In the last post, we explored how reducing cognitive load helps readers access and understand complex ideas. A strong structure increases the likelihood that readers will absorb and retain more of what you’re saying. In this post, we shift from focusing on building a structure to movement within that structure: how readers navigate, pause, and return.  

How People Read  

Eye-tracking research shows that readers rarely move through text line by line; instead, they scan using predictable patterns, prioritizing speed and efficiency over completeness (Pernice 2019). You may be familiar with the idea that people read in an “F” pattern by default (see figure 1). This reading pattern tends to happen when text isn’t set up to be easily scanned. Without clear structure, readers default to skimming primarily the top and left edges, which isn’t as effective in gathering important information since key details might be included on other parts of the page or screen (Pernice 2017). 

What you actually want to achieve with your layout is a “layer-cake” pattern, where strong headings guide readers down the page in horizontal layers to help them decide where to stop and engage. See an example of this in figure 2 below.  

In this pattern, readers gather just enough information from section titles to determine relevance, often skipping the body text entirely unless something matches their goal. This means that visual hierarchy actively structures how reading happens. When headings are clear, descriptive, and visually distinct, they function like entry points, allowing readers to navigate efficiently and choose where to invest attention. 

How SoTL Readers Read 

Although the examples above are coming from studies on web text and UX design, research suggests that this selective behavior extends to longer-form and academic texts as well. Tenopir et al. (2009) observed the “scholarly skim” is actually very common in practice. Research on academic reading practices shows that faculty and researchers do not typically read every article front to back; instead, they skim abstracts and prioritize sections based on task and purpose. To add to this finding, research from Liu (2005), Delgado et al. (2018), and Tenopir, Christian, and Kaufman (2019) found that readers engage in goal-oriented, nonlinear reading, particularly when working on screens or under time constraints. (Do these conditions sound familiar?) 

The difference, then, is not simply medium (e.g., web text vs. academic article) but purpose. Even in scholarly contexts where long-form content is common, readers move between sections, revisit passages, and prioritize what feels immediately useful rather than reading strictly from beginning to end.  

Another aspect to consider is that SoTL readers are likely to engage with scholarship in the midst of teaching, planning, or professional development. Think about instances where you’ve picked up SoTL research in pieces rather than all at once. A faculty member might scan for a teaching strategy, revisit a section on assessment, or return later to rethink a course design. A workshop participant might only read the sections most relevant to their discipline or immediate needs. When we write and design only for a linear reading path, we risk losing readers who are trying to navigate the text in more flexible, goal-oriented ways. 

In these moments, SoTL readers aren’t just consuming information, they’re searching for it. If your structure doesn’t support that kind of movement, readers must work harder to locate and reconnect ideas. Designing for non-linear reading is about recognizing how people actually use scholarly work, and making it easier for them to find, understand, and apply what matters to them in their context.  

What to Do About It  

If readers are likely to move through your work selectively, your structure needs to support that movement. This is where headings, summaries, and visual cues do more than organize content (although that’s a essential, too), but they guide navigation. Below I’ve included practical tips you could implement in your writing today, as well as longer, more specific guides you could reference if you want to learn more about this topic.  

Quick Tips  

• Clear, descriptive headings allow readers to scan and locate relevant sections quickly. 
• Brief summaries or opening sentences help them decide whether to stay or move on. 
• Repetition of key terms and ideas across sections helps readers reorient when they jump back in.  

Together, these elements act as signposts, helping readers move through the text without losing the thread of your argument. 

Guides 

These resources provide guidance on designing text for scanning, structuring headings, and creating visual hierarchy that supports a layer-cake reading pattern: 

1. Layer-Cake Scanning Pattern – Kara Pernice, Nielsen Norman Group, 2019. Explains the layer-cake scanning pattern in detail and provides examples of how headings and subheadings guide readers down the page. 
2. Writing for the Web: How People Read Online – Jakob Nielsen, Nielsen Norman Group, 2008. Foundational, freely available guide on scannable writing, headings, bullets, and how to organize web content for selective reading. 
3. Visual Hierarchy: Organizing Content to Follow Natural Eye Movement Patterns – Mariga Soegaard, Interaction Design Foundation, 2021. Offers guidance on visual hierarchy, headings, and layout to help readers naturally scan and understand content. 

Looking Ahead 

If readers are scanning and dipping into your work, the natural question for you as a writer is: what do you want them to notice first, and what should they remember? In the next post, we’ll look more closely at visuals like charts, diagrams, and images as memorable arguments. 

---

References 

Liu, Ziming. 2005. “Reading Behavior in the Digital Environment: Changes in Reading Behavior Over the Past Ten Years.” Journal of Documentation 61 (6): 700–712. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410510632040. 

Delgado, Pablo, Cristina Vargas, Rakefet Ackerman, and Ladislao Salmerón. 2018. “Don’t Throw Away Your Printed Books: A Meta‑Analysis on the Effects of Reading Media on Reading Comprehension.” Educational Research Review 25: 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.09.003. 

Grabiec, Sophie. 2026. “Cognitive Load Is Your Invisible Barrier.” Center for Engaged Learning (blog), Elon University. March 31, 2026. URL. 

Pernice, Kara. 2017. F-Shaped Pattern of Reading on the Web: Misunderstood, But Still Relevant. Nielsen Norman Group. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/f-shaped-pattern-reading-web-content/. 

Pernice, Kara. 2019. Layer-Cake Scanning Pattern. Nielsen Norman Group. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/layer-cake-pattern-scanning/. 

Tenopir, Carol, Lisa Christian, and Jordan Kaufman. 2019. “Seeking, Reading, and Use of Scholarly Articles: An International Study of Perceptions and Behavior of Researchers.” Publications 7 (1): 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7010018. 

Tenopir, Carol, Donald W. King, Jesse Spencer, and Lei Wu. 2009. “Variations in Article Seeking and Reading Patterns of Academics: What Makes a Difference?” Library & Information Science Research 31 (3): 139–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2009.02.002.

---

About the Author 

Sophie Grabiec is the Center for Engaged Learning’s Managing Editor, where she oversees the production of CEL’s books, open access resources, and blog. Before joining Elon University, she lived and worked in Washington, DC at Georgetown University, where she earned her M.A. in English and taught first-year writing. 

How to Cite This Post 

Grabiec, Sophie. 2026. “The Illusion of Linear Reading .” Center for Engaged Learning (blog), Elon University. April 14, 2026. https://www.centerforengagedlearning.org/the-illusion-of-linear-reading.