Learn how to read faster with Spritz on the iPhone and iPad

Posted:
in iPhone edited March 2017
The average reading speed of an adult is just about 300 words a minute, which sounds impressive, but comprehension suffers as adults also tend to only retain about 60% of what they read -- fix both with Spritz.




The ability to be literate is something that humans have chosen to take on, a skill cultivated over thousands of years. While it likely had a very business-centric start in ancient goods ledgers, the ability to write and read has enabled us to get to where we are today.

Every single day, the average adult sees hundreds of thousands of words, and that doesn't include anything they may read for pleasure.?

One of the biggest issues with reading cited by the critical is the time investment.

Let's work on that, with Spritz.

Spritz is software written by folks who want to change the way you read, and perhaps more importantly, the way you comprehend. By flashing a single word on the screen that is weighted to something called the "Optimal Recognition Position," or the ORP, Spritz can help your brain read easily up to 700 words per minute with just a little practice.

Upon first try, Most people find that 500 words a minute poses no challenge. On top of being able to read at near super-human speeds, most readers comprehension goes up sharply as well.

Spritz also helps those with dyslexia as well.

How does it work?

The ORP is the letter our brains look for when we are reading, and usually is somewhere around the third or fourth letter for most words we read. The ORP, shown in red in most applications that use Spritz, changes based on the word length.

In a three letter word, the ORP is directly in the middle. In longer words, the ORP is shifted further to the left. There's a ton of science behind the reason Spritz works, and if you're into it, we suggest you go check out Spritz' scientific breakdown.

Or, if you're just curious about Spritz, you could always try it out for yourself. You can try it at Readsy.co, but we think Spritz is even better when you experience it on iOS. Here's our two favorite Spritz-based apps that we think everyone would benefit from.
?

ReadMe!




If you've got a classic book bucket-list that you're just dying to work through, we highly suggest ReadMe! ReadMe! is a free app that allows you to snag eBooks and "spritz" them at up to 1000 words per minute.

The app is easy to use and can work with existing books that you have that are in .PDF and ePUB formats. These are also the common filetypes used by Project Gutenberg, the internet's biggest collection of public domain books that you can download and read for free.

ReadMe! also features BeeLine Reader, which is another speed reading and comprehension building software that utilizes multicolored texts to help readers zip through paragraphs with far more ease than usual. ReadMe!'s subscription also gives you the ability to sync your books across all your devices and also store where you left off Spritzing so you can pick right back up where you left off.

The only caveat to this free app is that you've got to have an internet connection to use Spritz, unless you pay $5 for a yearly subscription which will unlock the "Spritz offline" mode.

Quickipedia




Wikipedia isn't always 100% accurate, but more often than not it's accurate enough and is a great way to help expand knowledge on everything from carnivorous plants to any given reality TV show and nearly everything in between.

If you're a Wikipedia addict, Quickipedia is exactly the sort of thing we'd suggest getting. Quickipedia enables you to spritz articles at over 40 different speeds, features an easy to use layout, and even tells you how long an article will take to finish reading at the selected speed.

Not sure what to read? There's a random article button.

Want to go back and re-read an article you'd read before? Quickipedia remembers the articles you'd read prior.

Out of all the Spritz apps that we've come across in the last few years, Quickipedia is quite possibly our favorite. Unlike Wikipedia, however, Quickipedia isn't free. You'll have to pony up $2.99 if you're looking to have this app on your iPhone or iPad.

More Spritz?

While there aren't a ton of apps out there utilizing Spritz, we hope that developers see how beneficial the creation of such apps could be. For instance, we'd like to see a newsfeed reader that utilizes Spritz to take the place of one that was pulled from the App Store in the last year.?

It's worth noting that you can't currently natively Spritz Kindle or iBooks just yet. If you want them to allow use of Spritz within their apps, you may want to suggest the idea to them yourself.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 20
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,015member
    This appears to be an advertisement and it should be so indicated. It's surely not a review because it makes a series of unsupported claims and is written from the point of view of the app developer or their marketing department. Please change this to ADVERTISEMENT or PRODUCT ENDORSEMENT.

    Also, perhaps I'm not seeing it but where are the authors of threads credited within the thread itself?
    edited March 2017 MetriacanthosaurusSoliirelandTomSawyerpscooter63boredumblolliver
  • Reply 2 of 20
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,442administrator
    Once more, it is not an advertisement. We've had this conversation before. 

    If it is an advertisement, we are required by federal law to post it. It isn't, so we didn't.

    Consider yourself warned.
    edited March 2017
  • Reply 3 of 20
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,015member
    Once more, it is not an advertisement. We've had this conversation before. 

    If it is an advertisement, we are required by federal law to post it. It isn't, so we didn't.

    Consider yourself warned.
    Allow me to respond to your response, Mike.

    These phrases imply endorsement:  "fix both with Spritz" (how do you know it fixes these things?), "Let's work on that, with Spritz" (same problem), "Spritz also helps those with dyslexia as well" (where is the supporting evidence for this claim?). These are endorsements of the product. Unless there is a rundown of similar apps (and there are similar apps), then the implication is this is the only or best app available to address the issues it purports to "solve". Are you the author of this piece, Mike? Because I see no authors credit.
    edited March 2017 TomSawyerboredumblolliverireland
  • Reply 4 of 20
    irelandireland Posts: 17,574member
    Did you ever consider we only retain 60% of what we read for a reason?
    edited March 2017
  • Reply 5 of 20
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,015member
    ireland said:
    Did you ever consider we only retain 60% of what we read for a reason?
    Possibly because the written word isn't as big a threat to our daily survival as real-world things or people, so its importance is reduced by our survival instinct?
  • Reply 6 of 20
    Every study I've read about speed reading indicates that claims of retention with high reading rates are, shall we say, unfounded.
    "If there are no pauses in the stream of words, there isn’t enough time to process them and they fall out of the working memory before they're comprehended."

    https://www.scotthyoung.com/blog/2015/01/19/speed-reading-redo/

    SpamSandwichTomSawyerlolliversully54ireland
  • Reply 7 of 20
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,452member
    Not sure what to read? There's a random article button.
    Not sure what to read? You probably don't need this. :p
    lolliver
  • Reply 8 of 20
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,442administrator
    Once more, it is not an advertisement. We've had this conversation before. 

    If it is an advertisement, we are required by federal law to post it. It isn't, so we didn't.

    Consider yourself warned.
    Allow me to respond to your response, Mike.

    These phrases imply endorsement:  "fix both with Spritz" (how do you know it fixes these things?), "Let's work on that, with Spritz" (same problem), "Spritz also helps those with dyslexia as well" (where is the supporting evidence for this claim?). These are endorsements of the product. Unless there is a rundown of similar apps (and there are similar apps), then the implication is this is the only or best app available to address the issues it purports to "solve". Are you the author of this piece, Mike? Because I see no authors credit.
    I am - I don't think the author's credit comes through to the fora. Edit - it does not.

    Regardless, it's a safe assumption that if its an app examination, or a how-to use a particular app to get something accomplished, it's probably mine.

    Neither here, nor in my previous venue, have I ever done a review with payola from the developer or similar examination -- not going to start now.
    edited March 2017 jSnively
  • Reply 9 of 20
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,015member
    Once more, it is not an advertisement. We've had this conversation before. 

    If it is an advertisement, we are required by federal law to post it. It isn't, so we didn't.

    Consider yourself warned.
    Allow me to respond to your response, Mike.

    These phrases imply endorsement:  "fix both with Spritz" (how do you know it fixes these things?), "Let's work on that, with Spritz" (same problem), "Spritz also helps those with dyslexia as well" (where is the supporting evidence for this claim?). These are endorsements of the product. Unless there is a rundown of similar apps (and there are similar apps), then the implication is this is the only or best app available to address the issues it purports to "solve". Are you the author of this piece, Mike? Because I see no authors credit.
    I am - I don't think the author's credit comes through to the fora. Edit - it does not.

    Regardless, it's a safe assumption that if its an app examination, or a how-to use a particular app to get something accomplished, it's probably mine.

    Neither here, nor in my previous venue, have I ever done a review with payola from the developer or similar examination -- not going to start now.
    Is it technically possible for an author's attribution to be added to the top of story threads? It would help clear up whom to address or query in the future. Thanks either way.
    ireland
  • Reply 10 of 20
    jagnutjagnut Posts: 16member
    Well, I tried readsy.co and could not get it to load any PDF file.  So that was the end of that trial. 
  • Reply 11 of 20
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,442administrator
    Is it technically possible for an author's attribution to be added to the top of story threads? It would help clear up whom to address or query in the future. Thanks either way.
    I do not know. I'll ask.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 12 of 20
    boredumbboredumb Posts: 1,414member
    ireland said:
    Did you ever consider we only retain 60% of what we read for a reason?
    Do you have any suggestions as to what it might be?
    (btw - I did manage to retain about 97.7% of your post ;) )
    lolliver
  • Reply 13 of 20
    I am dyslexic. I would be very interested if this app could help me. There is a single, one line claim, "Spritz also helps those with dyslexia as well". How? To what effect? Why? This is possibly the most significant claim made for Spritz yet is not supported, justified or expanded upon. Suspicions arise.
    irelandSpamSandwich
  • Reply 14 of 20
    sully54sully54 Posts: 83member
    boredumb said:
    ireland said:
    Did you ever consider we only retain 60% of what we read for a reason?
    Do you have any suggestions as to what it might be?
    (btw - I did manage to retain about 97.7% of your post ;) )
    It's got something to do with the fact that 40% of what we read does not add anything to the actual information and only helps place that information in context. 

    the way the brain stores information, it doesn't store things verbatim. Instead it synthesizes information based on each person's previous experiences and memory. This is why we're told to take notes in our own words in school. It helps make those neural connections that help move that information out of working memory and into long term memory. 

    Reading is all comprehension and nothing at all to do with how many words per minute you can read. Some people can comprehend something by reading it once, others need more time to process. The key is in the strength of a person's neural connections. It doesn't really matter how many words you can read if you don't retain any of it. That makes speed reading methods suspect as it shifts the objective of reading from comprehension to speed. 
  • Reply 15 of 20
    jSnivelyjSnively Posts: 327administrator
    This appears to be an advertisement and it should be so indicated. It's surely not a review because it makes a series of unsupported claims and is written from the point of view of the app developer or their marketing department. Please change this to ADVERTISEMENT or PRODUCT ENDORSEMENT.

    Also, perhaps I'm not seeing it but where are the authors of threads credited within the thread itself?

    We do not do advertorial.


    If Mike or anyone else writes up a story, it's because we think the readers are interested in it, or they want to inform people about something. You're welcome to comment on the tone of the story and when we can improve, but I would just like to reiterate that we do not do advertorial. This has been said numerous times by myself and the editorial staff, and it is also even mentioned in the commenting guidelines. Spam, your original comment broke those guidelines and is subject to removal, but I'm going to leave it for posterity.

    The only Ads you see in the news river are for our partners like Adorama, B&H, etc. And even then we work directly with our partners to actually deliver unique and best-in-class promotions. No one is going to mistake those for an actual news story.

    Is it technically possible for an author's attribution to be added to the top of story threads? It would help clear up whom to address or query in the future. Thanks either way.
    I do not know. I'll ask.
    The way our back-end handles authors and article ownership of an article is complicated. It's a solution bolted on top of a solution that was bolted on to a legacy solution. It's not impossible to bring this over to the forums, but it would also be so far down a very long list of things to do it may as well not exist. If you're that curious you could always just look at the site. The forums are in no way meant to be a replacement for the site itself, and will never carry the full feature set.
    edited March 2017
  • Reply 16 of 20
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,442administrator
    timmillea said:
    I am dyslexic. I would be very interested if this app could help me. There is a single, one line claim, "Spritz also helps those with dyslexia as well". How? To what effect? Why? This is possibly the most significant claim made for Spritz yet is not supported, justified or expanded upon. Suspicions arise.
    Well, it's helping my son, and his neurologist says that his case isn't unique - so that works for me.
  • Reply 17 of 20
    boredumbboredumb Posts: 1,414member
    sully54 said:
    boredumb said:
    ireland said:
    Did you ever consider we only retain 60% of what we read for a reason?
    Do you have any suggestions as to what it might be?
    (btw - I did manage to retain about 97.7% of your post ;) )
    It's got something to do with the fact that 40% of what we read does not add anything to the actual information and only helps place that information in context. 

    the way the brain stores information, it doesn't store things verbatim. Instead it synthesizes information based on each person's previous experiences and memory. This is why we're told to take notes in our own words in school. It helps make those neural connections that help move that information out of working memory and into long term memory. 

    Reading is all comprehension and nothing at all to do with how many words per minute you can read. Some people can comprehend something by reading it once, others need more time to process. The key is in the strength of a person's neural connections. It doesn't really matter how many words you can read if you don't retain any of it. That makes speed reading methods suspect as it shifts the objective of reading from comprehension to speed. 
    I don't get it...
    Just kidding!  Thanks for the explanation - seems cogent.
  • Reply 18 of 20
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,015member
    timmillea said:
    I am dyslexic. I would be very interested if this app could help me. There is a single, one line claim, "Spritz also helps those with dyslexia as well". How? To what effect? Why? This is possibly the most significant claim made for Spritz yet is not supported, justified or expanded upon. Suspicions arise.
    Well, it's helping my son, and his neurologist says that his case isn't unique - so that works for me.
    Now THAT is what should've been included in the review. Write from a first person point of view and avoid sounding like a marketing or PR person. Just let us know you or your son used the app, how it worked and what were the results.
    sully54
  • Reply 19 of 20
    The flaw with Spritz, and most "speed reading" apps in the app store is that it only displays words one at a time. Real speed readers (people, not apps) can read "chunks" of several words at a time. It's quite surprising that Spritz does not feature chunks. You can read even faster. The only app in the app store that reliably displays chunks is Outread. https://outreadapp.com/ If you are the developer of Spritz, please add "chunks", and I'll buy it immediately.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 20 of 20
    stickista said:
    Every study I've read about speed reading indicates that claims of retention with high reading rates are, shall we say, unfounded.
    "If there are no pauses in the stream of words, there isn’t enough time to process them and they fall out of the working memory before they're comprehended."

    https://www.scotthyoung.com/blog/2015/01/19/speed-reading-redo/

    The article linked to suggests that you can hit 600 WPM, a pretty significant increase over 250WPM. My experience with outread app is that I can read simpler material (US Today for example) at around 700 WPM, fiction at around 600, and more technical articles (the Economist) at around 550. I've tried to push past 700, and it gets uncomfortable, and I know I'm missing text at that point.
Sign In or Register to comment.