Use the abstract to choose what deserves deeper reading
Write the research question; authenticate the record; test background and objective relevance; read methods for design limits; interpret results with denominators and uncertainty; compare conclusions with observations; mark abstract omissions; locate full text; compare studies without flattening them; record inclusion reasons; and verify the final citation.
Why this English matters now
A research abstract helps a reader decide whether a full paper is likely to answer a real question. It saves time without turning a short summary into the whole evidence base.
Students searching how to read a research paper, what is an abstract, literature review screening, research methods in an abstract or how to find full text need a repeatable route from question to paper.
Current NUS Libraries and NCBI guidance checked on 29 October 2026 shows the practical connection: databases often display abstracts first, while library and PubMed routes help readers obtain the complete article.
Good abstract reading is hopeful and disciplined. It lets readers discover more widely, choose more carefully and reserve deep attention for the papers most likely to matter.
Checked against the official sources on 29 October 2026. The article explains how to read a document and make a safer next decision; it does not replace the issuing institution.
The reading method
Build an abstract-screening table with research question, title, authors, year, identifier, publication type, background fit, objective, design, sample, setting, measure, result, uncertainty, conclusion, missing details, full-text route and provisional inclusion reason.
- NUS Libraries explains that database results commonly display article details and abstracts and provides a Find It! route to subscribed full text.
- NCBI explains how a PubMed abstract record can lead to PubMed Central or publisher full text.
- These access tools support the move from discovery to reading; they do not replace appraisal of the complete paper.
Read with every responsible person in view
- Read as a student screening literature, a librarian supporting access, a supervisor checking decisions and a future professional keeping knowledge current.
- Keep discovery, screening, full-text appraisal, synthesis and citation separate.
- Use the abstract as a compact map whose omissions are as important as its contents.
Different people can read the same sentence for different jobs. The student needs the next action; the administrator needs a routable record; the family needs a realistic timeline; the eventual recipient needs evidence that fits its stated purpose. Good English keeps those needs aligned without inventing authority.
Official factual floor
These first-party sources support the factual claims and should be reopened for any live transaction:
Did you know?
An abstract can help a paper enter a reading queue, but it usually cannot answer every quality question. Its real power is selection: it helps the reader decide where to spend the next twenty minutes.
Full chapter index
- 1. Start with the research question
- 2. Authenticate the bibliographic record
- 3. Use the background to test relevance
- 4. Translate the objective into a screening test
- 5. Read methods for design and limits
- 6. Read numbers with denominators and uncertainty
- 7. Separate observed results from author conclusions
- 8. Look for limitations the abstract cannot carry
- 9. Follow the route from abstract to full text
- 10. Compare abstracts without flattening studies
- 11. Write a one-sentence inclusion reason
- 12. Cite the paper, not a search snippet
What this part of the document is doing
Before opening results, write what you need to know: population, intervention or phenomenon, comparison, outcome and context where relevant. This is where English becomes practical: the noun names the record, the verb names the state, the date fixes the version, and the qualifying phrase limits what the reader may safely conclude. Read those pieces together. If one is missing, mark the gap instead of filling it with hope, habit or a friend’s experience.
The useful question is not merely “What does this word mean?” It is “What action does this sentence authorise, who owns that action, and what evidence would show that the state has changed?” That question turns reading into a decision tool. It also prevents a heading, notification preview or informal summary from replacing the complete operative sentence.
A realistic situation
Example: A student searches broad keywords and saves every paper containing them, although most do not answer the assignment question. The risk here is not a lack of intelligence. It is a state-reading error: a nearby fact is allowed to stand in for the exact fact the process needs. A calm reader goes back to the named record, matches the person, programme or transaction, and keeps the decision inside the document’s real scope.
- 1. write the question
- 2. name inclusion criteria
- 3. name exclusion criteria
- 4. then search
Put into one sentence, the sequence is to write the question, name inclusion criteria, name exclusion criteria, and then search. Doing this aloud is helpful because it exposes hidden assumptions. A student, parent or adviser can then compare the spoken summary with the official wording. If the summary sounds stronger than the source, revise the summary—not the source.
Keep a small evidence note beside the action: document title, issuer, issue date, current status, deadline, responsible office and unresolved question. This takes less than a minute and prevents screenshots, tabs and forwarded messages from becoming an unstructured pile. The note also makes a later enquiry more precise and easier for the receiving office to route.
Transfer: Question design supports projects and evidence-based decisions. The same habit works in school notices, examination instructions, applications and employment records: authenticate, classify, sequence, act, and retain proof. That is why this form of English learning travels well beyond one document.
What this part of the document is doing
Match title, authors, journal or repository, year, DOI or other persistent identifier and publication type. Similar titles can belong to corrections, protocols, reviews or conference abstracts. This is where English becomes practical: the noun names the record, the verb names the state, the date fixes the version, and the qualifying phrase limits what the reader may safely conclude. Read those pieces together. If one is missing, mark the gap instead of filling it with hope, habit or a friend’s experience.
The useful question is not merely “What does this word mean?” It is “What action does this sentence authorise, who owns that action, and what evidence would show that the state has changed?” That question turns reading into a decision tool. It also prevents a heading, notification preview or informal summary from replacing the complete operative sentence.
A realistic situation
Example: A protocol is cited as if it contained completed trial results. The risk here is not a lack of intelligence. It is a state-reading error: a nearby fact is allowed to stand in for the exact fact the process needs. A calm reader goes back to the named record, matches the person, programme or transaction, and keeps the decision inside the document’s real scope.
- 1. match title and authors
- 2. identify publication type
- 3. record year and identifier
- 4. check correction or retraction notices
Put into one sentence, the sequence is to match title and authors, identify publication type, record year and identifier, and check correction or retraction notices. Doing this aloud is helpful because it exposes hidden assumptions. A student, parent or adviser can then compare the spoken summary with the official wording. If the summary sounds stronger than the source, revise the summary—not the source.
Keep a small evidence note beside the action: document title, issuer, issue date, current status, deadline, responsible office and unresolved question. This takes less than a minute and prevents screenshots, tabs and forwarded messages from becoming an unstructured pile. The note also makes a later enquiry more precise and easier for the receiving office to route.
Transfer: Bibliographic accuracy supports research and professional learning. The same habit works in school notices, examination instructions, applications and employment records: authenticate, classify, sequence, act, and retain proof. That is why this form of English learning travels well beyond one document.
What this part of the document is doing
The opening sentences state the problem and why the study was done. They help the reader decide whether the paper belongs in the topic map. This is where English becomes practical: the noun names the record, the verb names the state, the date fixes the version, and the qualifying phrase limits what the reader may safely conclude. Read those pieces together. If one is missing, mark the gap instead of filling it with hope, habit or a friend’s experience.
The useful question is not merely “What does this word mean?” It is “What action does this sentence authorise, who owns that action, and what evidence would show that the state has changed?” That question turns reading into a decision tool. It also prevents a heading, notification preview or informal summary from replacing the complete operative sentence.
A realistic situation
Example: A paper mentions adolescent literacy in its background but studies only an adult workplace sample. The risk here is not a lack of intelligence. It is a state-reading error: a nearby fact is allowed to stand in for the exact fact the process needs. A calm reader goes back to the named record, matches the person, programme or transaction, and keeps the decision inside the document’s real scope.
- 1. locate the stated problem
- 2. find the study aim
- 3. compare with your question
- 4. mark partial relevance honestly
Put into one sentence, the sequence is to locate the stated problem, find the study aim, compare with your question, and mark partial relevance honestly. Doing this aloud is helpful because it exposes hidden assumptions. A student, parent or adviser can then compare the spoken summary with the official wording. If the summary sounds stronger than the source, revise the summary—not the source.
Keep a small evidence note beside the action: document title, issuer, issue date, current status, deadline, responsible office and unresolved question. This takes less than a minute and prevents screenshots, tabs and forwarded messages from becoming an unstructured pile. The note also makes a later enquiry more precise and easier for the receiving office to route.
Transfer: Relevance screening supports efficient reading. The same habit works in school notices, examination instructions, applications and employment records: authenticate, classify, sequence, act, and retain proof. That is why this form of English learning travels well beyond one document.
What this part of the document is doing
A clear objective states what the authors intended to examine. Turn it into a yes-or-no or graded inclusion question. This is where English becomes practical: the noun names the record, the verb names the state, the date fixes the version, and the qualifying phrase limits what the reader may safely conclude. Read those pieces together. If one is missing, mark the gap instead of filling it with hope, habit or a friend’s experience.
The useful question is not merely “What does this word mean?” It is “What action does this sentence authorise, who owns that action, and what evidence would show that the state has changed?” That question turns reading into a decision tool. It also prevents a heading, notification preview or informal summary from replacing the complete operative sentence.
A realistic situation
Example: The title looks useful, but the objective measures attitudes rather than the learning outcome needed for the review. The risk here is not a lack of intelligence. It is a state-reading error: a nearby fact is allowed to stand in for the exact fact the process needs. A calm reader goes back to the named record, matches the person, programme or transaction, and keeps the decision inside the document’s real scope.
- 1. copy the objective
- 2. underline population and outcome
- 3. compare with criteria
- 4. decide include, maybe or exclude
Put into one sentence, the sequence is to copy the objective, underline population and outcome, compare with criteria, and decide include, maybe or exclude. Doing this aloud is helpful because it exposes hidden assumptions. A student, parent or adviser can then compare the spoken summary with the official wording. If the summary sounds stronger than the source, revise the summary—not the source.
Keep a small evidence note beside the action: document title, issuer, issue date, current status, deadline, responsible office and unresolved question. This takes less than a minute and prevents screenshots, tabs and forwarded messages from becoming an unstructured pile. The note also makes a later enquiry more precise and easier for the receiving office to route.
Transfer: Objective matching supports procurement and evaluation. The same habit works in school notices, examination instructions, applications and employment records: authenticate, classify, sequence, act, and retain proof. That is why this form of English learning travels well beyond one document.
What this part of the document is doing
The abstract may identify study design, setting, sample, measures and analysis. These details help determine whether the evidence can answer the question. This is where English becomes practical: the noun names the record, the verb names the state, the date fixes the version, and the qualifying phrase limits what the reader may safely conclude. Read those pieces together. If one is missing, mark the gap instead of filling it with hope, habit or a friend’s experience.
The useful question is not merely “What does this word mean?” It is “What action does this sentence authorise, who owns that action, and what evidence would show that the state has changed?” That question turns reading into a decision tool. It also prevents a heading, notification preview or informal summary from replacing the complete operative sentence.
A realistic situation
Example: A cross-sectional association is described as proof that one factor caused another. The risk here is not a lack of intelligence. It is a state-reading error: a nearby fact is allowed to stand in for the exact fact the process needs. A calm reader goes back to the named record, matches the person, programme or transaction, and keeps the decision inside the document’s real scope.
- 1. identify design
- 2. identify sample and setting
- 3. identify measurement
- 4. note what the design cannot establish
Put into one sentence, the sequence is to identify design, identify sample and setting, identify measurement, and note what the design cannot establish. Doing this aloud is helpful because it exposes hidden assumptions. A student, parent or adviser can then compare the spoken summary with the official wording. If the summary sounds stronger than the source, revise the summary—not the source.
Keep a small evidence note beside the action: document title, issuer, issue date, current status, deadline, responsible office and unresolved question. This takes less than a minute and prevents screenshots, tabs and forwarded messages from becoming an unstructured pile. The note also makes a later enquiry more precise and easier for the receiving office to route.
Transfer: Method literacy supports science and policy. The same habit works in school notices, examination instructions, applications and employment records: authenticate, classify, sequence, act, and retain proof. That is why this form of English learning travels well beyond one document.
What this part of the document is doing
Results should be read with sample size, comparison, effect direction and uncertainty where reported. A percentage without denominator can mislead. This is where English becomes practical: the noun names the record, the verb names the state, the date fixes the version, and the qualifying phrase limits what the reader may safely conclude. Read those pieces together. If one is missing, mark the gap instead of filling it with hope, habit or a friend’s experience.
The useful question is not merely “What does this word mean?” It is “What action does this sentence authorise, who owns that action, and what evidence would show that the state has changed?” That question turns reading into a decision tool. It also prevents a heading, notification preview or informal summary from replacing the complete operative sentence.
A realistic situation
Example: A 50 percent improvement means one additional success in a group of two, but the abstract is shared without the sample size. The risk here is not a lack of intelligence. It is a state-reading error: a nearby fact is allowed to stand in for the exact fact the process needs. A calm reader goes back to the named record, matches the person, programme or transaction, and keeps the decision inside the document’s real scope.
- 1. find the denominator
- 2. identify comparison
- 3. record effect size
- 4. look for interval or uncertainty
Put into one sentence, the sequence is to find the denominator, identify comparison, record effect size, and look for interval or uncertainty. Doing this aloud is helpful because it exposes hidden assumptions. A student, parent or adviser can then compare the spoken summary with the official wording. If the summary sounds stronger than the source, revise the summary—not the source.
Keep a small evidence note beside the action: document title, issuer, issue date, current status, deadline, responsible office and unresolved question. This takes less than a minute and prevents screenshots, tabs and forwarded messages from becoming an unstructured pile. The note also makes a later enquiry more precise and easier for the receiving office to route.
Transfer: Quantitative English supports finance, health and education. The same habit works in school notices, examination instructions, applications and employment records: authenticate, classify, sequence, act, and retain proof. That is why this form of English learning travels well beyond one document.
What this part of the document is doing
Word limits mean abstracts may omit recruitment details, missing data, subgroup analyses, measures, conflicts or full limitations. Screening should lead to the paper. This is where English becomes practical: the noun names the record, the verb names the state, the date fixes the version, and the qualifying phrase limits what the reader may safely conclude. Read those pieces together. If one is missing, mark the gap instead of filling it with hope, habit or a friend’s experience.
The useful question is not merely “What does this word mean?” It is “What action does this sentence authorise, who owns that action, and what evidence would show that the state has changed?” That question turns reading into a decision tool. It also prevents a heading, notification preview or informal summary from replacing the complete operative sentence.
A realistic situation
Example: A paper is included in a final literature review after reading only a 250-word abstract. The risk here is not a lack of intelligence. It is a state-reading error: a nearby fact is allowed to stand in for the exact fact the process needs. A calm reader goes back to the named record, matches the person, programme or transaction, and keeps the decision inside the document’s real scope.
- 1. mark unknown fields
- 2. open the full text
- 3. read methods and limitations
- 4. update the screening note
Put into one sentence, the sequence is to mark unknown fields, open the full text, read methods and limitations, and update the screening note. Doing this aloud is helpful because it exposes hidden assumptions. A student, parent or adviser can then compare the spoken summary with the official wording. If the summary sounds stronger than the source, revise the summary—not the source.
Keep a small evidence note beside the action: document title, issuer, issue date, current status, deadline, responsible office and unresolved question. This takes less than a minute and prevents screenshots, tabs and forwarded messages from becoming an unstructured pile. The note also makes a later enquiry more precise and easier for the receiving office to route.
Transfer: Layered reading supports research quality. The same habit works in school notices, examination instructions, applications and employment records: authenticate, classify, sequence, act, and retain proof. That is why this form of English learning travels well beyond one document.
What this part of the document is doing
NUS Libraries explains that database results often show article details and abstracts and provides routes to available full text. NCBI similarly shows how PubMed records can lead to publisher or PubMed Central copies. This is where English becomes practical: the noun names the record, the verb names the state, the date fixes the version, and the qualifying phrase limits what the reader may safely conclude. Read those pieces together. If one is missing, mark the gap instead of filling it with hope, habit or a friend’s experience.
The useful question is not merely “What does this word mean?” It is “What action does this sentence authorise, who owns that action, and what evidence would show that the state has changed?” That question turns reading into a decision tool. It also prevents a heading, notification preview or informal summary from replacing the complete operative sentence.
A realistic situation
Example: A student assumes no free PDF button means the article does not exist or cannot be accessed through the library. The risk here is not a lack of intelligence. It is a state-reading error: a nearby fact is allowed to stand in for the exact fact the process needs. A calm reader goes back to the named record, matches the person, programme or transaction, and keeps the decision inside the document’s real scope.
- 1. use institutional find-full-text tools
- 2. check DOI or publisher
- 3. check legal repositories
- 4. ask a librarian
Put into one sentence, the sequence is to use institutional find-full-text tools, check DOI or publisher, check legal repositories, and ask a librarian. Doing this aloud is helpful because it exposes hidden assumptions. A student, parent or adviser can then compare the spoken summary with the official wording. If the summary sounds stronger than the source, revise the summary—not the source.
Keep a small evidence note beside the action: document title, issuer, issue date, current status, deadline, responsible office and unresolved question. This takes less than a minute and prevents screenshots, tabs and forwarded messages from becoming an unstructured pile. The note also makes a later enquiry more precise and easier for the receiving office to route.
Transfer: Information access skills support lifelong learning. The same habit works in school notices, examination instructions, applications and employment records: authenticate, classify, sequence, act, and retain proof. That is why this form of English learning travels well beyond one document.
What this part of the document is doing
A screening table can compare design, sample, outcome and result while preserving important differences. Do not turn unlike measures into one false ranking. This is where English becomes practical: the noun names the record, the verb names the state, the date fixes the version, and the qualifying phrase limits what the reader may safely conclude. Read those pieces together. If one is missing, mark the gap instead of filling it with hope, habit or a friend’s experience.
The useful question is not merely “What does this word mean?” It is “What action does this sentence authorise, who owns that action, and what evidence would show that the state has changed?” That question turns reading into a decision tool. It also prevents a heading, notification preview or informal summary from replacing the complete operative sentence.
A realistic situation
Example: Three studies are called contradictory although they studied different ages, settings and outcomes. The risk here is not a lack of intelligence. It is a state-reading error: a nearby fact is allowed to stand in for the exact fact the process needs. A calm reader goes back to the named record, matches the person, programme or transaction, and keeps the decision inside the document’s real scope.
- 1. standardise table fields
- 2. preserve original measures
- 3. name design differences
- 4. explain apparent conflict
Put into one sentence, the sequence is to standardise table fields, preserve original measures, name design differences, and explain apparent conflict. Doing this aloud is helpful because it exposes hidden assumptions. A student, parent or adviser can then compare the spoken summary with the official wording. If the summary sounds stronger than the source, revise the summary—not the source.
Keep a small evidence note beside the action: document title, issuer, issue date, current status, deadline, responsible office and unresolved question. This takes less than a minute and prevents screenshots, tabs and forwarded messages from becoming an unstructured pile. The note also makes a later enquiry more precise and easier for the receiving office to route.
Transfer: Comparative synthesis supports reviews and decision briefs. The same habit works in school notices, examination instructions, applications and employment records: authenticate, classify, sequence, act, and retain proof. That is why this form of English learning travels well beyond one document.
What this part of the document is doing
For every selected paper, record why it answers the question and what remains to check in the full text. This prevents accidental citation drift. This is where English becomes practical: the noun names the record, the verb names the state, the date fixes the version, and the qualifying phrase limits what the reader may safely conclude. Read those pieces together. If one is missing, mark the gap instead of filling it with hope, habit or a friend’s experience.
The useful question is not merely “What does this word mean?” It is “What action does this sentence authorise, who owns that action, and what evidence would show that the state has changed?” That question turns reading into a decision tool. It also prevents a heading, notification preview or informal summary from replacing the complete operative sentence.
A realistic situation
Example: Weeks later, the student remembers that a paper was interesting but not why it was included. The risk here is not a lack of intelligence. It is a state-reading error: a nearby fact is allowed to stand in for the exact fact the process needs. A calm reader goes back to the named record, matches the person, programme or transaction, and keeps the decision inside the document’s real scope.
- 1. name the question link
- 2. name design and sample
- 3. name key result
- 4. name the full-text check
Put into one sentence, the sequence is to name the question link, name design and sample, name key result, and name the full-text check. Doing this aloud is helpful because it exposes hidden assumptions. A student, parent or adviser can then compare the spoken summary with the official wording. If the summary sounds stronger than the source, revise the summary—not the source.
Keep a small evidence note beside the action: document title, issuer, issue date, current status, deadline, responsible office and unresolved question. This takes less than a minute and prevents screenshots, tabs and forwarded messages from becoming an unstructured pile. The note also makes a later enquiry more precise and easier for the receiving office to route.
Transfer: Decision logs support teams and audits. The same habit works in school notices, examination instructions, applications and employment records: authenticate, classify, sequence, act, and retain proof. That is why this form of English learning travels well beyond one document.
What this part of the document is doing
Use the official bibliographic record and full paper for the final citation. Search results and AI summaries can help discovery but are not substitutes for the source. This is where English becomes practical: the noun names the record, the verb names the state, the date fixes the version, and the qualifying phrase limits what the reader may safely conclude. Read those pieces together. If one is missing, mark the gap instead of filling it with hope, habit or a friend’s experience.
The useful question is not merely “What does this word mean?” It is “What action does this sentence authorise, who owns that action, and what evidence would show that the state has changed?” That question turns reading into a decision tool. It also prevents a heading, notification preview or informal summary from replacing the complete operative sentence.
A realistic situation
Example: A generated citation contains a plausible title and DOI that do not match any real paper. The risk here is not a lack of intelligence. It is a state-reading error: a nearby fact is allowed to stand in for the exact fact the process needs. A calm reader goes back to the named record, matches the person, programme or transaction, and keeps the decision inside the document’s real scope.
- 1. open the original record
- 2. copy verified fields
- 3. check DOI resolution
- 4. compare the citation with the paper
Put into one sentence, the sequence is to open the original record, copy verified fields, check DOI resolution, and compare the citation with the paper. Doing this aloud is helpful because it exposes hidden assumptions. A student, parent or adviser can then compare the spoken summary with the official wording. If the summary sounds stronger than the source, revise the summary—not the source.
Keep a small evidence note beside the action: document title, issuer, issue date, current status, deadline, responsible office and unresolved question. This takes less than a minute and prevents screenshots, tabs and forwarded messages from becoming an unstructured pile. The note also makes a later enquiry more precise and easier for the receiving office to route.
Transfer: Source verification supports academic integrity and professional reports. The same habit works in school notices, examination instructions, applications and employment records: authenticate, classify, sequence, act, and retain proof. That is why this form of English learning travels well beyond one document.
Evidence examples: what the wording can and cannot prove
Headline and operative detail
Use the heading to locate the research finding, then read the sentence, table or label that controls the decision.
Check: A heading is a signpost, not the whole evidence.
Current source and saved note
Keep a dated note, but reopen the official source before a live examination, enrolment or submission.
Check: An authentic page can still belong to another year, subject or course.
Fact, interpretation and action
Write these on three separate lines before deciding what to do.
Check: The source supplies the fact; the reader must label any inference and choose a proportionate action.
Uncertainty and clarification
Name the missing fact and ask the teacher, librarian, supervisor or office who owns it.
Check: A precise question is stronger than a confident guess.
Practice studio
Sixty-second screen
Make a provisional include, maybe or exclude decision.
- question fit
- design
- sample
- outcome
- full text
Abstract-to-paper audit
Check what the short record left out.
- methods
- measures
- missing data
- limitations
- conflicts
Evidence table
Compare studies without erasing important differences.
- design
- population
- setting
- measure
- result
Advice for students, families and advisers
For students
- Write inclusion criteria before searching so interesting titles do not control the review.
- Use the abstract to screen, then cite and appraise the full paper.
For parents and general readers
- Treat research headlines and abstracts as invitations to investigate, not final personal advice.
- Ask whether the studied population and outcome match the decision.
For teachers, librarians and supervisors
- Make screening reasons visible and reproducible.
- Teach lawful full-text routes and how to record inaccessible or uncertain studies.
Frequently asked questions
What is a research abstract?
A compact summary of a paper, commonly covering purpose, methods, results and conclusion.
Should I read the title or abstract first?
Use the title for orientation, then the abstract for relevance and design.
Can I cite only the abstract?
For most assignments and decisions, locate and read the full paper before making substantive claims.
What if the abstract has no headings?
Identify the background, objective, methods, results and conclusion by function.
Does a database listing prove quality?
No. It authenticates a record; study quality still needs appraisal.
What numbers matter first?
Sample size, comparison, effect size, uncertainty and the actual outcome measured.
Where can I find full text?
Use institutional library tools, DOI or publisher links and lawful repositories such as PubMed Central where available.
What if full text is unavailable?
Record the limitation, ask a librarian and avoid overstating an abstract-only conclusion.
How do I compare apparently conflicting abstracts?
Check population, design, measure, timing and setting before calling them contradictory.
Why English?
Because a compact abstract must be unpacked into a careful reading decision.
Useful next reading
- Why English? | Reading Supplementary Material Alongside a Research Paper — continue from the paper into supporting methods and data
- Why English? | Checking Source Credibility Before Using Evidence — evaluate the paper and every surrounding claim
Closing thought
A strong reader does not ask an abstract to be the whole paper. The abstract opens the door, the full text supplies the room, and a transparent screening note explains why the reader chose to enter.