Forcing readers to skim at unusually high prescribed rates makes reproduction very poor and the process disagreeable¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 1914 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Reproduction falls off when observers are forced to skim at prescribed extra-fast rates. → Whipple 1914

Evidence¶

Whipple 1914¶

Whipple, G. M., & Curtis, J. N. (1914). Preliminary Investigation of Skimming in Reading. The Journal of Educational Psychology. https://eric.ed.gov/?q=preliminary+investigation+of+skimming+in+reading

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Auxiliary Experiment 1 (Extra Fast Skimming): five observers skimmed four educational reprints under prescribed time limits (e.g., one minute for a 1764-word reprint, a .03 sec-per-word rate). The article reports reproduction fell off and the process became disagreeable and flurried.

"Reproduction falls off when the observer is forced to read at these high speeds. Gou and Fr tried to get only the main points and skip the rest, while the other observers tried to trail over the whole thing and lost everything."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Knowing that reproduction will be demanded slows reading rate across all readers and methods — related
• Earlier investigators found rapid readers recall as well as or better than slow readers — related
• Individual differences in skimming speed are large even among college-trained readers, with one observer skimming nearly three times the pace of another — related
• Skimming speed increases across the later pages of multi-page texts — related