Does speed-reading training work, and if so, why? Effects of speed-reading training and metacognitive training on reading speed, comprehension and eye movements

IF 2 2区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Research in Reading Pub Date : 2023-01-30 DOI:10.1111/1467-9817.12417
Marina Klimovich, Simon P. Tiffin-Richards, Tobias Richter
{"title":"Does speed-reading training work, and if so, why? Effects of speed-reading training and metacognitive training on reading speed, comprehension and eye movements","authors":"Marina Klimovich,&nbsp;Simon P. Tiffin-Richards,&nbsp;Tobias Richter","doi":"10.1111/1467-9817.12417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Commercial speed-reading training programs are typically marketed with the promise to dramatically increase reading speed without impairing comprehension. From the perspective of reading psychology, it seems quite unlikely that speed-reading training can indeed have such effects. However, research on the effectiveness of modern speed-reading training programs on reading performance in typical readers is sparse. The present study had two goals. First, we sought to extend prior research on speed-reading by assessing the effects of a speed-reading application on reading performance in a pre-training and post-training design with a control group. Second, we aimed to identify the mechanism underlying speed-reading training programs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We assessed reading speed, comprehension and eye movements of 30 German-speaking undergraduates (<i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 22.77 years, <i>SD</i><sub>age</sub> = 3.41 years) before and after they received a commercial, app-based speed-reading training, a metacognitive training or no training.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Results revealed higher reading speed in the speed-reading condition and metacognitive condition compared with the control condition, although not to the extent claimed in the application. Eye-movement data indicated that the increase in reading speed was due to fewer and shorter fixations in measures reflecting late but not early lexical processing. No differences in comprehension performance were observed between the three conditions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>We discuss our findings in support of the idea that the increase in reading speed was not caused by a change in basic characteristics of participants' reading behaviour, but rather by an increase in their awareness of their own reading process. Further research is needed to investigate whether the observed effects are maintained over time.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47611,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Reading","volume":"46 2","pages":"123-142"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-9817.12417","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Reading","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-9817.12417","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background

Commercial speed-reading training programs are typically marketed with the promise to dramatically increase reading speed without impairing comprehension. From the perspective of reading psychology, it seems quite unlikely that speed-reading training can indeed have such effects. However, research on the effectiveness of modern speed-reading training programs on reading performance in typical readers is sparse. The present study had two goals. First, we sought to extend prior research on speed-reading by assessing the effects of a speed-reading application on reading performance in a pre-training and post-training design with a control group. Second, we aimed to identify the mechanism underlying speed-reading training programs.

Methods

We assessed reading speed, comprehension and eye movements of 30 German-speaking undergraduates (Mage = 22.77 years, SDage = 3.41 years) before and after they received a commercial, app-based speed-reading training, a metacognitive training or no training.

Results

Results revealed higher reading speed in the speed-reading condition and metacognitive condition compared with the control condition, although not to the extent claimed in the application. Eye-movement data indicated that the increase in reading speed was due to fewer and shorter fixations in measures reflecting late but not early lexical processing. No differences in comprehension performance were observed between the three conditions.

Conclusions

We discuss our findings in support of the idea that the increase in reading speed was not caused by a change in basic characteristics of participants' reading behaviour, but rather by an increase in their awareness of their own reading process. Further research is needed to investigate whether the observed effects are maintained over time.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
速读训练有效吗?如果有效,为什么?速读训练和元认知训练对阅读速度、理解和眼动的影响
商业快速阅读培训项目通常都以在不影响理解的情况下显著提高阅读速度为卖点。从阅读心理学的角度来看,快速阅读训练似乎不太可能真的有这样的效果。然而,关于现代快速阅读训练方案对典型读者阅读表现的有效性的研究却很少。目前的研究有两个目标。首先,我们试图通过在训练前和训练后与对照组设计中评估快速阅读应用程序对阅读表现的影响来扩展先前的快速阅读研究。其次,我们旨在确定快速阅读训练计划的机制。方法对30名德语本科生(年龄22.77岁,年龄3.41岁)进行商业、基于app的快速阅读训练、元认知训练和不进行训练前后的阅读速度、理解能力和眼球运动进行评估。结果快速阅读组和元认知组的阅读速度均高于对照组,但未达到应用中所宣称的程度。眼动数据表明,阅读速度的提高是由于在反映晚期而非早期词汇加工的测量中注视的时间更少、更短。三种情况下的理解能力没有差异。我们讨论了我们的研究结果,以支持阅读速度的提高不是由参与者阅读行为的基本特征的改变引起的,而是由他们对自己阅读过程的认识的提高引起的。需要进一步的研究来调查观察到的影响是否会随着时间的推移而保持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Journal of Research in Reading provides an international forum for researchers into literacy. It is a refereed journal, principally devoted to reports of empirical studies in reading and related fields, and to informed reviews of relevant literature. The journal welcomes papers researching issues related to the learning, teaching and use of literacy in a variety of contexts; papers on the history and development of literacy; papers about policy and strategy for literacy as related to children and adults. Journal of Research in Reading encourages papers within any research paradigm and from researchers in any relevant field such as anthropology, cultural studies, education, history of education, language and linguistics, philosophy, psychology and sociology.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information What we have learned about learning to read in a digital age and children's contemporary reading experiences Evidence-based support provided to struggling readers in later primary years in the UK: A scoping review Using orthographic support to reduce the impact of noise on oral vocabulary learning in adults
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1