Reading speed & Memory

c4sea

Just wondering if you get a new book on some familiar technology
how many pages you read avg in an hour?

and could you remeber forever what you read or you need to re-read again if then how many times?

r3nu4l

c4sea wrote: »

Just wondering if you get a new book on some familiar technology
how many pages you read avg in an hour?

Not sure how this relates to popular science Everyone has different reading speeds. People can be trained to speed read, some do it effectively, others don't. For example, years ago I loaned my friend the book 'The Lord of The Rings'. He returned it two days later saying he had read it. I asked him a number of questions and his answers indicated that he had indeed read the book. However, despite having read the book, he didn't realise that the characters Strider, Aragorn and Elessar were the same person. This indicates that for some people, speed reading is a poor choice.

and could you remeber forever what you read or you need to re-read again if then how many times?

Now this is in the realm of popular science Memory is pretty false. IT has been shown that the more times we recall a memory, the more our subconcious mind embellishes that memory.

For example, say you went to the beach as a kid with your parents and had a great day building sandcastles. Imagine that on that day, it had been fairly overcast, warm but breezy. Now say you recalled that image every 5 years or so from the age of 20 onwards. At 20 you may recall the memory quite well.

At 25 you are sitting on a beach on holidays, the sun is beating down, you're having a cold beer and are relaxed. You start thinking about your childhood and recall that day at the beach. Ah yes, you can see it now, the sandcastles, the warm sun on your skin, not a cloud in the sky, great day.

Now because at that moment you are relaxed, warm , comfortable and the sun is tingling on your skin and because 25 years ago, it was a warm day (but overcast) your subconcious mind has embellished the memory slightly.

Next time you recall that memory you may recall the original overcast sky or you may still recall the cloudless sky and you may embellish more.

Quite often the subconcious mind also injects elements of what you are currently longing for into your memories. So if you are stressed at work and remember that day you may just recall the pleasure and forget that you dropped your ice cream later that day.

The correct memory can resurface however if someone else who was there says, 'oh do you remember how upset you got when you dropped your ice cream?'. All of a sudden you do

So that was all about personal memories directly experienced by a person. Memory in terms of reading a book is slightly different. On reading a book a second time you may read something and suddenly remember 'Oh yeah!' or other times if you've read books by the same author, involving the same character you may mix up events from two different books and think they belong in the one book.

People with photographic memories are different. I don't know enough about that to comment.

There have been lots of good articles in New Scientist about memory over the years, there are some on the BBC News website too.

c4sea

Thanks a lot . Moderatro for your reply.
I am wondering if more people could reply ,particulary from technologies side
like avg speed for reading IT books, physics etc.
Guys this is very important for me. please reply. so that i can where i stand?

Mellowsh

I consider myself to be a fast reader (final HP book in about 12 hours kinda thing) but reading a Dawkins book, like Blind Watchmaker, I suppose I got through about 9 or 10 pages an hour (that book is hard to concentrate on!!) and retained most of it to be able to discuss the next day with a friend.

Phototoxin

It depends on what you're reading. I was reading a small book on philosophy at approx 1 page per minute but taht was taking it in. Skimming things or reading a familiar subject much less. Less familiar subjects more. Its all relative I guess

c4sea

thanks guys for reply.
Hope to see more reply.

nyarlothothep

Most books are easy enough to read, not the case with Rodger Penrose, Emperors New Mind is heavy.

mark renton

I have to read over things more than once - IMO it is the picture/understanding of the concept that the mind builds whilst gathering information... this information input can be fast or slow, fast input hinders the absorbtion capacity

Memory - I also believe there is a limit on memory, I have studied Computer Networking in the past and have now shifted over to Systems - a considerable amount of what I have learned in Networking would be lost, probably room made for learning current input

nesf

c4sea wrote: »

Just wondering if you get a new book on some familiar technology
how many pages you read avg in an hour?

Varies hugely depending on the maths content.

c4sea wrote: »

and could you remeber forever what you read or you need to re-read again if then how many times?

I don't trust my memory like that. My bookshelves are my memory. I read (technical) books as much as to know where to look to find information on something rather than to remember that specific information in detail.

Valmont

r3nu4l wrote: »

Now this is in the realm of popular science Memory is pretty false.

I wouldn't say false, more that it is prone to distortions over time.

r3nu4l wrote: »

Now because at that moment you are relaxed, warm , comfortable and the sun is tingling on your skin and because 25 years ago, it was a warm day (but overcast) your subconcious mind has embellished the memory slightly.

Do you have an article I could read on this?

r3nu4l wrote: »

Quite often the subconcious mind also injects elements of what you are currently longing for into your memories. So if you are stressed at work and remember that day you may just recall the pleasure and forget that you dropped your ice cream later that day.

Just a small point but I don't think the literature on false memories etc. really uses the term "subconscious" very often, at least not what I've read.

r3nu4l

Valmont wrote: »

I wouldn't say false, more that it is prone to distortions over time.

Very true, good distinction made!

Do you have an article I could read on this?

Funnily enough, my memory is playing tricks on me and I can't remember where I read this. I'll look through some of the textbooks I've got again. A Pubmed search might reveal something either.

Just a small point but I don't think the literature on false memories etc. really uses the term "subconscious" very often, at least not what I've read.

Aye, I'm no expert on this, I've just read a few bits and pieces out of interest so I may not be using the most correct terminology!

Valmont

Well since this the popular science forum, I found the chapter in Lauren Slater's Opening Skinner's Box to summarise the whole area of false memories pretty well.

Subconscious is a word that hearkens back to the days of Freud and while I wouldn't say it's wrong, just out of date. Not that it matters too much anyway.