4 ms·
The text says it's been proven by NASA and several others that you can't remove subvocalization, yet most speed reader comments here go on to say "yes it works
by humanspecies 14y ago
The text says it's been proven by NASA and several others that you can't remove subvocalization, yet most speed reader comments here go on to say "yes it works i removed subvocalization". It's obvious all these "speed readers" didn't read a single line of this article.
- daven11 14y agodepends what you mean by sub vocalisation - some people move their lips when they read - this slows things down. You still read the words in your head - so you could call that sub vocalisation - but don't move anything physical (throat, mouth, tongue) - that slows you down.
- ZeroGravitas 14y agoFrom the article: Even skimmers subvocalize key words. This is detectable, even among speed readers who think they don't do it, by the placement of electromagnetic sensors on the throat which pick up the faint nerve impulses sent to the muscles. Our brains just don't seem to be able to completely divorce reading from speaking. NASA has even built systems to pick up these impulses, using them to browse the web or potentially even control a spacecraft. Chuck Jorgensen, who ran a team at NASA in 2004 developing this system, said: "Biological signals arise when reading or speaking to oneself with or without actual lip or facial movement. A person using the subvocal system thinks of phrases and talks to himself so quietly, it cannot be heard, but the tongue and vocal chords do receive speech signals from the brain."
- ax_ 14y agoMaybe they skimmed it :)
- r0s 14y agoThe article treats subvocalization as an absolute value to present a lazy argument. Is reducing subvocalization beneficial? Is every single phrase and word important to subvocalize? Relevant questions completely ignored here.