Reading on social media - faster or slower

[sealbeater]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Seems to me like you might be confusing "reading" with "getting to the end."

I don't think I'm confusing anything at all.

Of course, I've actually used RSVP. Somehow, I'm doubting others here have.

[tomfyhr]

Originally Posted by sealbeater

I don't think I'm confusing anything at all.

Of course, I've actually used RSVP. Somehow, I'm doubting others here have.

Is there anyone that can tell me what RSVP stand for and what its software does?

[sealbeater]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_...l_presentation

The unique method used by RSVP allows for the reading of unlimited text in a limited position. Researchers from Carnegie Mellon have found that as many as 12 words per second are readable in controlled situations (720wpm). Further research has shown that for shorter pieces of text, RSVP formats increased reading speed by 33% with no significant differences in comprehension or task load.

Research done by the Wichita State University suggests that at 250 words per minute (WPM) comprehension was not significantly different from reading done using Palm Reader (EReader). Display at 650 WPM reduced comprehension by about 20% versus display at 250 WPM, from a score of 74.6 to 52.1, resulting in an effective 82% increase in words comprehended per minute, assuming the scoring is linear. Studies have shown that reading rate is determined by size of text and spacing. RSVP allows users to obtain a maximum reading rate through the ability to adjust text size and eliminate space by displaying one item at a time.

[tomfyhr]

Originally Posted by sealbeater

Studies have shown that reading rate is determined by size of text and spacing.

Does that mean that social media, which usually has little amounts of text, increases reading speed and in thus good in that regard?

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by sealbeater

I don't think I'm confusing anything at all.

Of course, I've actually used RSVP. Somehow, I'm doubting others here have.

You're confusing at least one thing: me being interested in, or wanting to talk about RSVP. I'm not, and I don't.

People mentioning that they're not interested in "reading faster" is not the same thing as saying "RSVP doesn't work, and no one should use it."

Perhaps if you slowed down a bit you'd realize that.

[sealbeater]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

You're confusing at least one thing: me being interested in, or wanting to talk about RSVP. I'm not, and I don't.

Then...don't. I'm interested in talking about it so I will.

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

People mentioning that they're not interested in "reading faster" is not the same thing as saying "the software you keep talking about sucks."

Well, the topic of discussion is reading faster. If they aren't interested in reading faster, there are other threads. If they are interested in reading faster, this is a very effective way of doing so.

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Perhaps if you slowed down a bit you'd realize that.

Perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to assume others realizations. If they aren't interested in reading faster, don't use the software. Personally, I doubt very highly anyone in this thread has used it, which is why I asked what software they used.

If someone doesn't know something, why speak on it?

[sealbeater]

Originally Posted by tomfyhr

Does that mean that social media, which usually has little amounts of text, increases reading speed and in thus good in that regard?

I don't think that's quite what it means. I don't think there's much difference in WPM read reading a short sentence or a long paragraph.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by sealbeater

If someone doesn't know something, why speak on it?

No one but you was "speaking on it" (RSVP).

[sealbeater]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

No one but you was "speaking on it" (RSVP).

Difference being, I know about it.

[DiapDealer]

And no one else cared about it. That's why is was so weird that you started defending it and/or advocating for it (or advising people to not knock it) in a thread that really has nothing to do with how to increase your reading speed.

Nobody was saying anything for or against RSVP. They were only indicating their interest (or lack thereof) in reading faster. Which for some weird reason, you took as somehow badmouthing RSVP.

But whatever ... feel free to continue arguing with yourself.

[sealbeater]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

And no one else cared about it.

That's fine. That's why I said it was "too esoteric for most".

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

That's why is was so weird that you started defending it and/or advocating for it (or advising people to not knock it) in a thread that really has nothing to do with how to increase your reading speed.

The topic of discussion was reading speed.

You yourself said:

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I had a similar experience with a scrolling reading app. My problem was that it actually increased my eye movement, rather than minimized it.

Obviously, you haven't used RSVP either.

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Nobody was saying anything for or against RSVP. They were only indicating their interest (or lack thereof) in reading faster. Which for some weird reason, you took as somehow badmouthing RSVP.

I didn't take it as anyone badmouthing RSVP, I took it as no one knowing anything about RSVP, which, judging by the context of the statements made by you and others, seems to be pretty accurate.

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

But whatever ... feel free to continue arguing with yourself.

Thanks. Feel free to abstain from replying if you dont want a conversation.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by sealbeater

Display at 650 WPM reduced comprehension by about 20% versus display at 250 WPM, from a score of 74.6 to 52.1, resulting in an effective 82% increase in words comprehended per minute, assuming the scoring is linear.

Actually thank you for that. So it is scientifically proven that RSVP is NOT good if you want to actually comprehend what you are reading. The amount your are comprehending goes down the faster you read, even though you try to convince me that I comprehend more words per minute? No thank you, as you can easily calculate the amount you don't comprehend goes up even faster.

[sealbeater]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Actually thank you for that. So it is scientifically proven that RSVP is NOT good if you want to actually comprehend what you are reading.

You would be vastly mistaken.

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

The amount your are comprehending goes down the faster you read, even though you try to convince me that I comprehend more words per minute? No thank you, as you can easily calculate the amount you don't comprehend goes up even faster.

Yes. At 1000 words a minute, you may have some problems. At 500 WPM, comprehension is fine and in my experience, 650 is fine. I have no troubles with comprehension or retaining working memory.

Of course, I've actually tried it. My sole experience with it isn't from reading a wikipedia link while trying to find something wrong with it so I can argue about it.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by sealbeater

Thanks. Feel free to abstain from replying if you dont want a conversation.

It's amusing to me that you think what you're doing is conversing.

[sealbeater]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

It's amusing to me that you think what you're doing is conversing.

Please, continue to feel amused.