At what speed do you read?

[Colt]

Due to some discussion that briefly arose in this thread's second page I grew curious about how fast I could supposedly read.

http://www.readingsoft.com/ - Rated me at 295 wpm with 90% comprehension.

http://mindbluff.com/askread.htm - Rated me at 300-350 wpm.

Now, this is above average apparently, but seems much slower than my real reading speed with a book. I don't skim, I actually hear the words being read in my mind. Could there really be that much of a difference in reading speed between the computer and print? I'm curious what other people might get. - Colt

[RWood]

I voted for the fiction reading speed. For technical documents this needs to be cut in half.

I may actually read faster on the Sony Reader than I do on paper. I seem to finish a lot more books than I did before and the amount of reading time is not a great deal more than it was before.

(Then again, how many new electronic whiz-bangs get used the same amount after 10 months as they did at the start?)

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Colt

Now, this is above average apparently, but seems much slower than my real reading speed with a book. I don't skim, I actually hear the words being read in my mind. Could there really be that much of a difference in reading speed between the computer and print? I'm curious what other people might get. - Colt

I haven't tried to measure it, but I don't see a lot of difference between the two mediums. I think it's a matter of what you are used to.

For example, it's a popular theory that a serif typeface is easier to read than a sans-serif when you are reading blocks of text. I don't believe that's the case. I think serif seems easier to read because it's what you are used to, and you recognize the letter forms more readily. But given time to adjust, sans-serif presents no obstacle. (I am an ex print designer/production guy, who thinks that setting text copy is an art a lot of pro designers haven't mastered.)

But you mentioned "hearing the words being read in my mind". When you hear them, what else do you experience? If the author is describing action, do you see pictures evoked by the words?
______
Dennis

[Colt]

Yep, I see pictures and all. Whenever I (frequently) dream it's in full color and sound which is rare according to studies, so I don't lack the ability. It's not like I'm mouthing the words or anything. Some "speed readers" apparently skip the "filler" words which I just don't understand. It's a story, not a code.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Colt

Yep, I see pictures and all. Whenever I (frequently) dream it's in full color and sound which is rare according to studies, so I don't lack the ability. It's not like I'm mouthing the words or anything. Some "speed readers" apparently skip the "filler" words which I just don't understand. It's a story, not a code.

Dreaming in color and sound is standard for me, too.

But I ask because of interest in perception theory.

We all perceive the world though our senses, but one will be our dominant sense. I think visually. I see pictures in my head. When I'm asked to explain a technical concept, I tend to reach for paper and pencil to draw a diagram.

My SO's primary sense is sound. She doesn't think visually, and I need to find different metaphors to explain things to her, as my pictures convey nothing.

I corresponded with a chap on another forum years back whose principal sense was touch: he "felt holes in arguments".

This will affect both how the author writes, and how the reader responds. I suggest that folks trying to read James Joyce read him aloud, as he was in part trying to reproduce what he heard on his famous walks through Dublin.

As far as speed reading, the techniques I'm aware of don't drop filler words. We normally read with words as the units of meaning, and reading is recognition of a sequence of words. Speed reading attempts to teach the reader to recognize whole phrases or sentences rather than words as the basic units.
______
Dennis

[Colt]

I'm actually the same way as far as explaining things go. The reason I know how to draw and taught myself mechanical design and layout was that I wanted to show other people what was inside my head. There's always a couple of pads of grid paper, clipboards, and straight edges lying around my desk.

And you're right about the author. Some books I zip through, others I go slower. You're also right about it mostly being perception. I really dislike reading at the computer so I'm resistant to enjoying something on the screen compared to something in bed I'm reading. - Colt

[Alexander Turcic]

Originally Posted by Colt

http://www.readingsoft.com/ - Rated me at 295 wpm with 90% comprehension.

I did this test and I scored a 595 wpm with 82% comprehension. I am afraid this test is seriously flawed though. First, it totally depends on the screen you are reading from, its quality and its resolution. It also depends on how you set your browser (how many chars per line). And finally, many of the comprehension questions could be answered through common sense... I know I answered some right even though I didn't recall reading about it

[europas_ice]

Originally Posted by Colt

Could there really be that much of a difference in reading speed between the computer and print?

That readingsoft site said there is a difference. I bet it is because the computer screen usually isn't set up for optimal reading though, whereas publishers of pBooks have standards that optimize the readability of a text.

[kovidgoyal]

430 wpm at 100% comprehension. But I was simultaneously carrying out a conversation at the time ;-)

[HarryT]

1017 wpm at 55% comprehension, which proves what I already knew - that I "skim read" and ignore things like specific numbers. I get the gist of what I'm reading, but not the details required to answer questions like those.

When I forced myself to re-read it slowly and carefully, my speed was 430 wpm with 100% comprehension, but I can't imagine reading a book for pleasure at that snail-like speed.

[IceHand]

Well, in the first test I had a speed of 227 wpm at 100% comprehension and in the second test I had around 300-350 wpm. But this seems slower than my usual reading speed when reading paper books, though not much slower as I tend to re-read some parts, because I want to understand everything that I read (I also re-read some parts in the first test).
Somehow I have an aversion to skip or skim parts in a text even when they are boring, because then I get the feeling that I missed something. This reading behaviour is sometimes cumbersome, especially when reading slow paced stories like Lord of the Rings (yes, I don't like the books).

While looking at the above numbers you should take into account that English is not my native language and I read a bit slower when reading an English text.

[nesagwa]

I only got 190, but that's not telling me anything I didn't already know. Ive always been a very slow reader. I might read a little faster when reading something less dry (like the sample reading) and without numbers. Never really understood the "skim" method they taught us for standardized tests (FCAT, SAT, ACT, ETC.) Whats the point of even reading something if you aren't going to retain any of it for longer than the five minutes you need to answer a question?

My mind always tends to wander when I read stuff like this. They mention something and I'm off thinking about it instead of paying attention. When I reach the end of the page I realize I don't remember a damned thing I read and have to go reread it.

[Lemurion]

It was an interesting experiment, and my results seem to be atypical.

I got 1126 wpm with 100% comprehension on the first test which is average to low for me. I knew there'd be a test so I reread parts that included numbers to bump my comprehension score.

However, unlike everyone else who's posted here, I got a lower score on the second test; 750-800 wpm. I think that's partially due to formatting and that they were using time as the fixed variable not words. I had to scroll down repeatedly, and took my eyes off the screen to do so. I followed that site to a second test (different text) and tried that. This time I ran out of text before the minute was up. That gave me about 900 wpm.

[Adam B.]

I was lazy and took the first test without the comprehension. I got about 222 wpm.

I don't really care too much about how fast I read. I mostly read for pleasure, therefore, I'm not in a hurry to finish my book. When I read at work, it's usually short parts of technical documents or websites looking for a solution to a problem. I can easily skim and know if I've already tried it, or if it might work for me.

As far as what I see when I read, after I get into a book, I don't even know that I'm reading. I can see the story play out in my head like a movie and seldom realize that I'm reading text on a page (or screen).

[slayda]

The Evelyn Woods Speed Reading course uses what they call ERS (effective reading speed). What you do is to multiply your speed in words per minute by your comprehension as a decimal. E.g. if you read 300 words per minute at 80% comprehension that is 240 WPM ERS.