Eliminating subvocalization - DANGEROUS?

[Proxy]

I've just found out about speed reading recently, and I'm fascinated by the fact that I can double or triple my current reading speed (300 wpm).

I've researched the subject and found an interesting conflict that prevades the speedreading community -
Is subvocalization BAD or GOOD?

Most speed readers say you should try to completely eliminate subvocalization to become a really fast reader, while others say that it's actually DANGEROUS to eliminate subvocalization, since it can cause a complete loss of all comprehension skills and greatly impair any future reading and learning.
And then I read some speedreading forums and I actually find a post (I can provide the link later) that says something along the lines of "I've eliminated subvocalization, but now I don't comprehend anything."

To say I'm confused is an understatement - I'm scared to even start a speed reading program and kill off my subvocalization, because obviously I'm possibly risking a complete loss of reading comprehension....

What are your opinions on this... does killing subvocalization eliminate comprehension?

PS- I've read a post from Alex (the guy from Learning Strategies, they developed photoreading) saying that he thinks subvocalization is neccesary.... yet in their book about photoreading (I'm currently doing photoreading) they say subvocalization is bad... what gives??

[Proxy]

C'mon people... does noone practice speedreading here? What about Steve?

[Sunnybayes]

I don't call myself a speed reader, but I'd find it pretty amazing if you could permanently lose your ability to subvocalize. I mean, that would seem like it would mean that you could no longer even talk to yourself in your own head.

If you did lose your ability to subvocalize then you'd just have to go back to actually reading outloud, assuming you didn't lose your ability to speak and then learning again like you do like in 1st grade how to read without talking.

And maybe the whole thing about eliminating subvocalization... maybe it just like learning to be able to understand someone who speaks really really softly and extrememly fast. At first, if you met someone like that then of course you would not be able to understand them without training... but after you practied it a whole bunch you could start to catch on, and so you could tell them to speak even faster and softer until one day it doesn't even seem like they are speaking at all... maybe something like white noise.

That's my guess of what it means to eliminate subvolcalization.

[MercuryLime]

I have noticed the same thing; subvocalizing really helps me comprehend what I'm reading.

If you trained yourself not to, you could train yourself to subvocalize again; it's not permanent unless you choose it to be.

[PVince81]

Maybe the problem is that we associate words to sounds, and sometimes our brain needs these (simulated) sounds to understand. This is maybe the case for languages where what is written nearly represents what must be pronounced. In other languages, like chinese, there are only characters, from which it is nearly impossible to guess how to pronounce them. So it is theoretically possible to learn to recognize them without learning how to pronounce them, and actually understand texts.

Another personal case is that at school I learnt the multiplication tables by reciting it out loud, like:
- eight times seven, fifty-six.
- eight times eight sixty-four
- ...
And this really impairs me when I'm doing calculations in my head, because I always need to vocalize the numbers. So when I see:
7 x 8 = ?
First I will stare at it, without knowing the response directly, so I try reading it out loud: "seven times eight". But I can't find it in my head, so I try reverting it to "eight times seven", which is nearer to what I can remember, and then finally comes "fifty-six", that I need to translate again to numbers.

In my opinion it would be optimal to be able to think without subvocalizing. I often notice tense/frustrated feelings when I think with voice, because it looks like my brain is faster than what my voice simulation can pronounce. When I manage to remove this voice I feel more relaxed and can think very fast. There's really no need to really "talk to yourself in your head".

The only case where subvocalization is necessary is when you want to prepare sentences to be said to other people. Or you could use it to learn foreign languages and talk to yourself in your hand in this language.

[Halffull]

I've always been a naturally fast reader, and when reading up on speedreading techniques, I found many things which I had done naturally already... no subvocalization being a primary one.

From what I understand, the reason that subvocalization slows stuff done is not that you're hearing the sounds, but that you're actually imaging yourself saying them, associating the words with your voice box... which makes sense giving that the word is subvocalizing and not subhearing. This means that you can read only as fast as you can speak.

Anyways, I associate the words with my head, and not my voice box... I still hearthe words being said, but it's my mind that's reading them, not my mouth. Still get the benifit of hearing the sounds, but you don't have to say them out loud.

Comprehension has never been a problem.

[Rose of Cairo]

Hmmm... I don't know anything about speedreading or photoreading, but I'm a natural fast reader I guess. When I was a teenager, I used to read one novel every evening.

I had never consciously thought about subvocalizing or not, but now that you mention it, yes I don't subvocalize when I read. I don't even hear the words as a voice in my head. I don't know if it's good or bad, but I can assure you that I understand what I read

I also don't subvocalize when I think. It would slow me down, as I can think much faster than I can speak. As a result I often don't know which logical path I followed to reach the conclusion I reached.

Tip: to read fast, don't focus on the words. Don't look at them one by one. Just pick one point in the middle of each line (or if they're broad pick two points on each line), look with relatively unfocused eyes at this point and "soak" the information in unconsciously. Jump from point to point with your eyes, don't follow the lines.

My 2 cts

[oBakasan]

From my experience I think removing subvocalization can be a very beneficial thing, (try touch typing without subvocalizing what you type - remarkable!)

I'm not that good at it yet though, does anyone have any good links on the topic? I would love to be able to read a novel a day as one of the posters mentioned.

[bluedragon]

I am a natural fast reader too. I could read pages almost diagonally while being 100% aware of the degree of relevance of every phrase and able to slow down if I found something worth reading more carefully.
I used to read super-fast especially in forums, when I was looking for a particular answer and I knew for sure that the chance of finding that was extremely low.
But when I found out about speedreading and I tried to consciously eliminate sub-vocalization, I found that it reduced my comprehension ability.
I also read on a speedreading blog that there are 2 types of subvocalisation - the one where you imagine yourself actually saying the words, and the involuntary one where you hear fragments of words as you go along reading, and that this second type of vocalization is impossible and very dangerous to eliminate, therefore I don't try, especially since I can't imagine someone reading faster that I do, except by using photoreading, which is different.

[sewCrates]

As far as speed reading goes, I'm no champion, but I can honestly say that I read the original post and all of its responses (above my comment thus far in the thread) in about fifteen or twenty seconds. I used very minimal subvocalization-- the only words I really "hear out loud" in my head are words or phrases my brain picks out as key phrases at this point, which enhances memory of key concepts. This comes with many years of practice, and it starts with focusing on the ability to move from "point to point" in a body of text, as one of the posters noted (which happens to be one of the key phrases that my brain picked out and subvocalized to me).

I saw some concerns about comprehension, but I can assure you that one can comprehend enough key data to function well enough in the business world or stay abreast of news topics. I can look at a 500 word body of text and pick out a single typographical error on the page in about five seconds or less. This is an excellent skill to develop for proofreading purposes. I would not use this skill when studying key material for rote memorization purposes, except perhaps in the first reading thereof. However, when scanning a single body of text, or especially when an entire corpus of documents needs to be reviewed (and perhaps revised), it is an invaluable tool to have in your skillset.

Start off by focusing on the second word in from the left and right hand sides of the margin, and running your finger down the page as you go... from there, over a couple weeks of practice, you can start moving closer and closer to the center of the page. I find that in a five or six sentence paragraph my eye darts briefly to the top-left and then to the bottom-right of that paragraph, and grabs most of the relevant information as it passes by.

If you want to learn this skill pretty quickly, and a whole bunch of other really awesome life skills, Timothy Ferriss does a great job of teaching it (for free!) Do a Google search for "timothy ferriss speed reading" and you'll undoubtedly find a ton of YouTube videos, blog posts, etc. If that name seems familiar to anyone, it's probably because he's the author of "The Four Hour Work Week", and a very accomplished person in a staggeringly wide variety of disciplines.

Good luck, everyone!
~ Crates (cr8s.net)

[wstein]

Speed reading works as advertised. I know of no 'harmful' effects.

There are a few side effects that may not be viewed entirely as positive but these can be mitigated by purposely sub vocalizing. Once you get experienced at speed reading, switching back and forth is not a problem.

The main side effect is that emotional content does not have time to be fully experienced. This is fine for factual information but might diminish fiction especially if you like the emotional part of it (i.e. might spoil your romance novel or thriller).

Another side effect is if you use reading as a way to keep you body busy while you ‘ponder’ something else. The increased comprehension rate and pace of reading will occupy enough awareness to interfere with ‘background’ processing.

FYI, speed reading helps with quieting mind chatter (monkey mind).

[scotthegeek]

I can stop sub vocalize when I read but its not habit. I don't not about be able to do that for thinking. I do seem to like hearing the words and thoughts in my head. I feel less empty but I do feel my mind is cluttered some times.

Scott

[Irisha]

I studied speed reading, and I started to read 24 times faster, according to the test results. Text comprehension was also tested. So, eliminating subvocalization didn't make any harm.
I don't know how speed reading is taught here, but in Russia, where I studied it, the important elements were selfhypnosis and mnemotechniques based on the rhythm of the brain functioning. The whole text ( it can be a thick book) should be read using speed reading 4 times : the second time in 20 seconds after the first, the third time in 20 minutes after the second, and the forth time in 8 hours after the third. 100% information is comprehended and memorized. I used this technique to get ready for some of the exams at the university, - the result was awesome!

[nietsdoen]

Yeah. When I read sans subvocalization I retain and comprehend.. nothing. I do know that sometimes when I'm reading particularly slow the muscles in my mouth move slightly. I think the latter is subvocalization and the former is removing all thought whatsoever. But I notice that speed reading websites tell you to repeat a mantra while reading. When I do this, I end up glazing my eyes over the text and repeating the mantra. Yeah. Not productive. However, when I focus on merely reading faster whilst absorbing the words and comprehending them, i.e., moving my eyes efficiently without going back over sentences and keeping my mind from wandering, I absorb a lot in short periods of time.

So yeah.. I don't read 600 wpm, but can do maybe 400-450, and that's good enough for me as long as I comprehend everything.

[Irisha]

Actually you do comprehend with eliminating subvocalization, but you don't memorize as much as you could when subvocalizing. Because subvocalizing helps activate this type of memory which works better while you are in motion.
So, it's necessary to combine speed reading, and the above mnemotechnique - but eliminating subvocalization is absolutely necessary for a faster reading!

[CoolBee]

As someone who used to earn a living as an audio touch typist (and an extremely good one at that!), I can vouch that it is perfectly possible to type whole letters and reports without remembering a single detail - in through the ears, out through the fingers, without passing brain cells.

Anyway, I am very interested in all this and am gathering resources on memory techniques and speed reading with some quite specific targets: so I can process the 28000 PDF documents on my computer, and learn Arabic much more quickly and thoroughly.

I googled the Tim Ferris as suggested above and here is the link:

Scientific Speed Reading: How to Read 300% Faster in 20 Minutes

One of the comments to that refers to a document on reading on the Michigan University website - well it's not there now, but I have found it on mediafire. I've just read it and it's quite a useful summary in things to consider when reading and how to approach non-fiction works.

It is a legitimate download and here is the bit off the front page that says so:

"This article may be freely distributed for any non-­‐commercial purpose, provided that nothing is added or removed, including this copyright notice."

howtoread.pdf