Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read • Hacker News Board

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#71

Post by khattam » Sat, Apr 16, 2016, 12:48 PM UTC

jobigoud wrote: post #37

Regarding audio they say: > Doubling the speed, in our experience, leaves individual words perfectly identifiable — but makes it just about impossible to follow the meaning. Wow, sorry but this is very misinformed. A lot of people me included can listen to audio at 2x. I constantly listen to podcasts (so not a slow narration to begin with) at 2x in English which is not even my native language and I understand everyth…

I second this. English is my second language and if I listen to an audiobook or watch an informational video in normal speed, I might as well not do it at all... because my brain starts thinking of something else if it is too slow (i.e. normal speed) and I lose track of it.

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#72

Post by altotrees » Sat, Apr 16, 2016, 1:24 PM UTC

jasonkester wrote: post #9

I don't get why anybody would want to speed read a novel. (Outside of a High School literature class where you're being forced to read Ethan Frome and you just want to get back to playing Minecraft, of course). When I'm reading Hemingway, I'll go back and read individual paragraphs three times to squeeze the last drop of juice out of them. There are only so many Hemingway paragraphs in existence, so wasting one feels…

I have found that the density of content certainly adds to or detracts from the ability to read at a rapid pace.

When I sit down with a Raymond Carver short story, the shorter sentences and clear descriptions allow me to absorb it more quickly and move on.

I tried to read at the same pace with authors like Thomas Pynchon or David Foster Wallace (and Hemingway) and found myself re-reading the same paragraph four times.

For me, it isn't nessecarilly that I want to speed read a novel, it is just that I have trained my brain in other ways to absorb the most crucial aspects of a text/problem quickly and jump ahead (at my own detriment). Thanks college!

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#73

Post by RodericDay » Sat, Apr 16, 2016, 1:30 PM UTC

jasonkester wrote: post #9

I don't get why anybody would want to speed read a novel. (Outside of a High School literature class where you're being forced to read Ethan Frome and you just want to get back to playing Minecraft, of course). When I'm reading Hemingway, I'll go back and read individual paragraphs three times to squeeze the last drop of juice out of them. There are only so many Hemingway paragraphs in existence, so wasting one feels…

It's really quite simple: some novels have writing you want to savor, and you read them slowly, and some novels you just want to extract the plot out of, from fairly mediocre writing.

For example, I really wasn't a huge fan of GRR Martin's writing or story, but I wanted to be on top of the plot of SoIaF, so I blazed through the thing. I got a few details wrong, such as someone being a cousin instead of an uncle maybe, but I was ready to discussed tons of specific aspects of the writing as well (like how he calls Brienne ugly ~every. single. time.~ she comes up).

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#74

Post by Houshalter » Sat, Apr 16, 2016, 1:35 PM UTC

I read this article at 450 words per minute using Readline, a speed reading extension like spritz. 450 wpm is not a lot, and it's enough to process most of the text. But it's faster than my default reading speed, and it also makes reading feel more gentle and passive.

When I read articles without it (which I do most of the time) I read a bit slower. I get distracted much more often. My mind wanders. It feels a bit more like work to make myself read the next sentence.

For the same reason I prefer audio books to written books, and lectures to textbooks (although I prefer to listen to both at a sped up rate.)

The density of the text matters more than anything. You can not speed read a math textbook at even normal reading speed. You can read a very light or uninteresting article at 200 wpm above normal. I can listen to some audio at 2x speed, but sometimes I slow it down to make sure I have time to process everything.

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#75

Post by wapapaloobop » Sat, Apr 16, 2016, 1:39 PM UTC

There's an assumption here that meaning or understanding is discrete and limited but the reality is that there is an unlimited depth of meaning in any text. So a claim that a reader has captured the meaning has to include "for the purposes of X". Certainly it isn't captured for the purposes of most media reviews. Just read the initial professional reviews for any book that you know and love.

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#76

Post by kaikai » Sat, Apr 16, 2016, 1:53 PM UTC

simula67 wrote: post #11

The reason people want to read quickly is because writers often digress. Maybe the focus should be on writing text that can be absorbed easily and quickly and finding and promoting such text.

Yes! I often scan low-density writing, and love finding technical blogs and tutorials that convey information with clarity and concision. We value writing with strong personality and style, and that's not always aligned with high density.

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#77

Post by teh_klev » Sat, Apr 16, 2016, 1:53 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #25

jasonkester wrote: post #9

I don't get why anybody would want to speed read a novel. (Outside of a High School literature class where you're being forced to read Ethan Frome and you just want to get back to playing Minecraft, of course). When I'm reading Hemingway, I'll go back and read individual paragraphs three times to squeeze the last drop of juice out of them. There are only so many Hemingway paragraphs in existence, so wasting one feels…

> I don't get why anybody would want to speed read a novel. Because most people don't understand that novels are for ideas, language and descriptions, as opposed to plot. Except if we're talking about Grisham/Crichton/Dan Brown etc "novels".

> Except if we're talking about Grisham/Crichton/Dan Brown etc "novels".

Whilst these authors may not be literary greats (though not sure why you lump Crichton in with Brown), isn't it important that people are reading something, even if it is The Davinci Code or The Firm? Even if these are throwaway novels, readers are improving their comprehension, spelling and vocabulary skills (especially if these books are in english and english is not your first language). That's surely better than lazing in front the the telly watching reality TV shows.

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#78

Post by wodenokoto » Sat, Apr 16, 2016, 1:56 PM UTC

I once took a speed reading course and my conclusion was, just as the article, that it is glorified skimming.

But some text are written to be skimmed (large parts of many college textbooks for example - the author is paid by the word, so there's often a lot of filler. Most people only need to get squinted with most journal article they meet)

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#79

Post by wbl » Sat, Apr 16, 2016, 2:08 PM UTC

Hyperlexia is real. I wouldn't say it always works, and in math it can be very dangerous. But I still have enough retention to participate in undergraduate level discussions of the text after I'm done. Sadly, we don't know how to make ordinary people hyperlexic.

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#80

Post by stevetrewick » Sat, Apr 16, 2016, 2:09 PM UTC

I read the first two sentences of each paragraph in the article, then I went back and read it again. No difference in comprehension. N=1, but then this article is a great example of the current trend in 'science communication' for the 'single study so thing is definitely true with a clickbaity headline' template, so I don't feel bad.