Speed reading apps are great for snippets but not sonnets

Mar 10, 2014 by Anna L Cox And Duncan Brumby, The Conversation
Credit: radarxlove, CC BY-NC

A new app is about to come on the market with promises to dramatically increase the speed at which you read. Spritz is a text streaming technology that allows you to read a sentence, one word at a time. Each word is shown for only a brief flash, in the same place on a screen, before the next appears.

Up to 1,000 words can be shown every minute, which would allow you to race through an entire novel in just 90 minutes. This could revolutionise the way we , particularly on small-screen devices, such as smartphones and smartwatches.

How it works

When we read, our eyes normally make a series of brief pauses to extract information before moving on. These are referred to as eye movement fixations and saccades. It is only during fixations that the eye processes what is before it.

Spritz allows you to read faster by presenting words in the same place on the screen. This means that the eye can remain in the same spot and does not have to waste time making lengthy saccades to get to the next word.

When we read we have to recognise words. Spritz supports this by focusing our attention on the most informative part of a word so that we recognise it quickly – the word's optimal recognition position. This is done by highlighting the letter that should be fixated in a different colour to the rest. Doing this grabs our attention and makes us fixate at that point.

Spritz also takes into account some of the factors that explain why we don't fixate on each word for the same length of time. Rather than reading each letter in a word, our visual system is able to process common words as whole units, using the context of the text and the overall shape of the word as clues to aid recognition. This means that words that are very similar to each other in shape, like "bed" and "fed", will require more time to process than words that are more distinct, like "decide". Spritz therefore slows down when displaying very short words and speeds up for words that are four to seven letters long.

Reading or skimming?

Reading is more than just moving your eyes across a page. It is a cognitive activity. Our brain is busy processing the meaning of the words that have been read. For demanding content or tasks, this cognitive processing can take time. We naturally compensate for this by lingering on some words for longer than others to give our brains time to process the meaning of what we are reading.

The spritz website hints that some in-house testing has been done and claims people are able to perform well when tested for their comprehension and recall of a text that they have just "spritzed".

But there's a potential problem with treating all equally and pushing everything through a high-speed funnel. Experiments using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation (RSVP), participants have demonstrated attentional blink. They were more likely to miss something important because their attention is occupied by something else that they had just experienced. For example, if you've just read an emotionally charged word such as "coffin" or "murder", you're more likely to miss something important if it occurs very soon afterwards.

The current system doesn't appear to offer any deeper adaption to the content that is being presented. It doesn't slow down if a main character dies suddenly, or a complex idea is presented in a sentence. This is not so surprising as this would be an extremely difficult technological problem to solve.

Spritz does slow down at the end of sentences to provide the reader with a little extra time to process the sentence that has just been read. But this might not be sufficient. In fact, readers frequently re-read sections of text when it did not make complete sense on the first pass –- something that is not possible with this system.

Spritz users might find themselves missing important information that they would have caught with regular reading as a result.

So while this technology could open up fantastic opportunities for reading small snippets of text, such as a tweet, on a very small screen, there's probably some way to go in the development of the technology before you'd want to read War and Peace on a smart watch.

Explore further: Researchers find brain activity related to individual differences in reading comprehension

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

E-readers more effective than paper for dyslexic readers

Sep 18, 2013

As e-readers grow in popularity as convenient alternatives to traditional books, researchers at the Smithsonian have found that convenience may not be their only benefit. The team discovered that when e-readers ...

Texting affects ability to interpret words

Feb 20, 2012

(Medical Xpress) -- Research designed to understand the effect of text messaging on language found that texting has a negative impact on people's linguistic ability to interpret and accept words.

Recommended for you

Apple sees iCloud attacks; China hack reported

6 hours ago

Apple said Tuesday its iCloud server has been the target of "intermittent" attacks, hours after a security blog said Chinese authorities had been trying to hack into the system.

HP supercomputer at NREL garners top honor

8 hours ago

A supercomputer created by Hewlett-Packard (HP) and the Energy Department's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) that uses warm water to cool its servers, and then re-uses that water to heat its building, has been ...

User comments : 3

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

MP3Car
not rated yet Mar 10, 2014
go here if you want to test it out on a long article. http://www.spritz...m/blog/#
AeroSR71
not rated yet Mar 10, 2014
I like it. Any way to increase the rate of information going into my brain is fine by me. Physorg should adopt this.
chromodynamics
not rated yet Mar 10, 2014
I tried this out but find it very annoying. You have to stare to use it which results in very tired eyes very quickly and when you look away from it you get the impression that everything is moving. The inability to glance back a line is cripplingly bad. It also didn't really feel much faster than regular reading. So I did some tests and discovered I read at 500 wpm naturally anyway. I can do 1000 with effort but its not fun then, it feels like using the app. It destroys any cadence in the text.
Bonia
Mar 10, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.