I find that if I am reading an article on the computer I more or less have to break it up into little chunks to get through it. I read a page and do something else, read a page and then do something else, alternating until I've made it through. More often than not these other things are on the internet, but I don't think the internet is to blame. Rather, the problem lies with reading on the computer. Whether that is because of the many distractions the computer offers or simply because reading long prose on a computer is unsatisfying I don't know, though I'd put my money on the latter. If I were to print out the same article (something I try not to do for environmental reasons) I would probably be able to read the whole thing in one shot.

My real point is this, however: I believe the presence of a computer is significant here, not past exposure to one. If that is the case then this can not be a case of the brain being rewired—instead it simply says something about the immediate effect of computers.

It would be an interesting study. Perhaps it's been done already. If I didn't have to run to work I'd poke around and try to find out!