Re: Zoomy?

1

837 wpm, 100% comprehension


Posted by: Brad DeLong | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 8:03 PM
horizontal rule
2

That's amazing Brad. Of course, I don't believe you since you didn't click the link to record your result.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 8:05 PM
horizontal rule
3

The poll isn't working for me. I was 441 wpm, and compared to most of the people I know, I'm a pretty speedy reader.

Professor DeLong, you frighten me.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 8:08 PM
horizontal rule
4

Hmm. Blogpoll seems flaky, I'll post an update about recording in the comments.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 8:09 PM
horizontal rule
5

389. I plead extenuating circumstances.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 8:11 PM
horizontal rule
6

629. I took my time.


Posted by: PZ Myers | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 8:21 PM
horizontal rule
7

Thank god for Ben.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 8:25 PM
horizontal rule
8

634 and 100%, but I had a two-year old tugging on my sleeve the whole time. I think I could do better, but maybe not Brad DeLong better.


Posted by: Belle Waring | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 8:29 PM
horizontal rule
9

356 and, frankly, I have no excuses. Yet more evidence that law school dumbs the mind, I guess.


Posted by: unf | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 8:44 PM
horizontal rule
10

Will any maroon break 400? It's not looking good.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 8:46 PM
horizontal rule
11

And the next person to break 600 and make excuses gets a whippin'.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 8:57 PM
horizontal rule
12

418 and 64%. Feh. I'm just tired - I think the comprehension score is atrocious.


Posted by: Mithras | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 9:01 PM
horizontal rule
13

Ogged, last time I measured my regular reading speed it was around 800 wmp though I can speed read at almost 4000 wmp using the marginal loop method at less than 50% retention. Oh well...


Posted by: OF Jay | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 9:04 PM
horizontal rule
14

You're only as good as your last performance Jay. Click away, I want official results!


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 9:05 PM
horizontal rule
15

486/100%. That comprehension test is way too guessable. My real score should be closer to 80%.

Anyway, the category descriptions at the end of the test caught my eye: "400 wpm, auditory reader." vs "1000 wpm, visual reader." I'm definitely an auditory reader. I can't imagine what the experience of reading could be aside from hearing the words in my head. Maybe Brad or one of you other ultrageniuses can explain.


Posted by: jhp | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 9:15 PM
horizontal rule
16

I can't imagine what the experience of reading could be aside from hearing the words in my head.

Yes! Do tell. I didn't even realize there might be another way to read.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 9:18 PM
horizontal rule
17

Well, okay, Ogged. I took the test. 1183 AT 91% using the marginal loop I learned when I was 14.


Posted by: OF Jay | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 9:44 PM
horizontal rule
18

Damn.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-12-03 9:48 PM
horizontal rule
19

481. I'm with you on the "auditory reader" bit.


Posted by: Scheherazade | Link to this comment | 11-13-03 7:06 AM
horizontal rule
20

351/73%


I thought I would do better. Sigh.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 11-13-03 7:55 AM
horizontal rule
21

The first time I took the test, I scored around 580. Enraged by DeLong's mastery, I tried a second time, and got up to the upper 700s, which is completely bogus and still lower than DeLong. Then I just clicked start and stop to test my scrolling ability, and I managed

a mind-boggling 7,555 words per minute!

BOOYAH!


Posted by: Fontana Labs | Link to this comment | 11-13-03 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
22

425wpm

73%

Read in a normal, browsing, fashion. I think that by "bearing down" any of us could likely improve our score 50%.

What intrigues me, however, is the 'marginal loop method' -- what the heck is that? I've always treated speed reading as a hoax on par with those 'good luck crosses' in the back of the Weekly World News. But if it's for real, it opens up my access to snooze-inducing academic tomes! Ronald Dworkin should pay *me* to take a course...


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 11-13-03 9:42 AM
horizontal rule
23

I'm wondering about speed reading too. This auditory/visual distinction actually makes some sense, and now I feel like I've been in the minor leagues, all the while thinking that I'm a pretty fast reader. So, Brad, any tips? And Jay, what's this loop thing?


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-13-03 10:24 AM
horizontal rule
24

968 at 90%.


Posted by: FDL | Link to this comment | 11-13-03 6:59 PM
horizontal rule
25

Sorry to be late on checking back on this, but the Marginal Loop is something I learned almost ten years ago.

My speed reading courses started with using the finger as a tangible guide across lines of text. That way your eyes move at the speed of the finger, jumping the process of actually comprehending it consciously. Don't worry, your brain, theortically, can handle the comprehension.

Sort of a parallax between physical reading and actual understanding.

From one end of a text line to the other end, you move up to "fingering" the center of the line of text. And then, three to four lines of text at once.

The marginal loop, involves moving the finger from one corner of the page, at an angle downard, upward, and then down again at roughly the same angle. The brain takes care of patching the blocks of text together.

I takes A LOT of practice, and is best for light reading. Not good for reading stories, since the "flavor" and enjoyment of it all tends to get mucked up. Also not good for technical manuals, but it is good for reading news.

Try running your finger across the screen horizontally along lines of text. I know it looks kooky byt even that simple method can boost your reading speed up tp 50%.


Posted by: OF Jay | Link to this comment | 11-14-03 9:11 AM
horizontal rule
26

Eck. I think I described The Loop a bit loopily. Let's try this step by step:

Top left corner of page, diagonally down across how many lines of text you think you can span. When you reach the right end of the page, move the finger up vertically, around to the same height of the starting point. Go back down diagonally to around a line or two below where you ended on the right side of the page.

Repeat until the page is done. Hmm. Intriguing, no?


Posted by: OF Jay | Link to this comment | 11-14-03 9:15 AM
horizontal rule
27

796, 100%. Not really a blessing, though. Books cost too much and don't last long enough.

I use a mouse pointer instead of a finger across the screen.

I'm pretty sure anyone can do it, they just don't try.


Posted by: Tripp | Link to this comment | 11-14-03 10:13 AM
horizontal rule
28

I'm going to admit it: 287, 91% No shortcuts or tricks.

Can i blame it on my habit of constant close-reading which I've aquired because of my philosophy curriculum? Or maybe I'm just a slow reader.


Posted by: Michael | Link to this comment | 11-14-03 5:42 PM
horizontal rule
29

Can i blame it on my habit of constant close-reading which I've aquired because of my philosophy curriculum?

I will say that if someone is reading Aristotle at 800wpm, I'd be disinclined to credit their interpretation. However, I think there are at least a few other philosophers in this thread who managed higher rates.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-14-03 5:45 PM
horizontal rule
30

786

But it's commercial text.


Posted by: jam | Link to this comment | 11-14-03 7:10 PM
horizontal rule
31

I'm ready and wiling to admit there are faster readers than me; personal experience proves this. I am still amazed, however, at such high scores after the injunction to not speed read or skim. As I read a literary text, my 287 is probably about normal. I just looked at it again, many hours later, and used my normal tricks for a 795. Reading in such a manner would still give me a good comprehension result, but I didn't read every single word. Are some people on here reading at this high level and registering every single word? Just curious.


Posted by: Michael | Link to this comment | 11-15-03 2:32 AM
horizontal rule
32

I wonder about that too, Michael. But, as I said above, the auditory/visual reader distinction makes a lot of sense to me, so I'm inclined to believe that the really fast readers are reading differently than the rest of us, and in fact reading every word. I'd love some confirmation, if anyone of them are still checking this thread.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-15-03 10:29 AM
horizontal rule
33

I think I'm reading every word, but I'm not sure because I don't say them aloud to myself in my mind as I read them.

Comprehension is good. 11 for 11 on the comprehension test score...


Posted by: Brad DeLong | Link to this comment | 11-15-03 10:49 AM
horizontal rule
34

This is really messing with my universe. Now I have to imagine people reading without each word going "ching-registered" in their minds? I'm about ready to buy this software.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-15-03 11:02 AM
horizontal rule
35

Ogged: in what I learned, at least, the eye and the brain recognize the general shape of words and phrases. That whole mssiplleing this is BS, I think, because it mucks up the profile of words. What happens, in theory, is that the eye and brain recignize the words while that part that processes comprehension has a slight latency to it. You actually read faster than you think, not think as in think think, but faster than your brain thinks.

That's why certain typefaces make for the easiest reading.


Posted by: OF Jay | Link to this comment | 11-15-03 12:14 PM
horizontal rule
36

1210, 100%. Useful for all those Victorian novels :)

(Oddly enough, I can't slow down--it actually reduces my reading comprehension. I have no clue why.)


Posted by: Miriam | Link to this comment | 11-15-03 1:03 PM
horizontal rule
37

Miriam, have you taken a speed-reading course or is this something you came to naturally? These numbers are blowing my mind.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-15-03 2:21 PM
horizontal rule
38

I had to spend two weeks in a mandatory speed-reading thingy in jr. high--but I've always been able to read this fast.

The only downside: a cross-country airplane trip = about 4 novels. Amazing how heavy those paperbacks get...


Posted by: Miriam | Link to this comment | 11-15-03 2:43 PM
horizontal rule
39

Yeah yeah, cry me a river. So are you like Brad, such that the words don't sound in your head?


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-15-03 2:45 PM
horizontal rule
40

Yeah yeah, cry me a river.

Waaah...oh, wait, you were being sardonic...

No, I don't hear the words, but it's difficult to really explain how that works.


Posted by: Miriam | Link to this comment | 11-15-03 6:01 PM
horizontal rule
41

667/91%

I *don't* hear the words - I just absorb them.

My score was a little slow for my normal reading because I wanted to thoroughly read the text; I'd probably have read it somewhere closer to 1000 wpm with more like 50% recall if I'd done what I normally do for less than compelling reading.


Posted by: Anthony | Link to this comment | 11-16-03 11:01 AM
horizontal rule
42

Perhaps it's out of place for someone with such an abyssal score to comment on this, but I have noticed that I only hear the words when I'm reading slowly, whether that's because I'm reading attentively or because I'm tired, or any other reason. Fast reading = no hearing.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 11-16-03 12:17 PM
horizontal rule
43

327, 100% Sad, but there it is. I wanted to be _right_ more than I wanted to be fast, and the numbers at the beginning worried me. (I have a wretched memory for numbers.)

On a second scan, I managed 791.

I don't know if the test accurately reflects how I read _books_ though; I tend to gloss over things much more and chewing through a 300-page book in about 4-5 hours is not impossible. Much higher noise to signal ratio, too.

Regarding visual/auditory -- I'm very much auditory when I _write_ -- but I think I'm a mixture when I read. Words that I don't know how to pronounce, proper names, and long words I definitely just see and comprehend; I don't have a little voice speaking in my head for those.

Perhaps this is why I have to write out words to check their spelling rather than sounding them out? (Or maybe it's just English.)


Posted by: Rana | Link to this comment | 11-18-03 10:53 AM
horizontal rule
44

Perhaps this is why I have to write out words to check their spelling rather than sounding them out?

Interesting question. I'm the same way, not that it always helps. And it also makes sense that one person could be a mixture. I still find the basic categories very helpful.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-18-03 11:06 AM
horizontal rule
45

How do you guys remember every little thing? When I read, I try to read every word. When I skip the nonsense and go for the real info, I sometimes skip a half a line or more.


Posted by: John | Link to this comment | 10-14-05 2:08 AM
horizontal rule