = Less than $20,000)

$20,000 to $49,999 -0.494 0.386

$50,000 to $74,999 -0.095 0.933

$75,000 to $99,999 -0.59 0.901

$100,000 to $149,999 -0.658 0.728

$150,000 and over -0.716 1.019*
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 49

Independent Variables Participated in 

Creative Writing

Participated in Book 

Clubs or Reading 

Groups

Race/ethnicity (base = Non-Hispanic white only)

Non-Hispanic non-white only -0.34 0.101

Hispanic, any race 0.17 1.016

Note: The symbols ** and * represent significance values of p ≤ 0.05 and p ≤ 0.1, respectively. Numbers are coefficients from the model 

that represent the difference in log odds of a respondent participating in the literary activity for the particular subgroup compared to 

the base subgroup. The number of books read is a continuous variable; the coefficient can be interpreted as the difference in log odds 

of a respondent participating in the literary activity given an increase in the number of books read by 1 book.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, SPPA, 2017, Core I, Module C, and Module D.
50 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Table B-5. Logits estimating the likelihood of participation in cultural activities 

by reader type, reading frequency, and demographic subgroup

Independent Variables Attended a Live 

Performance

Visited a 

Museum or 

Art Gallery

Visited 

an Art 

Fair or 

Festival

Visited a Historical 

Monument, Park, 

Neighborhood, or 

Building

Reader type (base = Print-only readers)

eBook readers 0.393** 0.544** 0.398** 0.408**

Audiobook listeners 0.839** 0.968** 0.67** 0.707**

Digital readers and listeners 0.673** 0.886** 0.738** 0.986**

Reading frequency

Number of books read 0.009** 0.004 0 0.003

Age (base = 18 to 24)

25 to 34 -0.243 -0.262 -0.005 0.008

35 to 44 -0.332* -0.262 -0.253 0.135

45 to 54 -0.291 -0.325* -0.131 0.137

55 to 64 -0.152 -0.422** -0.19 0.006

65 to 74 0.268 -0.21 -0.001 0.191

75 and older -0.072 -0.367 -0.574** -0.211

Education (base = Less than high school)

High school graduate 0.021 0.072 0.461** -0.162

Some college 0.537** 0.754** 0.659** 0.089

College graduate 1.022** 1.436** 0.972** 0.572**

Advanced graduate degree 1.073** 1.585** 1.071** 0.759**

Employment status (base = Not in labor force)

Unemployed 0.034 -0.082 -0.217 0.009

Employed 0.157 -0.09 0.072 0.099

Sex (base = Female)

Male -0.264** -0.102 -0.138* -0.012
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 51

Independent Variables Attended a Live 

Performance

Visited a 

Museum or 

Art Gallery

Visited 

an Art 

Fair or 

Festival

Visited a Historical 

Monument, Park, 

Neighborhood, or 

Building

Income (base = Less than $20,000)

$20,000 to $49,999 0.022 0.311* 0.243 0.095

$50,000 to $74,999 0.152 0.395** 0.466** 0.392**

$75,000 to $99,999 0.575** 0.445** 0.543** 0.601**

$100,000 to $149,999 0.614** 0.641** 0.658** 0.763**

$150,000 and over 0.758** 1.036** 0.582** 0.999**

Race/ethnicity (base = Non-Hispanic white only)

Non-Hispanic black only -0.149 -0.233 -0.34** -0.451**

Non-Hispanic Asian or Hawaiian/

Pacific Islander

-0.724** -0.095 -1.025** -0.254

Non-Hispanic other -0.383 -0.279 -0.449 -0.175

Hispanic, any race 0.401** 0.266 -0.025 -0.059

Note: The symbols ** and * represent significance values of p ≤ 0.05 and p ≤ 0.1, respectively. Numbers are coefficients from the model 

that represent the difference in log odds of a respondent participating in the cultural activity for the particular subgroup compared to 

the base subgroup. The number of books read is a continuous variable; the coefficient can be interpreted as the difference in log odds 

of a respondent participating in the cultural activity given an increase in the number of books read by 1 book.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, SPPA, 2017, Core I.
52 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Table B-6. Logit estimating the likelihood of support for the arts by reader type, 

reading frequency, and demographic subgroup

Independent Variables Support for the Arts

Reader type (base = Print-only readers)

eBook readers 0.451**

Audiobook listeners 0.831**

Digital readers and listeners 0.797**

Reading frequency

Number of books read 0.015**

Age (base = 18 to 24)

25 to 34 -0.842**

35 to 44 -0.626**

45 to 54 -0.674**

55 to 64 -0.608*

65 to 74 -0.449

75 and older -0.077

Education (base = Less than 9th grade)

Some high school -1.6

High school graduate -0.696

Some college -0.087

College graduate 0.12

Advanced graduate degree 0.324

Employment status (base = Not in labor force)

Unemployed -0.225

Employed 0.185

Sex (base = Female)

Male 0.068

Income (base = Less than $20,000)

$20,000 to $49,999 1.179**

$50,000 to $74,999 1.189**

$75,000 to $99,999 1.206**

$100,000 to $149,999 1.164**

$150,000 and over 1.473**
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 53

Independent Variables Support for the Arts

Race/ethnicity (base = Non-Hispanic white only)

Non-Hispanic black only 0.211

Non-Hispanic Asian or Hawaiian/Pacific Islander -0.466

Non-Hispanic other 0.793*

Hispanic, any race 0.3

Note: The symbols ** and * represent significance values of p ≤ 0.05 and p ≤ 0.1, respectively. Numbers are coefficients from the 

model that represent the difference in log odds of a respondent supporting the arts for the particular subgroup compared to the base 

subgroup. The number of books read is a continuous variable; the coefficient can be interpreted as the difference in log odds of a 

respondent supporting the arts given an increase in the number of books read by 1 book.

Source: National Endowment for the Arts, SPPA, 2017, Core I and Module D.
54 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Appendix C: Methods

Analytical variables 

The study team developed several analytical variables for the analysis described in this report. Below we describe how each analytical 

variable was defined using survey data. 

Reader types

The study team created two categorical analytical variables to capture reader types with 2017 SPPA survey data, READ_TYPE and 

READ_TYPE2. Both analytical variables were defined from the following variables in the 2017 SPPA data file:

	 PEC1Q14A – Read any books in the past 12 months

	 PEC1Q18A (asked only of those respondents who had answered yes to PEC1Q14A) – Read any books in the past 12 months using 

electronic devices, such as eReaders, tablets, laptops, computers, or cell phones (only asked of respondents that answer “yes” 

to PEC1Q14A)

	 PEC1Q17A – Listened to any audiobooks in the past 12 months 

Table C-1 provides the categories of the analytical variable READ_TYPE and their definitions in terms of the 2017 SPPA variables. Table 

C-2 provides the categories of the analytical variable READ_TYPE2 and their definitions in terms of the 2017 SPPA variables. 

Table C-1. Categories of analytical variable Read_type that measure reader types

Category of READ_TYPE Definition

PRINT_ONLY – Read books outside of work or school in the past 12 months but did 

not use an electronic device to read or listen to audiobooks

READ_TYPE = PRINT_ONLY if PEC1Q14A = “yes” 

and both PEC1Q18A and PEC1Q17A = “no”

DIGITAL_AUDIO – Read books outside of work and school in the past 12 months 

and used an electronic device to read and/or listen to audiobooks

READ_TYPE = DIGITAL_AUDIO if PEC1Q18A = “yes” 

or PEC1Q17A = “yes” 

NONREADER – Did not read a book outside of work or school or listen to a book in 

the past 12 months

READ_TYPE = NONREADER if both PEC1Q14A and 

PEC1Q17A = “no” 
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 55

Table C-2. Categories of analytical Variable Read_type2 that measure digital 

reader types

Category of READ_TYPE2 Definition

eBOOK – Used an electronic device to read but did not listen to any 

audiobooks in the past 12 months

READ_TYPE2 = DIGITAL if PEC1Q18A = “yes” and 

PEC1Q17A = “no”

LISTENER – Listened to audiobooks but did not read with an electronic device 

in the past 12 months

READ_TYPE2 = LISTENER if PEC1Q18A = “no” and 

PEC1Q17A = “yes” 

DIGITAL_AND_AUDIO – Both listened to audiobooks and read with an 

electronic device in the past 12 months

READ_TYPE2 = DIGITAL_AND_AUDIO if PEC1Q18A = 

“yes” and PEC1Q17A = “yes”

Reading genres

Table C-3 provides the specific survey variables used to define each of the analytical variables capturing reading genres from the 2017, 

2012, 2008, 2002, and 1992 SPPA. Although there are data available from the 1997 SPPA, we intentionally excluded this year because 

the methodology of the survey data collection was different in this year and the technical documentation for the SPPA advises against 

comparing estimates from this year to other years. 

Table C-3. Survey variables that define analytical variables of reading genres

Analytical Variable SPPA 2017 SPPA 2012a SPPA 

2008

SPPA 2002 and 

1992b

BOOK – Read any books outside of work or school in 

the past 12 months

PEC1Q14A BOOKS_PC PEQ12A BOOKS

NOVEL – Read any novels or short stories in the past 

12 months

PEC1Q15A NOVELS_PC PEQ13AA1 READ_NOVELS

POETRY – Read any poetry in the past 12 months PEC1Q15B POETRY_PC PEQ13AA2 READ_POETRY

PLAYS – Read any plays in the past 12 months PEC1Q15C READPLAYS_PC PEQ13AA3 READ_PLAYS

LITERARY – Read any novels, poetry, or plays in the 

past 12 months

Composite of NOVEL, 

POETRY, and PLAYS

Same Same Same

HISTORY – Read any nonfiction books about history 

in the past 12 months

PEC1Q16A N/A N/A N/A

SCIENCE – Read any nonfiction books about science 

and technology in the past 12 months

PEC1Q16B N/A N/A N/A

BIO – Read any biographies or memoirs in the past 

12 months

PEC1Q16C N/A N/A N/A

GRAPHIC – Read any graphic novels or books in 

comic-strip format in the past 12 months

PEC1Q16D N/A N/A N/A

RELIGIOUS – Read any religious texts or books about 

religion or spirituality in the past 12 months

PEC1Q16E N/A N/A N/A

a

 The 2012 SPPA includes respondent and spouse/partner responses.

b Data source was the combined 1992–2012 SPPA data file; all other years use the data file for the individual year.
56 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Other literary activities

To measure other literary activities, the study team used survey variables to create five analytical variables capturing (1) attendance 

at an event featuring a poet or writer, (2) participation in creative writing, (3) taking classes in creative writing, (4) participation in 

book clubs or reading groups, and (5) writing for personal interest. The data on other literary activities comes from multiple sources, 

including the SPPA, ABS, and ATUS. Table C-4 describes the survey variables used to define each analytical variable capturing 

participation in other literary activities.

Table C-4. Survey variables that define analytical variables of literary activities

Analytical Variable 2017 Variable 2014/2015 Variable 2012 Variable

EVENT – Attended an event 

featuring a poet or writer in the 

past 12 months

PEC2Q1F (SPPA) –Attended 

an event featuring a poet 

or writer (this could include 

book signings, readings, or 

poetry slams)

BOOK_READING (ABS 2015) – 

Attended a live book reading/

poetry reading/storytelling event, 

respondent and spouse/partner 

combined

READINGEVENT_PC (SPPA) – 

Attended a live book reading or 

a poetry or storytelling event, 

respondent and spouse/partner 

combined

CREATIVE – Participated in 

creative writing in the past 12 

months

PEMCQ7 (SPPA) – Did 

creative writing such as 

fiction, nonfiction, poetry, 

or plays

WRITING (ABS 2014) – Did 

creative writing such as fiction, 

nonfiction, poetry, or plays, 

respondent and spouse/partner 

combined

PEC8 (SPPA) – Did any creative 

writing such as fiction, 

nonfiction, poetry, or plays

CLASS – Took a class in creative 

writing in the past 12 months

PEMEQ3F (SPPA) –Took 

lessons/classes in creative 

writing (respondents that 

are aged 18–24)

PEMEQ3FF (SPPA) –Took 

lessons/classes in creative 

writing (respondents that 

are aged 25 and older)

LESSONWRITING (ABS 2015) – 

Took classes in creative writing, 

respondent and spouse/partner 

combined

PEE6D (SPPA) – Took classes in 

creative writing

CLUB – Participated in book 

clubs or reading groups in the 

past 12 months

PEMDQ1J (SPPA) –

Participated in book clubs 

or reading groups 

N/A

BOOKCLUB_PC (SPPA) – 

Participated in a book club or 

reading group, respondent and 

spouse/partner combined

WRITE – Wrote for personal 

interest on a typical day

T120313 (ATUS) – Wrote 

for personal interest 

T120313 (ATUS 2015) – Wrote for 

personal interest 

T120313 (ATUS) – Wrote for 

personal interest 

Cultural activities

To measure cultural activities, the study team used survey variables to create four analytical variables capturing (1) attendance at live 

performances; (2) visits to museums or art galleries; (3) visits to art fairs or festivals; and (4) visits to historic parks or monuments or 

touring buildings or neighborhoods for historic or design value. Table C-5 describes the survey variables used to define each analytical 

variable capturing participation in cultural activities.
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 57

Table C-5. Survey variables that define analytical variables of cultural activities

Analytical Variable SPPA 

2017 SPPA 2012a SPPA 2008 Label

LIVE – Attended a live performance in the 

past 12 months

PEC1Q1A JAZZ_PC PEQ1A Attended live jazz performance

PEC1Q2A SALSA_PC PEQ2A Attended live Latin, Spanish, or 

salsa music performance

PEC1Q3A CLASSICAL_PC PEQ3A Attended live classical music 

performance

PEC1Q4A OPERA_PC PEQ4A Attended live opera music 

performance

PEC1Q5A MUSICAL_PC PEQ5A Attended live musical stage play

PEC1Q6A PLAY_PC PEQ6A Attended live performance of a 

nonmusical stage play

PEC1Q7A BALLET_PC PEQ7A Attended live ballet performance

PEC1Q8A DANCE_PC PEQ8A Attended live dance performance 

other than ballet

VISIT – Visited a museum or art gallery in 

the past 12 months PEC1Q10A ARTMUSEUM_PC PEQ9A Visited art museum or gallery

FESTIVAL – Visited an art fair or festival 

in the past 12 months

PEC1Q11A CRAFTFAIR_PC PEQ10Ab Visited a craft fair or a visual arts 

festival

PEC1Q12A OUTDOORFESTIVAL_PC PEQ10Ab Visited an outdoor festival that 

featured performing artists

PARK – Visited a historic park or 

monument or toured a building or 

neighborhood for its historic or design 

value in the past 12 months

PEC1Q13A PARK_PC PEQ11A

Visited historic park or 

monument or building or 

neighborhood

a

 The 2012 SPPA includes respondent and spouse/partner responses.

b The 2008 SPPA did not distinguish between craft fairs, visual arts festivals, and outdoor festivals like later years did.

C

 Among the three SPPA waves, wording of the question item pertaining to visiting places for their historic or design value varied.

Frequency of reading

To measure the frequency of reading, the study team created an analytical variable BOOKS_COUNT that was defined by the survey 

variable:

	 PTC1Q14B – About how many books did you read during the past 12 months
58 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Support for the arts

Table C-6 provides the survey variables used to create the analytical variable SUPPORT, which measures support for the arts using 2017 

SPPA survey data. 

Table C-6. Survey variables that define analytical variable of support for the arts

Analytical Variable Variables in 2017 SPPA

SUPPORT – Adults who 

supported the arts with time or 

money in the past 12 months 

PEMDQ3 – Volunteered for an arts organization, group, or project 

PEMDQ4 – Subscribed to an arts organization

PEMDQ5 – Donated any money, goods, or services to an arts organization, group, or 

project

PEMDQ6 – Purchased or acquired any pieces of art, such as paintings, drawings, 

sculpture, pottery, or other visual art

Sample weights 

Each of the survey datasets have sample population weights that facilitate accurate estimates of the population the survey is meant 

to represent. The 2017 SPPA, ABS, and ATUS all have a single weight that was applied in all analyses. Earlier years of the SPPA used 

multiple weights that pertain to specific variables/modules of the survey. The study team applied the appropriate weight to each 

analysis using data from prior years of the SPPA by consulting the technical documentation for the data file. Table C-7 provides the 

sample weights used for analysis of each analytical variable.
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 59

Table C-7. Sample weights used for each analytical variable

Analytical Variable SPPA 2017 SPPA 2012 SPPA 

2008

SPPA 2002 

and 1992 

(combined 

file)

ABS ATUS

READ_TYPE and READ_

TYPE2 PWSUPWGT - - - - -

BOOK, NOVEL, POETRY, 

PLAYS, and LITERARY PWSUPWGT PWOWGT CWGT WEIGHT - -

HISTORY, SCIENCE, BIO, 

GRAPHIC, and RELIGIOUS PWSUPWGT - - - - -

EVENT PWSUPWGT PWSWGT - - PWABSWGT -

CREATIVE PWSUPWGT PWNWGT - - PWABSWGT -

CLASS PWSUPWGT PWNWGT - - PWABSWGT -

CLUB PWSUPWGT PWSWGT - - PWABSWGT -

WRITE - - - - - TUFINLWGT

LIVE, VISIT, FESTIVAL, 

and PARK PWSUPWGT PWOWGT CWGT - - -

BOOKS_COUNT PWSUPWGT - - - - -

SUPPORT PWSUPWGT - - - - -

Missing data

The SPPA and other data sources have missing data due to the survey design (i.e., modules of the SPPA are randomly assigned 

and not given to all respondents), refusal to answer questions, and other issues. The study team discarded all missing data prior to 

analysis. Following guidance in the technical documentation for the CPS supplements, we assumed that any missing data were missing 

completely at random; thus, deleting the cases did not introduce bias into the estimates. Throwing out the missing data did impact 

estimates of population counts. To remedy this issue, the study team applied the adjustment factors to all estimates of the population 

that are provided by CPS in the technical documentation (source and accuracy statements) of the SPPA and other data files. Table C-8 

provides the adjustment factors used for analyses with SPPA 2017 data, and Table C-9 provides the adjustment factors used for analyses 

with SPPA 2012 data. No adjustment factors were necessary for SPPA 2008, ABS, or ATUS data for the research in this report.
60 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

Table C-8. SPPA 2017 Supplement weighting factors

Factor Description

2 Estimates involving items from one Core

2.5 Estimates involving items from one Module

5 Estimates involving items from one Core and one Module

10 Estimates involving items from two different Modules

20 Estimates involving items from one Core and two Modules

Table C-9. SPPA 2012 Supplement weighting factors

Factor Core/Module Weight Used

1 PWOWGT, PWTWGT, or PWAWGT

2.25 PWSWGT

1.75 PWNWGT

Variance and standard error estimation

In addition to apply sampling weights, it is also important to account for the design effect of the survey when estimating variances 

and standard errors. If this is not done, it is possible to find erroneous evidence of statistical significance, which can lead to false 

claims that a change or an association is statistically meaningful when it is not. The 2017, 2012, and 2008 SPPA, as well as the data files 

for the ABS and ATUS, each have 160 replicate weights provided by CPS that facilitate accurate estimation of variances and standard 

errors that accounts for the effect of the survey design. For analyses using these data, the study team applied the replicate weights 

and used the Successive Difference Replication (SDR) method in Stata to estimate variance and standard errors. The SDR method is 

recommended for use with CPS data in technical documentation provided by the Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS).

It is the study team’s understanding that the CPS did produce replicate weights for the SPPA in years prior to 2008; however, the data 

do not appear to be available on the CPS website. The combined 1982 to 2012 SPPA data file in the National Archive of Data on Arts 

& Culture includes variables that indicate strata and primary sampling units that facilitate the Taylor series linearization estimation 

method (the default in Stata) for estimating variance, which is less accurate than SDR but still highly rigorous and valid. We use this 

method to estimate variances for the SPPA data from 2002 and earlier. 

Finally, small sample sizes were an issue for some of the analyses using subgroups. If the coefficient of variation for a subgroup in an 

analysis was less than 30 percent, the study team combined subgroups to improve the accuracy of the estimate. 
HOW DO WE READ? LET’S COUNT THE WAYS: Comparing Digital, Audio, and Print-Only Readers 61

Methods to test statistical significance

Between years and groups

To test for statistical significance of differences between years or subgroups in the analyses above, the study team calculated the 90 

percent confidence interval of the estimate in each year or subgroup using the following formula:

Cl=X±1.645*SE

where X is the estimate and SE is the estimate’s standard error. The study team then compared the confidence intervals of each year 

or subgroup and determined whether they overlap. If confidence intervals overlap, we report that the estimate is not significant with at 

least 90 percent confidence. 

Multivariate regressions

The study team also specified several multivariate regression models to understand whether differences between subgroups were 

statistically significant, controlling for other factors. We describe each model below.

The study team specified a multinomial logistic regression that facilitated testing the statistical significance of the association between 

a particular demographic subgroup and reading types, controlling for the other subgroups. The results of this model are in Table B-1 in 

Appendix B.

The multinomial logistic regression for each respondent i in the 2017 SPPA data took the form

ln(READ_TYPEi={ PRINT_ONLYi

DIGITAL_AUDIOi

 )=a+ßXi

+Ei 

where a is a constant term, ß is a matrix of coefficients for each subgroup X that estimates the log odds of a member of the subgroup 

being in each category of READ_TYPE compared to the reference category NONREADER, and E is a random error term. If a coefficient in 

ß is statistically significant with 90 percent confidence, the study team reported that there is evidence that the subgroup is associated 

with the particular type of reading.

The study team also specified logistic regression models that facilitated testing the statistical significance of the association between 

a particular demographic subgroup and the analytical variables measuring literary activity (see Table C-4) and cultural activity (see 

Table C-5), controlling for the other subgroups. The results of these models are in Table B-2 and Table B-3 in Appendix B. Each logistic 

regression for each respondent i in the 2017 SPPA took the form

ln(yi=1)=a+ßXi+Ei

where y is the variable measuring literary activity or cultural activity; a is a constant term; ß is a matrix of coefficients for each 

subgroup in X that estimates the log odds of a member of the subgroup participating in y compared to the reference category of the 

subgroup; and E is a random error term. If a coefficient in ß is statistically significant with 90 percent confidence, the study team 

reported that the subgroup is associated with the activity represented by dependent variable y.

Finally, the study team specified logistic regression models that facilitated testing the statistical significance of the association 

between reader types and literary activity, cultural activity, and support for the arts, controlling for demographic subgroups and the 

frequency of reading. The results of these models are in Table B-4, Table B-5, and Table B-6 in Appendix B. Each logistic regression for 

each respondent i in the 2017 SPPA took the form

ln(yi=1)=a+ßXi+δREAD_TYPE2i+Ei
62 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS | arts.gov

where y is the variable measuring literary activity, cultural activity, or support for the arts; a is a constant term; ß is a matrix of 

coefficients for each demographic subgroup and the variable BOOKS_COUNT in X that estimates the log odds of a member of the 

subgroup participating in y compared to the reference category of the subgroup or, in the case of BOOKS_COUNT, the change in the 

log odds of participating in y given an increase in the number of books read by 1 book; δ is a vector of coefficients for each reader 

type, either eBOOK, LISTENER, or DIGITAL_AND_AUDIO, that estimates the log odds of an individual of the reader type participating in y

compared to the reference category (PRINT_ONLY), and E is a random error term. If a coefficient in δ is statistically significant with 90 

percent confidence, the study team reported that the reader type is associated with the activity represented by dependent variable y, 

controlling for the variables in X.