Subject: Re: Reading versus books on tape From: Anne Fennimore <afennimo@xxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 12:15:31 -0400David, Perhaps your poorer understanding of the audio books is due less to your retention and more to the fact that your attention was being compromised by your commute. And, perhaps your ability to recite random passages is due to either a "review" of information already stored in your long-term memory or that you were stopped at a traffic light when you heard the particular information.... Anne Fennimore-Toropainen David Anderson wrote: >Another anecdotal tid-bit: I listen to many books on tape while commuting, >including history and/or scientific books. I find my retention is a little >poorer and that my understanding isn't as deep sometimes (a result of not >being able to reread and ponder a passage). However, I am much more likely >to have portions memorized. I have found that I am able to recite random >selections after listening only a few times. > >David > >On 7/6/06, Toth Laszlo <tothl@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 6 Jul 2006, tony stockman wrote: >> >> > anecdotally I believe for myself at any rate, as a blind person and >> > having used braille since primary school, braille reading is more >> > effective for learning than listening to tape. >> >> I think that quite many people (including me) performs a kind of visual >> learning. For example, I can recall even after years how a certain piece >> of information was positioned on the page of the book. Because of this, I >> can hardly imagine how I could learn anything by listening to a tape (I >> have never tried it, though). Sorry, this is only "anecdotal", but I hope >> somebody here can name some real study on this. >> >> Laszlo Toth >> Hungarian Academy of Sciences * >> Research Group on Artificial Intelligence * "Failure only begins >> e-mail: tothl@xxxxxxxx * when you stop trying" >> http://www.inf.u-szeged.hu/~tothl * >> >> >