12

Sometimes when reading, text segments are not so important or relevant, when that happens I tend to read between lines in a visual manner, without sub-vocalizing or pronouncing the words in my mind.

Could that way of reading affect text comprehension?

Jeromy Anglim
  • 30,741
  • 11
  • 93
  • 221
rraallvv
  • 549
  • 3
  • 10
  • You mean just skimming through the words? I don't think you're going to retain a lot of information. :P By the way, also going too slow is not helpful at all. –  Dec 06 '12 at 10:49
  • 1
    I don't think most people normally simulate talking when they're reading (and I don't mean mouth movements, but rather pronouncing the words in your mind): I read much faster than I talk. It does change certain aspects of how you experience the text, yes. – Cerberus Dec 06 '12 at 13:44
  • 1
    I think some people read exactly the way Cerberus describes. And I think some people read quite differently. It can't be stated too often that, unlike language, which is a naturally evolved characteristic of H. sapiens, literacy is modern technology and humans do not have any common evolved talents, organs, brain structures, or other adaptations for reading or writing. Which is to say, everybody learns how to read and write differently, using whatever skills and structures they can manage to adapt to it. Success in literacy, as often noted, is pretty variable and often spotty. –  Dec 06 '12 at 16:35
  • @jlawler has there been any research on what needs to be present to what degree to allow for literacy? Eyesight is of course key, but besides that? – kaleissin Dec 06 '12 at 17:34
  • Tons of it. But it assumes that everybody reads the same way, and simply averages over subjects, and most of it is about teaching rather than learning. And, of course, very little of it is correlated with real language or linguistics. –  Dec 06 '12 at 18:37
  • @Cerberus, I don't simulate talking while reading, but I think I do somehow simulate hearing. Not sure how common this is. I'm not a particularly fast reader, I guess this could be a reason why. –  Dec 08 '12 at 04:04
  • 1
    @Cerberus: What dainichi said. I'm not aware that I simulate talking while reading, but I do "hear" what I read. Always. My brother, who is capable of "speed-reading" (I'm not) says that he takes in entire blocks of consecutive words which somehow convey meaning to him. We both think there can't really be any internalised speaking/hearing involved in that - him because he's not aware of it, me because I don't see how you can "speak/hear" that fast in the first place (he reads up to 15-20 times faster than me if he's showing off! :) –  Dec 11 '12 at 02:37
  • Also, subvocalizations are often not detectable by the reader. It may be the case that you are indeed subvocalizing and not aware of it. The only way to tell would be with a electromyography or functional MRI. Introspection is unfortunately a very error-prone technique in this area. – Mark Beadles Dec 14 '12 at 21:06
  • 2
    see this related question: http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/questions/1691/is-sub-vocalization-when-reading-and-writing-merely-a-symptom-of-lack-of-fluency – Jeromy Anglim Dec 15 '12 at 13:13
  • @JeromyAnglim The answer you have given to that question is more applicable here, I think. It seems the two questions are not about the same issue, though. Given that fluency and comprehencion could be related, but sub-vocalization maybe not. I'd be happy to accept that answer regarding the issue here. – rraallvv Dec 15 '12 at 14:43
  • @JeromyAnglim If I've got your point, subvocalization could be related to text complexity. So is more likely to improve comprehension when one uses subvocalization. – rraallvv Dec 15 '12 at 14:49

1 Answers1

6

Yes, inhibiting sub-vocalization is likely to impair comprehension.

Here is the abstract from Slowiaczek & Clifton (1980):

Two experiments demonstrated that subvocalization is of value in reading for certain types of meaning. Blocking subvocalization by requiring subjects to count or say “cola-colacola …” aloud impaired their reading comprehension but generally not their listening comprehension. The effect of blocking subvocalization was found to be specific to tests that required integration of concepts within or across sentences, as contrasted with tests that required only memory of individual word concepts. Two hypotheses were offered: first, that subvocalization results in a more durable memory representation needed for integration of concepts; and second, that subvocalization enables a prosodic restructuring that makes information needed for sentence comprehension accessible.

Reference

Slowiaczek, M. L., & Clifton Jr, C. (1980). Subvocalization and reading for meaning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(5), 573-582.

Jeff
  • 5,488
  • 29
  • 44