Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
quackery, August 11, 2009
Why bother debunking this myself? Lemme just quote from NASA, which, intrigued by the extravagant claims of the Photoreading system, clinically evaluated it at their Ames Research Center in California.
"In conclusion, the evidence shown here indicates that PhotoReading does not lead to successful and/or rapid comprehension of written text. The claims of its effectiveness range across all types of reading material, including texts such as those examined here. The focus here was on relatively difficult texts, and not leisurely reading of fictional novels. One might claim that the technique may be more appropriate for reading fictional material. However, the expert who participated in this study claimed that she would not use this technique to read a novel because it is less enjoyable, primarily because the reader tends to miss the verbal interplay between characters within the novel. In essence, the point of a novel would be lost with PhotoReading. One might claim, particularly in light of the results in this study, that PhotoReading could be appropriate for searching for details (and not global information). However, given the loss in accuracy combined with a lack of substantial time gain, I would not recommend using the technique for this purpose. Moreover, this technique may be detrirnental to readers because it instills a false feeling of understanding. PhotoReaders may believe that their reading goals have been accomplished, whereas their goals are probably far from achieved. A PhotoReader may believe that the text has been absorbed, and the reader may indeed remember some of the text's details. However, the source of this memory most likely arises from previewing and rapid reading the text, and not from the PhotoFocus phase of PhotoReading (as claimed by PhotoReading experts). Moreover, it is also doubtful that the memories for the text are highly stable or accurate. Based on the results of this study, there are appear to be no benefits of using the PhotoReading technique."
This study is freely available online; it's readable and utterly crushing. To get it yourself, Google "Photoreading NASA" and look for the PDF.
|
|
|
11 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
It's Still Voodoo, July 8, 2008
I wrote a review for an earlier edition of this book. It has never worked. Photoreading is not reading. It's not even speedreading.
After I first looked at the book, I thought it was the most cockamamie thing I'd ever heard of, but then, perhaps more from hope than common sense, I began to change my mind. It seemed like there might be something to it...that, in theory, it *should* work. So I got the faith, so to speak, and plunged in.
The basics of PhotoReading are simple enough: you preview the text, page through the book rapidly, while maintaining an unfocused gaze at the pages (thus "nonconsciously," as the author puts it, photographing them), let it incubate for a while, then skim the book, and, if necessary, go back and speed read it. Very broadly, that's it.
Right there, it should be apparent that what is giving you a grasp of a text's contents--if anything is--are the repeated trips back into the text, not the hoodoo-ism of PhotoReading itself.
I've tried it. I have not received any benefit whatsoever from the PhotoReading itself, although, of course, repeated trips back to the text have been helpful. Eliminating the "photoreading" stage has no impact on the effectiveness of the procedure. None. Zip.
One way the author is able to assert that you can read 25,000 words a minute is by, in fact, urging you NOT to read them. He maintains that only 4-11% of a text contains useful information. REALLY! I don't know what kinds of books he reads, but the books *I* read aren't so much fluff!
The author seems to give himself a back door, too, in case you can't get PhotoReading to work for you. If PhotoReading doesn't work for you, it's because you care about the outcome. No kidding. In other words, for instance, graduate students who have a pile of books to cleave through should not worry about this...otherwise it won't work. That's like saying, "Don't think about a green banana"--the first thing you think about is a green banana. Of course people are going to be concerned about their mastery of a text...if they weren't, there would be no need for it, and the very people who MOST need to be able to PhotoRead will be least able to make it work.
This is a slim paperback, and an overpriced one at that. There is a measure of slick, salesman-like smarminess to it, too.
But fear not...if reading this book doesn't work for you, you can always purchase the PhotoReading Personal Learning course for $245.
All this notwithstanding, there is *some* useful information here. As an introduction to memory/learning techniques like Mind Mapping, it's adequate. PhotoReading is not any substitute, however, for true speed reading.
|
|
|
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
NASA-USA Government Research on this technique says it is not useful, June 19, 2009
[...]
Please see the above link for a scientific review of this technique.Page 11 concludes that this technique is not efficient.
The following were the observations made scientifically:
1. Extremely rapid rates as claimed by the author has not been found.
2. Infact, this technique is even even slower than other speed-reading techniques and compares to normal reading speeds of an average literate individual.
3. There is a decrease in comprehension of the text(and the reader's euphoria/false sense of confidence alone makes him/her believe that this technique has produced results)
4. Superficial understanding of the text, sense of dejavu,priming and other factors are a result of this technique with no tangible benefits as such.
5. It has been concluded that this technique might benefit someone reading lightly or fictional material but not for serious study or for the purpose of remembering or comprehending anything.
The last line of this report says that this technique is of no use.
Please read the PDF and decide for yourself.
I have bought this bought and find that it has been cleverly marketed and profits the author very much.There are some interesting aspects in the book,however one should not carry heavy expectations.
You have been warned and yet if you want to carry on, Best of Luck!
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Paul R. Scheele
by Paul R. Scheele
by Richard Bandler
by Paul R. Scheele
by Paul R. Scheele
by M.A. Paul R. Scheele
