Rapid reading gains about 26% more ideas per second than normal reading, and slow reading about 20% fewer, in all four groups¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 1922 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Combining speed and comprehension into ideas gained per second, rapid reading yielded 26 per cent more ideas per second than normal reading and slow reading 20 per cent fewer, a superiority shown by each of the four groups. → Gilliland 1922

Evidence¶

Gilliland 1922¶

Gilliland, A. R. (1922). The effect of rate of silent reading on ability to recall. The Journal of Educational Psychology. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1922-02093-001

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Efficiency analysis of the same rate-of-reading experiment: comprehension score divided by reading time in seconds per hundred words gave ideas gained per second (Table III). The author reports the printed percentages favoring rapid reading for all four groups.

"There were 20 per cent fewer ideas gained per second in slow reading than in reading at the normal rate and 26 per cent more ideas gained per second in rapid reading than in reading at the normal rate. This superiority of rapid reading is shown by each of the four groups of subjects tested."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Reading Fluency — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• Instructed slow reading ran about 40% below normal rate and rapid reading about 16% below normal time, fairly uniformly across groups except seventh graders — related
• Comprehension (ideas recalled) shows very little difference across slow, normal, and rapid silent reading rates — related
• Earlier investigators found rapid readers recall as well as or better than slow readers — related
• The new silent-reading test combines rate and comprehension scores into a single score via partial regression equations on teacher-rated reading ability — related