This is very interesting (and as has been pointed out in other comments, not exactly a new idea). I think its proper application, though, is in a tool for practicing reading, not for actually reading tests.
One major thing this approach looses is the inherent non-linearity of text. If I miss a fact and want to back up a bit, or want to pause for a moment and think about something, I can (when reading) without even thinking about it. Even if this approach is faster overall, it makes reading more like listening to audio or watching a video; it's a big pain to rewind or pause.
Secondly, this is actually slower than true speed reading or skimming because it forces you to read every word. Truly accomplished readers will often read material at a very superficial level, only dipping in and reading consistently when they encounter a novel concept. Essentially, they can use semantic compression to increase their reading speed by only bothering to read what they find to be relevant. This operates on every level, from the page to the chapter to the paragraph to the sentence. It isn't perfect, of course, but it's always possible to back up if one finds crucial information has been missed.
Finally, even though this tool is truly excellent for breaking the subvocalization habit that hampers most slow readers, once you learn how to read without subvocalizing it becomes a bit redundant. For example, looking at Spritz, I cranked the speed to 500. It felt pretty good, like I was reading fast. Then I went and took a traditional reading speed test and clocked in at 700wpm, with 95% comprehension. So I'm not sure my overall speed is better with Spritz.
That said, I'll probably keep coming back to this or technologies like this, now that I'm aware of them. They seem a really good way to force oneself into the speed-reading mindset - I have a feeling that doing this for 60 seconds before a normal reading session would improve reading speed substantially.
Fun to make. I'm also curious about the overall benefits. I find myself distracted by other thoughts if I don't have subvocalization happening.
If you want the ability to move backwards, I feel like that's possible with a good NLP library. If you skip back two sentences, or enough sentences to match some word or syllable threshold, it may be useful. In that case, you can play a few words, pause for a second or so to let the user decide if they've found the right spot (and context switch into reading) or if they should continue going back. I tried hacking in a quick back button that went back X words, but it was very disorienting. But in any case, it isn't as interaction free as doing so when reading a block of text is. But to counter your argument: you still have to keep your position even with text or seek for your position again, so there's a downside to those benefits.
I'm not sure how Spritz handles things like this, but I felt like making my own based on what I saw on the demo really quick to get a better understanding. It's a curious thing, maybe I'll check out the application sometime.
Sweet fiddle, but putting the emphasis on the center letter puts it way too far to the right for any long word. Compared to the example on the Spritz website it's quite awkward. My eye constantly wants to shift left, while I can comfortably zone out on the highlighted letter in the Spritz example.
I'm curious as to how they calculate the "Optimal Recognition Position", but there is probably a better way to approximate it. I'm going to play around with some different positions.
> this tool is truly excellent for breaking the subvocalization habit
Which, according to all the research I've seen, is exactly what you don't want to do if you want to retain any information. (I couldn't find the study I remembered reading recently, but this article references some such studies http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4229)
I was speed reading since Third Grade and remember making a deliberate effort to slow down in Junior High because I was not retaining enough information to write essays. During High School, I broke the curve on A.P. US History on an open notes final without having a single note to bring to class.
Auditory learning styles may require the subvocalization to succeed.
You don't want to break it in the sense that you stop doing it altogether. Just as lukev said, you would want to learn controlling it to your advantage - slowing down and speeding up depending on what you a reading.
> this tool is truly excellent for breaking the subvocalization habit
I found the exact opposite when playing with the demo on the site. Perhaps I fall into the camp of the 1k+ wpm readers, and by extension am a non-linear, non-vocalizing reader, but going this slow, and seeing only one word at a time made me conscious of my mind "saying" every word.
> it forces you to read every word
Also a pain in the ass - I found if you blink, you'll end up missing words. At a consistent 500 wpm clip, a blink (avg 100-400 ms) could miss anywhere from 1 to 3 words. As you get faster, blinks are even more costly. Somehow (I assume through years of practice), when speed reading, your mind is able to properly account for blinks. This also brings up an interesting point - the creators claim that this method reduces eyestrain, but it makes me feel like I'm forced to hold my eyes open for fear of missing something. I can't imagine that's any less straining on the eyes.
Maybe in the future they'll add eye tracking and pause the text when it detects a blink. And we thought Kindle tracking your reading habits was scary.
Over the past year, I have dedicated hundreds of hours towards improving my reading speed. I usually use Acceleread on my iPad; most recently I used it to read D.H Lawrence's Sons & Lovers at around 750-800 wpm. I also use Beeline -a different type of reading tool with some additional functionality for dyslexics- when reading web pages.
I've learned that certain types of prose make for poor speed reading material. Without a "rewind" option, there is no way that I can use these apps to read anything instructional or anything involving a high level of detail (such as a mystery novel). I understand that allowing the user to rewind would sacrifice speed, but speed can't always take precedence over clarity.
Also - in terms of the text- there needs to be a better method for handling quoted text. With speed reading apps that give the user the option of seeing chunks of words, it is far too easy to lose track of who is speaking when one chunk of words has an opening quotation mark and the next chunk of words [may or may not] have a closing quotation mark. I'm guessing that this problem is exacerbated by the fact that - in Spritz's case- words are only presented one at a time.
Here are some things I would I would like to see adopted by speed-readers:
Rewind functionality
Punctuation-based text color:
If the text is in between quotation marks, parenthesis or brackets, this text should be shaded a slightly different color than the rest.
Contextual deceleration:
I would love it if a speed reading app would automatically slow down at the end of a chapter. The last few sentences of a chapter are usually crafted with especially deliberate care and are meant to be savored.
More customization options for dyslexics:
For example, Beeline allows users to chose a specific type of font that is specifically geared towards dyslexics. In the future, I'd like to see speed readers enable these types of fonts (as well as customization options for line height and letter spacing).
For the punctuation-based text color, it would be great if the software was able to keep track of, or at least attempt to keep track of, what character was speaking and assign a specific color to that characters' text.
For speed reading something like a novel, this would help the brain quickly associate a color with a character and avoid the need to catch the text that makes it clear who is speaking.
I just did a random reading speed test and got 1640wpm with 90% comprehension, and I definitely do not read linearly -- it's hard to explain, but I often find that I scan far ahead and see the ends of sentences before their starting words, then wander around somewhat randomly in the middle of them. I'll notice typos and grammar errors several sentences or even a paragraph after where it occurs, probably meaning that I'm taking huge "gulps" of words and internally buffering it, then processing it very nonlinearly. I've never taken any courses on speed reading, but I guess I developed this habit from reading code (where a lot of the time is spent seeking). The Spritz experience was a little disorienting since I kept wanting to seek around in the text, and being linearly spoonfed it gave me the feeling of losing track of what I'd just "read".
Huh, strange thing is it seems like I just can read that quickly anyway. Started on the banner at 250wpm, pretty comfortable, went straight to 500wpm on the banner and still fairly comfortable to read. So I thought I'd have a go at just reading some plain text as quickly as I comfortably could and it turns out that I can read more quickly than I do. I don't know why I don't read more quickly than I do, perhaps it down to comprehension, but I think in the future for articles I'm not trying to fully absorb that I may try to just read them more quickly!
My comfortable reading speed is a bit above 700wpm. On a book with proper line length, or on my Kindle. Strangely, or not at all, I only read at that speed when parsing non-fiction texts. Reading a novel, the reading times on my Kindle boil down to 300wpm.
Some stuff needs to be savored, I guess. Even at that speed, I'm known for devouring books, so I am probably reading too fast.
On a side note, if Spritz is that good, I'd like to try it out above my comfort zone. Say, 1000wpm.
I thought the same thing. Nothing a little JavaScript can't fix:
// Insert drop down item.
var li = document.createElement('li');
li.innerHTML = '<a href="#">1000wpm</a>';
li.setAttribute('data-value', '1000');
document.querySelector('.speed ul').appendChild(li);
// Create 1000wpm script
var s = document.createElement('script');
s.id = 'learntospritz_en_1000';
s.type='spritztext';
var data = JSON.parse(document.querySelector('#learntospritz_en_500').innerText);
data[17] = '1000';
s.innerText = JSON.stringify(data);
document.body.appendChild(s);
I've thought about this before too, and I've realized that unless I give it some thought, my eyes read at about a talking speed, especially when reading essays and comments such as yours. My guess is since we hear the words in our heads, we prefer to hear them as if they were naturally spoken.
Ok... but almost all that you said is a UX Issue...
Imagine an UI with a circle and the spritz box above. You put your thumb in the middle, push right it starts to show the words forward, push farther from midle => faster. Push it left => slower. Left after middle, rewinding text.
You could even use up, down to go back entiry frases or paragraphs.
Regarding linearity, you could use color/color fading to wrap phrases, or show two to four words per time moving just the red letter according to speed.
Why wouldn't they just implement a stop/start button and a zoom out/in button? If you want to return to a missed word or reread a section, zoom out to see a page and then touch a word.
What traditional reading speed/comprehension test did you take? I just took the one at readingsoft.com, and I felt like I could have guessed most of the answers in the test without even reading the text. I'm wondering if mosts comprehension tests actually do a poor job to testing comprehension.
This stuff always interests me because I'm a terribly slow reader (I think I did ~180 wpm on the above test). I'd really like to be able to improve without hurting my comprehension. However, when I discuss an article with someone who reads quickly I usually find that they've missed some important pieces of information. The sort of gaps exposed by real conversation may not show up on a simple multiple choice quiz. I'm just guessing here though. Based on my own experience, hearing that someone read 700wpm with 95% comprehension is like hearing that someone has broken the laws of physics.
(Not the OP, but I just take the test.) I got 6 out of 11 without reading the text. I didn't even skim the text. And in most of the questions I got wrong, the correct answer was my second choice.
I find this system really drives up my concentration by sustaining the pace and letting me read without eye scanning.
In the past few years I begun using text to speech coupled with visual reading with the same effect - it makes my concentration more powerful. I don't even like to just read any more - or God forbid - post a comment like this without listening it out aloud. TTS support during reading also has the advantage of allowing me to look away for a time, maybe do something in the room while continuing reading (or reading while I drive).
My favourite voice is Alex from Mac OS. I read dozens of books, thousands of articles and forum threads like this. With forums I still need to scrape out some formatting text with a quick Grease Monkey script though, but it's so fun to hear you out aloud!
Whenever you hear something, you hear it word by word. And similarly you can't immediately go back (you have to stop it, "rewind it" and play it again).
Gave it a go and while I did ok, I agree with the sentiment about reading being non-linear.
That said, I don't see it as being a blocker exactly. A UI that let you pause the stream, and then if asked revealed some kind of tome navigation can't be too difficult to do. Also, images (photos, diagrams) could be revealed in a similar way.
That way the benefit of speed reading is retained, but with the added benefit of being able to skip backwards and forwards, and pausing to look at graphics.
One major thing this approach looses is the inherent non-linearity of text. If I miss a fact and want to back up a bit, or want to pause for a moment and think about something, I can (when reading) without even thinking about it. Even if this approach is faster overall, it makes reading more like listening to audio or watching a video; it's a big pain to rewind or pause.
Secondly, this is actually slower than true speed reading or skimming because it forces you to read every word. Truly accomplished readers will often read material at a very superficial level, only dipping in and reading consistently when they encounter a novel concept. Essentially, they can use semantic compression to increase their reading speed by only bothering to read what they find to be relevant. This operates on every level, from the page to the chapter to the paragraph to the sentence. It isn't perfect, of course, but it's always possible to back up if one finds crucial information has been missed.
Finally, even though this tool is truly excellent for breaking the subvocalization habit that hampers most slow readers, once you learn how to read without subvocalizing it becomes a bit redundant. For example, looking at Spritz, I cranked the speed to 500. It felt pretty good, like I was reading fast. Then I went and took a traditional reading speed test and clocked in at 700wpm, with 95% comprehension. So I'm not sure my overall speed is better with Spritz.
That said, I'll probably keep coming back to this or technologies like this, now that I'm aware of them. They seem a really good way to force oneself into the speed-reading mindset - I have a feeling that doing this for 60 seconds before a normal reading session would improve reading speed substantially.