[frozenport]

Probably won't help. We can be scientific about this: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22762257

    RESULTS:

Results suggested that reading on the two display types is very similar in terms of both subjective and objective measures.

   CONCLUSIONS:

It is not the technology itself, but rather the image quality that seems crucial for reading. Compared to the visual display units used in the previous few decades, these more recent electronic displays allow for good and comfortable reading, even for extended periods of time.

[sireat]

Here's link to abstract and full pdf for free: http://www.jemr.org/online/5/3/5

Interesting study but by no means conclusive and has a few flas as they only measured 6 female participants reading 300 words at a time on each device.(10 inch ipad, two sony e-ink devices of 6 inch variety)

Number and sex of participants might not be that crucial here but 300 words at a time seems very low amount.

Anecdotally, I can read just fine and quickly on a most glossiest of LCDs for a few minutes.

If I have to read for an hour or longer give me e-ink screen any time.

[DanBC]

Please do not use 4 spaces to indicate quoted text. Or, if you do, please make sure you add line-breaks.

EDIT: using four spaces to indicate quoted text means mobile users have to horizontally scroll the line of text in order to read it.

http://imgur.com/v9gbR6m

[metamet]

This doesn't mention anything about the light promoting wakefulness, but rather simply assesses levels of comprehension: "These dependent measures included subjective (visual) fatigue, a letter search task, reading speed, oculomotor behaviour and the pupillary light reflex."

Staring at a light producing screen all day then not staring at one could still be a good move.

[walterbell]

Blue light affects circadian rhythm, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2831986/

[fugyk]

Is there any research which compares eye strain on reading from paper vs e-ink/LCD?