On Monday 22 October 2007 06:02:17 pm, Russell Wallace wrote: > On 10/22/07, J Storrs Hall, PhD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't buy that there is parallel recognition going on. > > But that's not what the evidence you cited supports. > > The evidence you cited weighs against the _comprehension_ claims of > speed-reading practitioners. That's fine, but I'm not defending those > claims.
Still don't buy it. What the article amounts to is that "speed-reading" is fake. No kind of recognition beyond skimming (e.g. just ignoring a substantial proportion of the text) is called for to explain the observed performance. Josh ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=56488497-7b4bca
