We have all done it. The specifics are right there in the e-mail, but we reply asking the sender questions about the same information. When the sender responds, saying the specifics are contained in the first e-mail, we wonder how we could have missed them. Clearly, we had not read for the details. But why? Is it because we are not (Prensky, 2005) and, thus, have reading habits that do not translate well to an electronic environment? Do digital natives also make the same mistakes when they read online? Because we have been perplexed by being at both ends of these e-mails, we decided to investigate how well people read for detail when reading online and in print. We assessed the reading skills of a group of 100 eighth grade students and divided the students into four groups of 25. The first group read a science article online, the second group read the same science article in print, the third group read a social studies primary source document online, and the fourth group read the same primary social studies source document in print. When they finished reading, the students responded to questions to assess their level of comprehension and attention to detail. The students who read online and the students who read in print performed similarly well on questions related to main ideas and general themes. The content area did not seem to matter. There were no statistical differences among the groups, and it seemed that online reading was as effective as print reading in ensuring students understood the gist of the information. Where the differences really stood out was in the reading for details. The students who read online performed significantly poorer than the students who read from the printed version on questions related to specific information in the texts. Why was this? We had not asked questions about minutiae, but we did ask students about specific details that were important in such tasks as predicting, inferring, and visualizing. For example, in an article about bird deaths from wind turbines, students who read online and print formats answered the main idea question with the same rate of success. Both groups understood that the article focused on ways to reduce bird deaths so additional electricity-generating wind turbines could be installed. However, the students who read the print version answered the detail questions at statistically significantly better rates. Here are some of the detail questions: * What was the difference between painting one blade versus all of the blades? * True or False: An image on the retina is small when the object is far away. * How many times more likely were the birds to see two blank blades and one solid black blade compared with three blank blades? The results of this investigation prompted us to ask several follow-up questions. We wanted to know why online readers were doing well comprehending the main idea, but not the supporting details. We wondered if they had not as focused when reading an online text or if they had not stayed as long on the original site because of hot buttons that might have altered their original focus after they had grasped the main idea. With so many questions, we knew we needed to continue to study each of the areas separately to understand their combined role in reading comprehension. In the sections that follow, we look closely at three aspects of reading online texts: understanding the main idea, the three-dimensional nature of online reading, and deep reading of online texts. We close with recommendations for encouraging and supporting deep reading in an online environment. The main idea By the middle grades, students have had a lot of experience identifying the main idea (e.g., Laverick, 2002; Seitz, 1997). They learn the sentence structures that suggest important information, where the main idea is typically located within a paragraph or essay, and the way the author structures examples aligned with the main idea (Wang, 2009). …