Knowing that reproduction will be demanded slows reading rate across all readers and methods¶

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? Expectation of a reproduction test reduced reading speed for all subjects by all methods. → 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

Preliminary experiments with typewritten sheets; Table 3 records the decrease in time required per sheet when material was read with the definite knowledge that it would not have to be reproduced, with per-observer decreases such as Gou's 31.0 seconds (34.60%) for normal silent.

"Knowledge that reproduction is to be demanded slows the rate of reading of all subjects by all methods."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Processing Speed — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Forcing readers to skim at unusually high prescribed rates makes reproduction very poor and the process disagreeable — related
• Comprehension (ideas recalled) shows very little difference across slow, normal, and rapid silent reading rates — related
• 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
• Skimming is the fastest of five reading modes, roughly 0.13-0.14 seconds per word versus 0.22-0.35 for normal and maximal silent and aloud reading — related
• Skimming speed increases across the later pages of multi-page texts — related