Live data from Hacker News

An experiment to test if Bionic Reading helps you read faster

blog.readwise.io

81–90 of 100 posts

Re: An experiment to test if Bionic Reading helps you read faster

#81

I found Bionic 10% slower than Literata. But I also found I am a verrrry slow reader. My reading speed came to 147 wpm. Any recommendation to improve this?

When I was in school reading coaches encouraged the awareness of subvocalization (where you mimic the text as if you were speaking it, but not aloud). If you find yourself doing that while reading, stop/suppress that.

Re: An experiment to test if Bionic Reading helps you read faster

#82
post #77
post #61

Bionic reading: 317 WPM Literata: 317 WPM You read 0% faster with Bionic Reading I guess I’m a pretty consistent slow reader.

Way faster than me, and at the top end of average, based on everything I can find online. I'm curious though, what the average is among "readers" lol.

Bionic 633 wpm, literata 803.

I do read quickly but I have read that essay before, so perhaps I only skimmed it. I wasn't certain on one of the comprehension questions.

Re: An experiment to test if Bionic Reading helps you read faster

#84
post #75

https://speed.readwise.io Your results Typeface Bionic Reading Literata Article 1 591 WPM 352 WPM Article 2 657 WPM 457 WPM Average Speed 624 WPM 405 WPM You read 43% faster with Bionic Reading Guess gotta give this a try for storybooks... maybe some enterprising and bored HN nerd can make a Calibre plugin that converts regular epubs to bionic reading enabled epub files ---- but the truth is, for the aforementioned s…

Jeeze that is fast. More than twice the average reading speed. I wonder if bionic reading helps more for "speed readers"? Your results surely suggest it. Also - It must be so painful for you to type, or heck even speak!

[deleted]

Re: An experiment to test if Bionic Reading helps you read faster

#85
I’m not 100% sure it works for everybody, but it probably helps that English have shorter words where the stress tends to be on the first syllable, doesn’t have genders, always requires an explicit subject and has simple verb conjugations.

Would it work with languages that have longer words and a case system?

Re: An experiment to test if Bionic Reading helps you read faster

#89
post #45
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that my natural reading speed is ~950 wpm, so I tend to ignore these fads. Were you just born with 4-5x the average reading speed? Or did you employ some other 'fads'? This seems pretty astonishing. Particularly in light of the following sentence on the "Speed Reading" entry on Wikipedia: > Cognitive neuroscientist Stanislas Dehaene says that claims of reading up to 1,000 words per minute "must be viewed with sk…

I simply read a lot of science fiction/fantasy as a kid, and it happened naturally. I would view claims that a random person could be taught to read at my speed with skepticism. But I've met other people who read as fast as I do. As a kid I thought I was simply a slightly fast reader until I happened to take a copy of https://www.amazon.com/Clan-Cave-Bear-Jean-Auel/dp/060961097... to a bath. I started, got caught up…

Does that take any enjoyment out of reading for you? I tried speed reading for a brief stint, but then decided to stop. For me reading a good book is like savoring good food, I wouldn't want to chug it down.

Re: An experiment to test if Bionic Reading helps you read faster

#90

Linked at the end of the article is the short (15 minutes maybe) self-test: https://speed.readwise.io/ . Curious what results people here got. I got 23% faster with BR but I couldn't tell if I was just trying harder.

Also 23% faster with BR but I enjoyed reading that way less. As with yourself, I suspect that maybe I put pressure on myself to read faster for the BR.

As the article says, a better comparison may be to have a fake version of BR as the control.

Post reply on HN