June 2013
Volume 54, Issue 15
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2013
Measuring reading speed: a comparison of reading paragraphs and single sentences
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Susanne Trauzettel-Klosinski
    Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany
  • Elke Altpeter
    Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany
  • Tobias Marx
    Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany
  • Nhung Nguyen
    Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2013, Vol.54, 2747. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Susanne Trauzettel-Klosinski, Elke Altpeter, Tobias Marx, Nhung Nguyen; Measuring reading speed: a comparison of reading paragraphs and single sentences. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2013;54(15):2747.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: For measuring reading speed, the use of standardized texts is crucial 2. Single sentences (MN-Read, Radner) are well suited for assessing critical print size. We developed paragraphs (International Reading Speed Texts IReST 2) for measuring reading speed, which showed a high agreement within and between languages (17 languages, linguistically adapted). We hypothesize that paragraphs are preferable to single sentences for more precise speed measurement by stopwatch.

Methods: Reading speeds during reading standardized paragraphs of text ( IReST, German version, texts 3,6,10; 132 words, SD 3.2) were compared with standardized single sentences (Radner, German version, texts 1-3; 14 words each). 30 normally sighted elderly native German speakers (mean age = 64 years, SD 7 years) read the texts aloud in random order. Reading time was measured by stop watch and reading speed was calculated in correctly read words/minute (wpm).

Results: Mean reading speed did not show a relevant difference between IReST (167 wpm, SD 30.3) and Radner (170 wpm, SD 30.2), (highest mean difference: 7 WPM), when reading speeds of the total cohort were compared. However, individual variation during reading 3 texts of each type showed markedly higher standard deviations for the Radner texts (SD 18.9) than for the IReST texts (SD 5.2). A clinically relevant difference was defined as > 10 wpm 2.

Conclusions: For group comparisons, the kind and length of text (IReST or Radner) did not have a relevant influence on reading speed. For intra-individual measurement of reading speed, IReST texts showed lower variation between the texts. For higher accuracy we recommend to use them for repeated measurements, especially for monitoring the course of a reading disorder and for assessing effects of interventions. References 1 Radner W et al (2002) Graefe`s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 240: 461-46 2 Trauzettel-Klosinski S, Dietz K and the IReST Study Group (2012) IOVS 53:5452-5461

Keywords: 672 reading  
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×