Live data from Hacker News

Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

nytimes.com

121–130 of 133 posts

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#121
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I speed read pulp novels, and have for decades. From Doc Savage to Honor Harrington's recent outings, sometimes you just want the the combination of that literary equivalent of zoning out in front of the TV, combined with finding out what happens next. You're right that speed reading very well done stuff is a waste of time, but for the written equivalent of fast food, it seems to work fine. And if something does turn…

What is the point of speed reading a novel? If you can't be bothered to read what the author wrote, word for word (or nearly so) then you might as well go online and read a summary of the novel - job done. When an author writes a book, they consider every word they put in. Every word has meaning and a reason for being there. I am sure you could take almost any novel ever written and reduce it down to a 10th of it's o…

> Every word has meaning and a reason for being there.

That would be "Rent is due", for most professional writers. Or so they say.

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#122

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…

Related: There's a plugin for chrome that lets you speed up all html5 videos. I usually watch youtube at at least 1.5x. The plugin is better than the youtube settings because it lets you set the speed on small increments.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/video-speed-contro...

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#123
This is the second in articles in the last few months on speed reading and both basically say the same thing: "There's no way to read at a ridiculous speed and retain anything you've read".

I'm a speed reader. It did involve a sheet of paper that had "eye exercises" to practice but this was a tiny part of the class. The vast majority of the study was on scanning and skimming[1] text for information. It's a different way to read technical/programming books and I find it way superior to word-for-wording books. I can read a book this way several times. I can focus (word-for-word) on areas of weakness and skip areas that I know well. I can get through a large volume (with enormous effort) in a weekend with retention that is significantly higher than what I would have experienced if I had read it word-for-word (at least in part because I'd have only gotten through a small part of the book by then if I was reading word-for-word).

It's not magic, but intuitive, when you stop thinking about "speed reading" as a way to read fiction -- or really as anything other than a different way to consume large volumes of information for learning and it's particularly well suited to the huge technical books that plague our industry. Here's how it works in practice (for me; since I can't speak to anyone else):

- First read: 1 hour - a major part of this is simply determining if the book is worth studying. There's no shortage of huge books on complex topics in our industry and many of them aren't effective at teaching the topic they're trying to convey. If I approached reading word-for-word, I might not discover that until 5 hours later or I might miss some useful sections toward the end. In the word-for-word scenario, my choices now are to drop the book and mark that time as wasted or succumb to "loss aversion" and give up on it after several days when I'm exhausted from reading it. This also allows me to eliminate any parts that cover areas I know well, already, which is a huge problem for me when reading programming books. - Second read: Covers only the parts of the book that were identified in the first read as "worth reading". How long this takes depends a lot on the first part. I still mostly scan/skim but with much more attention to detail. I take a lot of notes here. - Subsequent reads: Deep reading (word-for-word) of truly useful material. Here's where I'm probably going to start doing exercises if the text includes any. This may or may not be done in the order presented in the book (especially for programming books which often introduce many concepts, dig into each, then way later cover "advanced techniques" of specific topics -- I hate this practice)

For a book that has 90% "new and useful content" to me, I can get through it in half the time it would have taken me to read word-for-word but with much higher retention. The reason for the higher retention is because when reading word-for-word I've forgotten significant portions of the early parts of the text weeks later when I've reached the latter quarter of the text. Technical books build on material chapter-by-chapter so losing the earlier parts drastically affects my understanding of the latter parts. When I sit down with a book, I block out my time in advance so that I can get through a "step" in my process from start to finish in order to avoid this problem. If I reach a latter part of the book and feel like I'm not understanding things well (I rarely feel "lost" mainly because of this technique), I consult my notes and know where to look for the information I'm missing. It makes consuming information efficient by reducing wasted time being lost, reading things that are redundant, and mentally organizing the information effectively.

On "speed reading apps" and courses, I think there's one point that is extremely misleading. That's the idea that you can use an app or take a course and over night become a speed reader. My course helped quite a lot, almost immediately, but it took 10 years before I was really good at it. This should surprise nobody. Any adult with children learning how to read understands what a complicated process reading actually is. You have to practice and when you read you have to think about your reading technique in addition to consuming the material. Thinking about it in the way I think about running: every read is about reducing the time/mile, reducing the amount of effort required to do a run, keeping your heart rate in the right place and increasing the distance you can run. You can practice running without thinking of these things, but if you're not deliberate about it, your returns on practice will become less and less.

Lastly -- I can't stress this point enough -- it's terrible for fiction. I hate reading any other way and as a result I simply don't read fiction at all. So I stick with audio books -- having a book narrated is the ultimate in word-for-word immersion. Enjoying the formation of sentences and the poetry of the text is impossible for me when speed reading.

[1] As it was described in the course: "Scanning" is reading parts of the page: headings, first paragraph sentences, intro paragraphs, etc. This gets a rough idea of context. "Skimming" I think is best described as "reading words but not sentences". You rapidly read the important words in every sentence. I can blow through a text this way in 10% of the time it takes to read...with about 1% of the information actually reaching me. It's not a way to learn material, it's a way to identify more deeply what the material is about.

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#124

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 was on a debate team in college, and understanding people talking at 200 to 300 wpm is a critical skill. Wired ran an interesting article on this phenomenon a few years back: http://www.wired.com/2012/01/ff_debateteam/

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I haven't tested a lot of them so not sure if it's relevant but I use DoggCatcher as a player and another app called Presto that shims the Android audio layer to increase the speech rate transparently for the player app. It's Presto that uses the Sonic library.

Do you have a link for Presto? I can't find anything about it online.

Hmm, now you got me worried. I use a dedicated device for podcasts that is still running Android 2.x. Prestissimo seems to be the new name, but itself deprecated in Android 6.0. I'll have to look into that before that device dies.

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#126
post #123

This is the second in articles in the last few months on speed reading and both basically say the same thing: "There's no way to read at a ridiculous speed and retain anything you've read". I'm a speed reader. It did involve a sheet of paper that had "eye exercises" to practice but this was a tiny part of the class. The vast majority of the study was on scanning and skimming[1] text for information. It's a different…

Scanning and skimming is very ordinary thing to do, I believe many learn to do that without any special instruction, especially if they are in a field where they read a lot. (Humanities majors, people who read magazines or NYTimes...) It's very basic thing in the arsenal of efficient learning.

The thing is, the kind the speed reading the article is about is something its proponents claim to be different than just "skimming".

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#128

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…

This part made me question the entire article. Just about any audiobook or podcast under 2x is too slow for me and most videos (including tv shows and movies) I watch at 1.5x comfortably. I'm also much faster at reading today than I was a few years ago. There is definitely a way to get much faster (while still being realistic).

Yeah. For a long time I thought I hated nearly all video-based entertainment. Then Youtube got that speedup feature. Now that I can watch things at 1.7x, it's much more interesting.

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#129
post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there are datapoints that the authors didn't consider In fairness, 1) we don't know what the authors considered; they apparently have done a lot of research on the subject, and 2) what you list aren't data

>we don't know what the authors considered; they apparently have done a lot of research on the subject That's true we don't know what they considered but a cursory search doesn't find any primary research on 2x audio acceleration performed by either Rebecca Treiman or Jeffrey Zacks. As for reading text, it looks like RT's commentary on speedreading is based on meta -research[1] and not primary lab research. (It's als…

Holy crap, Tim Cook at 3x is still too damn slow.

Re: Sorry, You Can’t Speed Read

#130

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…

Related: There's a plugin for chrome that lets you speed up all html5 videos. I usually watch youtube at at least 1.5x. The plugin is better than the youtube settings because it lets you set the speed on small increments. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/video-speed-contro...

Plugin schmugin. Try my bookmarklet:

javascript:void%20function(){document.querySelector(%22video%22).playbackRate=parseFloat(prompt(%22Set%20the%20playback%20rate%22))}();

Works on all HTML5 video that's not inside an iframe or otherwise inaccessible to the page-level DOM.

Only tested on FF for Windows and Linux, but it's just vanilla JS.

Post reply on HN