Final answer:
Interpreting data in readings like 'The Selective Laziness of Human Reading' entails a critical analysis of logic, evidence credibility, and the presence of any omissions. Statistical data supports the development of theses, while other evidence types enrich the argument. Readers should actively engage with the text, questioning and articulating their responses to enhance comprehension.
Step-by-step explanation:
The strongest evidence that shows how the data was interpreted in 'The Selective Laziness of Human Reading' would be based on textual evidence that supports the interpretations and conclusions drawn.
This involves critically examining the logic of the position, considering if the writer has omitted any relevant points, and assessing whether the evidence presented is credible and sufficient to support the inferences made.
Statistical data, as noted in Dillon's work 'Reading From Paper Versus Screens: A Critical Review of the Empirical Literature', plays a key role in substantiating claims and developing a thesis.
Researchers must consider multiple forms of evidence such as facts, examples, inferences, expert opinions, and personal experiences. The type of citation used is also crucial for crediting the original material.
To engage in active and slow reading, one must question the author's claims, seek supporting evidence, and be aware of any personal reactions to the text.
Articulating concerns and thinking through reactions helps in understanding both the material and one's response to it.
Ultimately, scholars' interpretations of data and artifacts must appear convincing, and readers are encouraged to consider alternative interpretations.