Slashdot Asks: What's Your View On Speed Reading? 207
Wouldn't it be great if you could read a novel in an hour or two? Certainly, many people do that. The phenomenon of speed reading is nothing new with plenty of people claiming that they have grown habituated -- or taught themselves into -- reading things in an accelerated fashion. Not everyone -- including yours truly -- is a fan of this. There are several studies that suggest that 'speed reading' result in people missing out on lots of tidbits. A New York Times article, published Friday, also suggests the same. Jeffrey M. Zacks, and Rebecca Treiman, in an op-ed, citing a recent article in Psychological Science in the Public Interest, claim that "it's extremely unlikely you can greatly improve your reading speed without missing out on a lot of meaning." They write: Certainly, readers are capable of rapidly scanning a text to find a specific word or piece of information, or to pick up a general idea of what the text is about. But this is skimming, not reading. We can definitely skim, and it may be that speed-reading systems help people skim better.Which brings us to the question: What's your view on speed reading?
From a previous comment on /. (Score:5, Funny)
I took a speed reading course where you run your finger down the middle of the page and was able to read 'War and Peace' in twenty minutes. It's about Russia.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why those videos of people holding up cards to read DRIVE ME NUTS!
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think you can pin a number on "speed reading". I took a speed reading class in college, and went in reading faster than anyone else came out of it reading. It did triple my reading speed at a slight decrease in comprehension.
It took me less time to read True Grit than to watch either movie (the book sucked).
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, it's not that far off. Though I've never taken a course or anything, I am able to read really quickly. I can eat a Stephen King novel in an afternoon. I retain it for a few hours, maybe a day and that's it. If I read at speedy rates, I retain very little of it. I'll remember the gist of it but I won't even remember character names, locations, or things like that. I recall some specific events - probably enough to be almost conversational so long as I'm honest about having not actually read it with
Re: (Score:2)
I'm the opposite. Although I read very fast ("The Green Mile" took a few hours) it sticks. But show me a photodocumentary or a talking head and it will NOT stay in my brain at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure why maybe some articles about auditory reading not being optimal although still faster than what you seem at bad readers - they try to speak out words they read in their minds - that is the slowest.
I maintain that if you sound out the words, you're not really reading. Reading is much deeper than that. Reading Asimov's Youth [mcgrewbooks.com] a true reader doesn't hear the words "There was a spatter of pebbles against the window and the youngster stirred in his sleep. Another, and he was awake." Rather, he hears the
Re: (Score:3)
how do you know that people reading out loud can't also see and hear what's going on in their minds?
Because I wasn't born with the ability to read and can remember not knowing how, and can remember learning.
No. (Score:5, Insightful)
Wouldn't it be great if you could read a novel in an hour or two?
I read fiction for relaxation and to enjoy, become mentally immersed in the story, not just to acquire the text in my memory.
To be honest, for me at least, the same often applies to technical material.
Re:No. (Score:5, Interesting)
I agree that speed reading novels is a bummer.
The Elementary school I went to had a reading class for the kids that could already read well by third grade; I'm sure it was someone's research project. :)
The used a tachistoscope to allow reading one line at a time, and gave tests over the content.
I worked up to 470 something wpm, with 98% comprehension; others in my class did better.
Several kids could max out the machine. :)
I've read Steven King's "IT" in a weekend, with sleep. Well, some, anyway.
Books are over way too quick for me.
Technical stuff is different; reading doesn't make the math any easier, lol.
Re: No. (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm 60, and was sick a great deal from about 3-8. I was taught a speed reading method to keep up with my class. I also have extraordinary memory skills...not quite Marilu Henner...but close.
So, I tend to have great retention which has been a blessing and a curse. I mean, school was stupidly easy so I never learned how to study or do research; I could just read the material and take the test.
Speed reading is good for some folks, I'd say. But, it may cause you to be a little lazy and undisciplined.
Re: No. (Score:5, Interesting)
I... I understand. I don't think many realize how introspective, almost profound, your statement was. I test like a genius. I really am not that smart. I don't even have long-term memory, it's like it holds it long enough to be dumped. When it no longer needs it, it cycles out the unimportant (it thinks) stuff and leaves me with vague recollections. On paper, I'm a genius. My thesis was the hardest thing I've done in my life - I'm also not even very creative.
In classes where I could get away with it, I used to read the books in the first week of the semester/year and just leave it and not bother with it for the rest of the year. That was rather effective until I hit college. I have my Ph.D. but it was a pain in the ass. On paper, I look like I'm brilliant. That's not even remotely the case. I just seem to retain things really well - until it gets dumped. Once it's dumped, it quickly fades unless there's a reason for me to keep using it.
It's why I'll reference stuff like, "It was in that documentary, by what's his face - the guy who has the photo technique named after him... Burns, yeah, him... Anyhow, it was in that documentary but I'll be damned if I can remember what it was about but I know they mentioned it and had several references for it. Oh, it was also about the rum-running, so it must have been his prohibition documentary or, wait, wait... It might have actually been about the period before and during prohibition - but it was about it, nonetheless. And that's what it reminds me of."
It's like my brain functions a bit like RAM. I liken it to a hard drive that needs to be defragged or given a full low-level reformat but it's more like RAM in that once it is used and no longer needed then it is freed up for another application with no remnants left behind unless you have special forensic tools. :/ Once the test is over, the paper's handed in, the questions asked, and the data no longer needed - it's fading, fading with an alarming speed. I'm a couple of years younger than you, I swear it feels like I can feel my brain plasticize. So, I keep doing things to ensure my memory is getting a work out. I keep learning new things. I've returned to doing some programming - I've been retired for eight years now. I've even started to put a few things online and I'm working on a few other projects - all to keep the memory from going.
I fear that more than I fear death. I don't think that's vanity speaking, I seriously need what memory I have. I've just never really retained it, not very well, unless it was something that got lots of recollection, work, or emphasis. Even then, it's tough to be motivated when you can just reread it and retain it well enough for the next exam. How very true, it can (and might) foster laziness - and apathy.
Re: (Score:3)
It's amazing how well the comments in this thread describe me.
During my middle-high school years I read voraciously, mostly fantasy, about 2-3 books per week. My memory is poor enough that after a few months I would only have vague ideas about the plot, and could happily re-read a book after a couple years and still be surprised. However, I never had any problems with school. I learned very quickly and tested extremely well. Like the parent, I was very good at quickly grasping concepts, so testing was easy
Re: (Score:2)
I think you were screwed over. My condolences. If you have the intelligence to do more than just remember facts, then it is a tragedy to never learn to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If I'd had to buy all the books I've read I wouldn't have been able to read 99.99% of what I've read. When I was about 12 I'd visit the library daily and bring half a dozen books home.
I don't think e-books should cost, because you don't actually OWN anything (I give my own e-books away for free on my web site). Reading has always been free. Physical objects have monetary value, virtual objects like e-books and MP3s can't be legally given away or resold, so are completely valueless in a monetary sense.
Re: (Score:2)
The standard word count given to authors of genre fiction to estimate finished page count from word count is 250–300 words per page. Your 100 pages per hour at 300 words per page works out to 500 words per minute.
I just looked at Explode the Phone which I have on my desk, and I estimate this book at 400 words per page, somewhat denser than the typical book. I recently read it in a single session at a rate somewhere around 60 pages per hour, or about 400 words per minutes, without missing many words.
Re: (Score:2)
If I read that I would assume that it was indeed $1,200.00, as I have no idea what chips cost back then. I did stand in the middle of a computer in 1972, one that ran a C5-A simulator. Picture a library with printed circuit boards instead of books.
Re:No. (Score:5, Informative)
"Aye"
"Dont you ever relax?"
"I am relaxing!"
I resemble this remark!!! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Same here. It is not that getting good in any STEM area requires this directly, it is that the people that have the potential to get good enjoy doing this and hence get good anyways. There are not a lot of us around though and others do not get it (just as Kirk here). For example, one way to recognize a coder that has it is to just ask whether they code things in their spare time for fun. People that do not do this will always struggle to even be mediocre at it and they will never truly care bout their craf
Re: (Score:3)
You know, that really depends.
If you're literally reading War and Peace you probably want to slow down a lot and think about what's going on. You may want to go back and re-read a particularly good or interesting passage. You will probably need to go and look things on Wikipedia for proper context. The same thing goes for a lot of older literature and literature from other cultures, like for instance the Old Testament books.
If you're reading Dan Brown's latest masterpiece or something else in that vein, the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't it be great if you could read a novel in an hour or two?
I read fiction for relaxation and to enjoy, become mentally immersed in the story, not just to acquire the text in my memory.
To be honest, for me at least, the same often applies to technical material.
Could not agree more. I learnt to speed read back in my university days and while it was useful for absorbing vast quantities of material quickly I never speed read anything I am doing for relaxation, I like to meander through the story at a leisurely pace.
Re: (Score:2)
Same here. Speed-readers are missing out on any but the most superficial entertainment and educational value. Both need integration of what you need and that often takes more time than slow-reading. If you speed-read, you do not even notice what you miss.
But I am not surprised many people do not understand this: Many people only understand "quantity" (as in "better" numbers), but are completely oblivious to the meaning of "quality". This is not a new problem, people have always been this stupid. The only di
Re: (Score:2)
Cheesy to reply my own post, but I seem to have attracted some random twink with no sense of humor and the tenacity of APK.
There's meaning and there's 'meaning' (Score:3)
Does it help you figure out what's going on in Finnegan's Wake, no, but I find that works on that spectrum of the scale aren't really worth bothering with anyway. If it literally cannot be speed-read because there's not enough clear descriptors (in an attempt to infuse their work with some variant version of 'meaning'), it's just an linguist's mental masturbation on a page
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly, the whole focus on novels or technical writing is stupid. Speed reading (training) is amazing for the daily consumption of news, blogs, websites emails, etc. The signal to noise ratio in a lot of these is very very low, which makes being able to find and only consume the signal a superb time saver.
Even in quality books or articles there are passages that are unnecessarily long or just not that interesting. Knowing the speed reading techniques and being able to switch from attentive reading to spee
Re: (Score:2)
You do not know what you miss. I pity you as you are losing out on one of life's greatest pleasures.
enjoy the book again and again (Score:4, Interesting)
i like speed-reading. i used to read 2-3 sci-fi / fantasy a week, except the 800-1000 page monsters like the robert jordan series, which often took me 4-6 days of continuous reading, and except asimov's detective stories about elijah bailey, which were incredibly dense logical reasoning (necessary for a detective and his partner). the thing i like about speed-reading is that when you come back to the same book in 4 to 12 months time, it's enjoyable - again - because you find things that you missed the first time. so the point that this article is making i see is an *advantage*... not a disadvantage.
Re:enjoy the book again and again (Score:5, Insightful)
the thing i like about speed-reading is that when you come back to the same book in 4 to 12 months time, it's enjoyable - again - because you find things that you missed the first time. so the point that this article is making i see is an *advantage*... not a disadvantage.
It also means that you didn't enjoy it to its fullest the first time around.
It also means that there is a high probability that you can "read" a book and miss the good part about it, thinking that it was crap.
Re: (Score:3)
It also means that there is a high probability that you can "read" a book and miss the good part about it, thinking that it was crap.
If there's only one good part, it's crap anyway. If there's 10 good parts in a chapter and you miss half of them, you still have 5 reasons it's not crap. The "high probability" you missed them all is 0.5^5 = 3%.
Maybe if you repeatedly skimmed the good parts, for instance fauna & flora descriptions bore you to tears. But then, the good parts are crap to you.
So no, it's not possible to miss enough parts to turn a good book into crap.
Re: (Score:2)
I was more thinking about that some books are more about the way the story is told than the actual story.
You will not just miss the good parts by speed reading those, you will miss the entire point.
That is true. You must pace through poetry and play to fully appreciate them.
Re: (Score:2)
Quite frankly if the good part was a tiny overlookable detail then it can't be all that good.
I enjoy movies a lot. It's the engaging plot that for me drives a story. The details are irrelevant and interchangable. A book however can't create a movie via graphic and needs to describe every detail even ones that aren't relevant in order to paint a stage. In many cases a book or story is just as good when you fill in the gaps.
This is obviously not true for detective stories where the colour of someone's dress i
Re: (Score:2)
Yes but they got to enjoy it just as much, if not more, the second or third time around.
To put this into another light, there are whole documentary series (some of great length) that I've watched multiple times and each time been able to enjoy it - and learn more things from it. You've a very narrow definition of what's good and what is not good if you insist that you get maximum enjoyment the first time around. I can think of many things that I've enjoyed many times over and I'm grateful for that.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you also watch movies fast forward?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"asimov's detective stories about elijah bailey, which were incredibly dense logical reasoning"
I'll make you a favor and will consider that you finding Elijah Bailey's stories to be "incredibly dense logical reasoning" are just probing those studies' authors right: speed reading does in fact miss a lot of meaning or, in other words, dumbs you down.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't even use proper capitalization; either you don't pay attention to what you read, or what you write isn't worth even speed reading.
My view (Score:5, Funny)
Slashdot Asks: What's Your View On Speed Reading?
I think more should be spent on determining the correct limits for different roads, and that red light cameras make things worse. Next question?
Chris High's Vortex MARS (Score:2)
Generally, I agree speed reading is skimming, potentially missing important details. However, there is Cliff High's Vortex Machine Assisted Reading System (1995) that flashes one word at a time centered on a small box. By getting rid of line following and other eye-mechanics, it has considerable potential but needs refinements such as punctuation delays and other automagic speed controls. It is relentless but thorough.
Re: (Score:2)
I think what your refering to is called rsvp there are several free apps for ios so you can probably get it on android too if you wanted.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wrote a program that did this exact thing in 1993. I got the idea from a tv spot about someone in australia who did it. It really does drop entire sentences into your brain faster than your inner voice can pronounce them. It's truly amazing.
Re: (Score:2)
Reading is for old people (Score:2)
Get a VR headset grandpa!
What's this about? (Score:2)
Download vs Indexing (Score:2)
Speed reading is like downloading data but not indexing it. You get the general gist, but it is NOT the same as reading for comprehensive.
Someone that speed reads a text book has far inferior recall - both immediately and years later.
Note this is something that many people do not understand about AI's either. They won't be able to just download something and learn/understand it instantly. Like humans, they will have to spend a lot of processing cycles integrating the information into their memory.
Re: (Score:2)
The first is correct, the second isn't. Real speed-reading does give comprehension. The only thing it doesn't give is immersion.
Of course if you increase if the speed-reading rate, you move into skimming territory and then you lose details and comprehension too.
It works (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
But speed reading reduces enjoyment and comprehension, so removes the pleasure from pleasure reading, and the comprehension from technical reading. So there ends up being no advantages.
I'm going to go ahead and disagree on that one. My basement library is just shy of a thousand novels and by no means contains all that I've read in my life. I have a philosophy that I don't give up on a book, no matter how crappy it is. There's almost always a nugget of "worthwhile" somewhere in there. But some authors are bad at various things. From realistic dialogue to exposition to dialogue, there's often something that's really not worth reading. I've become very good at catching on what's bad wi
Re: (Score:2)
Some mediocre books I re-read, simply because - like The Princess Bride - the "just the good bits" edition can be much, much better than the original.
Except there isn't an unabridged Princess Bride.
Right your are. Huh.
Re: (Score:2)
But speed reading reduces enjoyment and comprehension, so removes the pleasure from pleasure reading, and the comprehension from technical reading. So there ends up being no advantages.
That assumes you've already decided this is a text you need to fully comprehend cover to cover like a textbook. If you're given a lengthy draft and asked for your opinion you're not going to read everything. You're going to look at the index and summary, the headlines and then you're going to skim some chapters and maybe read a few in great detail. For example I recently had to read a lengthy legal proposal, much of it was background information and known to me but I knew there were some contentious areas I
my view on speed-readers is (Score:5, Funny)
Be Careful What You Wish For (Score:5, Interesting)
I spent several years trying to get help for dyslexia. A lot of school counsellors assumed it was what I was dealing with.
Right up to the point one caught that what I was actually doing was self taught speed reading everything and couldn't switch the damn thing off.
You have no idea how annoying it is to know a piece of information MUST exist within a passage but no amount of rereading, trying to slow yourself down, will get you to stop skipping over it because your brain has already decided it knows what is said.
As a simple example: Bob has $10. He pays dollars in tax. What percentage does Bob pay?
It's a standard question pattern. You know damn well that there must be an amount of dollars Bob paid in tax. You know the question likely has something like TWO in there and the answer would be twenty percent. But you read it over and over and the TWO never reveals itself because your brain has already decided it knows what the passage says.
It made chunks of my degree miserable. I knew the concepts, could study faster than most others, yet kept missing key parts of often simple questions in the exams.
Once I learned what I was doing, a hell of a lot of practice has weeded most of it back out at the expense of reading slower.
So, yeah, speed reading is great. Until it isn't. And then really isn't when you can't stop it.
Any other symptoms? (Score:5, Interesting)
How did you combat it? Does word-counting help? Does it affect both printed and electronically displayed text? Do you get any other symptoms like headaches?
It reminds me of some of the symptoms of Visual Stress a.k.a. Meares-Irlin syndrome [0].
I helped a friend many years ago (2002) who was thought to be dumb because he seemed unable to absorb written material and after 1/2 a page would switch to light skim-reading ("speed reading") and/or distract himself in any way possible. Being questioned on the material later he would be unable to answer many questions due to skimming over the material, leading to the 'dumb' tag.
He would also sometimes complain of severe headaches that could last days. Since childhood parents, teachers and doctors had tried to find a cause and subjected him to all sorts of tests with no result.
One day whilst we were focused on some programming he complained of a headache. Being the first time I'd witnessed his symptoms I asked him to describe exactly what he was experiencing. It turned out the printing would begin to swim around and blur in and out of focus and get worse the longer he tried to focus on it. He'd never been asked this question before and had assumed everyone experienced this and had not mentioned it.
After some research I discovered Professor Arnold Wilkins at Essex University, U.K., had developed a diagnostic test that identified the cause and possible counter-measures. Meares-Irlen syndrome is a visual acuity abnormality that can be partially or fully re-mediated with the use of colour filters, with each sufferer needing filters tailored to them - rather like a lens prescription for glasses.
We visited the university and my friend undertook the test and immediately noticed an improvement once the correct colour filter was identified. These tests were done whilst placing permutations of coloured transparencies over printed material (black text on white paper).
As a result I wrote a program that detected and applied the correct colour overlay to the computer screen and it worked as well as the transparencies but the colour required was quite different - due to the differences between reflective and transmissive light.
[0] "Colour in the treatment of visual stress" http://www.essex.ac.uk/psychology/overlays/
[1] "READING THROUGH COLOUR" http://www.essex.ac.uk/psychology/overlays/book2.pdf
Re: (Score:2)
As a kid I was reading with a "buffer" (Score:2)
My eyes were about a sentence ahead of the point I was understanding (comprehending? whatever, not a native English speaker).
At some point I stopped reading a lot and had lost that skill and now I read about 1.5 times slower than back then.
I can't recall any negative side effects, such as rememberiing or missing out things.
Mother told me, one of the librarians, who was suspicious about little kid (10 years old) reading so many books so quickly ("maybe he just skims through for pictures?"), asked questions a
Anecdote (Score:2)
My wife is a self taught speed reader (basically as a kid she thought everyone could do it). She can also recite passages verbatim from books that she read years ago. Being a speed reader doesn't mean that you HAVE to speed read. For things that are important, you slow down and concentrate on the words, like a normal reader. So how can it be bad? Use it when appropriate, and read normally when not.
Nope. (Score:2)
I read pretty slowly, and even so I sometimes catch myself having read a few lines of text but haven't really fully processed them so I go back and reread them.
I've also noticed a certain change of the pace of my reading as the scene plays out in my mind, I might read faster if things are happening quickly from a character's point of view.
So I think I'd lose the nuances of both the meaning and pacing if I tried to read faster.
Also, it's quite possible to follow the plot of a movie while watching at 2X speed
TLDR (Score:5, Funny)
TLDR
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you; Slashdot...still rocks
I wish (Score:2)
I read a novel in French by reading the printed edition while following along with the audio book, which forces you to read at a much slower rate than normal. It was astonishing how much I got out of the book and how much I enjoyed it, far beyond normal reading experiences.
I thought I was a fast reader, but now I know I was wrong.
Not if you want to enjoy the style of writing (Score:2)
I learned to speed read in 5th grade about 50 years ago. A few kids were chosen for some sessions that taught us how to skim for meaning and comprehension. There was a special projector that would scroll a column of text while showing us a narrow window of 1-2 lines. I really worked at it and could "read" most novels in a day or two. This worked okay until I ran into All the Pretty Horses. The weird style made me slow down just to be able to read it. I came to really enjoy the lack of punctuation and occasi
Good and bad. TL;DR: damned expensive (Score:2)
For some reason I went on a sort of long hiatus from reading fiction regularly, which has been a thing I've done all my life. I've been into story-based video games, because I wanted to get closer to living the story than just reading it. But right now I'm finally getting around to reading Seveneves, which I bought back when it was fresh on the shelf, and I've been thinking about this very issue again.
When I was in elementary school I was part of the group which met in the library and used the speed-reading
Some people just read fast (Score:2)
Reading fast is not the same as speed reading. I have a naturally high read speed. If undisturbed, I can read a typical paperback novel in 1.5 - 2 hours, often while eating lunch. I can skim much faster, that's my normal speed for pleasure reading. I honestly wish that books took longer for me to consume, my book habit is fairly expensive. The limiting factor for me is mechanical, not cognitive - my speed is more affected by page and font size (how far do my eyes need to travel, time spent turning pages) th
THANK YOU! (Score:2)
THANK YOU!
I have exactly the same thing: I normally read very quickly. I can still recite the entire first chapter of "The Hobbit", which I read in 5th grade, from memory, or the Edward Gorey poem "The Wuggley Ump", which I read in 7th as a dramatic reading exercise on cold reading text.
250 pages in 1.5-2 hours, depending on grade level.
I can speed-read as well, but I tend to get that number down to about 15 minutes. I don't enjoy speed reading, since it tends to blow my book budget, and I miss things --
I can't believe I actually read that (Score:3, Funny)
It worked for me (Score:2)
Yeah (Score:2)
Speedreading before it was cool (Score:2)
Without any cool technique, i just read a 200 pages book in one long evening. More than two hours, but still just one evening ...
Speed Reading is Rubbish (Score:2)
I have to read a lot of scientific papers and it would be great if I could read them faster. However, this is not possible, because I have also to understand them. Speed reading implies that I can increase the number of words read and understand, but this is not possible, as my thinking device is not getting faster. Sometimes I have consider a sentence for some time to understand all its implications. Therefore, it is not applicable to that type of text. I also cannot use it for technical manuals and standa
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but I disagree. I've met people who can read and absorb technical material a rates varying from 4000 to 12,000 words per minute. Most people read prose faster than they read technical material. If you are well grounded in the technical material and have mastered the vocabulary, you can practice on the subject and get very fast.
I met a Chemistry Professor from India in an Evelyn Wood reading Dynamics program in Chicago in 1978. He only achieved about 1200 words per minute with 90% recall on prose, bu
Re: (Score:2)
I do not doubt the reading speed. I doubt that understanding works so fast. I normally need to read and use stuff to improve understanding. However, I can understand that it is hard to tell someone like me how it feels like, as I have not experienced speed reading myself. Maybe I give it a try.
Of a similar vein to 'exam technique' (Score:2)
It is harder to learn a discipline than pass a test in said discipline. Passing said test is easier if you know it's nature in advance. In the case of speed reading, you may be able to grasp certain salient details of a novel by skimming, but I would like to see that done with a maths textbook: speed read an undergraduate textbook in a subject you have not studied yet, and answer exercise questions on the topic. That kind of thing takes thinking through, as does recognising any subtlety to a novel rather th
Dilbert strikes again (last panel) (Score:2)
http://dilbert.com/strip/2003-... [dilbert.com]
Speed reading is pseudoscience. (Score:2)
Speed reading is a fairly popular bit of pseudoscience. There's no evidence that people can actually read at superhuman speeds while retaining comprehension. At best, you can skim. Sure, skimming can be useful, but don't call it "speed reading".
Re: (Score:2)
There has been a lot of controversy about what actually constitutes "reading." The speedreading systems I'm familiar with have this criteria: If you can look at the page and visually get information from it, then you are "reading." The more information you glean from the pages, the better you read. The less time you spend looking at the pages, the faster you are reading. In the Evelyn Wood System (which is what I took back in the early '70's) my goal was to read as fast as I could at speeds appropriate to h
I think speed reading is a hoax (Score:2)
I think speed reading is a hoax. It *may* be an ability of those with some weird cognitive ability, like photographic memory or some such. But for anyone other than that, I think it's a hoax. My reading speed and comprehension has always been towards the top of the class and I've scored very highly on standardized tests. And I'm not a spring chicken. These are my conclusions on the various types of reading:
1) There's skimming - that's not reading. If I were skimming a document, looking for keywords, I'd m
Recall speed limits true input speed. (Score:2)
Speed vs retention (Score:3)
The big tradeoff most people get with speed reading is lack of the ability to actually retain the information beyond cursory information (see the War and Peace joke above).
While my reading speed is accelerated, it's not as fast as it possibly could be. But my general retention is quite high.
There's also the fact that, with my preferred material, I tend to re-read books over time. So my overall retention of material tends to increase with subsequent exposures.
Just read a lot - you'll get better at it (Score:2)
Attempting to just hunt down key words will lead to disappointment in the long run.
Speed reading is awesome (Score:2)
Speed reading is awesome, but there's more than one speed. There's at least "speed with full comprehension", and "skimming to get the gist". I strongly recommend training yourself, overtime, to increase both speeds. You CAN'T do this all at once, but you can train your brain to recognize words more quickly. I used a training device so that I could recognize individual words more quickly, and that really helps you to read more quickly with full comprehension. Basically, as brain gets faster recognizing
Reader's Digest Condensed Books (Score:2)
"Wouldn't it be great if you could read a novel in an hour or two?"
You used to be able to. Reader's Digest used to publish Reader's Digest Condensed Books. In effect, they did the speed-reading for you. I have to say that they did a very skillful job of the editing, too. Very impressive. But not really that enjoyable to read.
They don't seem to be around any more.
Slashdot Takes Speed Reading to the Next Level! (Score:3)
It's useless to me now (Score:2)
Speed anything (Score:2)
It's about as good as anything else. Speed eating. Speed cooking. Speed sex. It's one thing to race to the finish and say you're done. It's another thing to say you actually had the experience and savored it. Practice practice practice will get your reading speed up. I finish the typical paperback in 8 hours or so because I've been reading for years. My wife can't believe the amount of books I go through in a month. I can read faster, but I end up missing bits. When I reach a well written passage, or when I
Books or tech? (Score:2)
OK, (self-directed pointer ALERT!), 3 years ago I wanted to learn a little about WordPress, and I I wrote my first and only (to date) blog article; http://rocomai.com/wordpress/ [rocomai.com] I criticize Blio for not being as good as it needs to be. It does not meet the needs of modern learners, and all the apps I've tried preclude decent speed reading.
Speed reading works especially well for gathering information, but not so well for absorbing skills or know-how.
Reading and learning are different, but related and overlap
Fad (Score:2)
Funnily one time I was paging through a log file at full terminal speed. My boss came in and said "There is no possible way you could be reading it that fast." I said "I'm not reading it. I'm looking for a change in the patt
Rarely useful (Score:2)
In many ways, speed reading is everything wrong with modern education summed up. It's all about how to cram facts in quickly so you canm regurgitate them 30 minutes later and forget them by tomorrow.
If you really want to know the material you have to relate it to what you already know and that takes thinking going on in parallel with reading. Otherwise, it's only slightly less ephemeral than last night's dream.
It can somewhat improve your base reading rate if you allow yourself to fall back to an unhurried
Cut the waffle (Score:2)
it's extremely unlikely you can greatly improve your reading speed without missing out on a lot of meaning."
So many articles today are padded, just to make the word-count.
When reading these, it is frequently annoying to have to wade through paragraphs of irrelevant material, searching for the few lines of new information, or the single insight. For texts like this, skimming, speed-reading, or going sraight to the conclusions makes a lot of sense and saves a great deal of time.
Voltaire's Bastards (Score:2)
So I would argue that speed reading might be possible where the auth
No fan either (Score:3)
"Not everyone -- including yours truly -- is a fan of this. There are several studies that suggest that 'speed reading' result in people missing out on lots of tidbits."
I'm not a fan either for recreational reading, but for work or science stuff, where most of the words are 'filling' and not much of it real information, it's OK.
And now for a joke that you can't speed read.
Last week I was in a zoo, where they had just a single animal, a dog.
It was a Shitzu.
Some can by nature, some need a little training. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Evelyn Wood? [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, typos I went from 1200 wpm to over 800 wpm and the blog is at http://www.rocomai.com/ [rocomai.com]
Re: (Score:2)
LOL.
This was my coping mechanism for dyslexia! I follow along in my head and on the page at the same time, and when they don't match, I know there's a problem.
PS: Also read very fast, as previously stated; same comprehension level as you.
Re: (Score:2)
Speed writing sucks too.
Re: (Score:2)
You are one of the lucky ones that notice they are missing out. Most that can do speed-reading apparently do not even notice. Speed-reading is truly the big-mac of literacy.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're referring to the first thing Google throws at you, that's a typo. If you look carefully, it uses titbits twice lower down.
The t variants are used by proper English speakers and the d forms by puritanical nutbags.