No.

audiobooks = passive activity
reading = active activity

not quite the same

>>8064837
>active activity

and that is "better" because....?

>>8064822
They are really a great resource for blind people. Braille is not as practical as people make it seem.

>>8064845
You generally retain more information and therefore experience more as the book progresses with an active approach.

>>8064898
that doesn't even make sense, the human mind and body fucking evolved for speech over hundreds of thousands of years, how the fuck would reading be a "better" medium for communication than fucking speech? hopefully u just pulled that out of ur ass and serious ppl don't really believe that or serious people are stupid

>>8064898
with an active approach, you're not really ""retaining"" anything. whatever isn't absolutely fucking clear to you, you just stop at and obsess over for however long it takes you to get it/memorize it.

>>8064908
http://www.fastcodesign.com/3026224/evidence/your-brain-on-audio-books-distracted-forgetful-and-bored

>that doesn't even make sense, the human mind and body fucking evolved for speech over hundreds of thousands of years, how the fuck would reading be a "better" medium for communication than fucking speech?
Why not?

>>8064917
yeah if u think about it reading is kind of pleb cuz ur like "duh, what did he mean by that let me reread it five times" but a true patrician just listens to the audiobook like "damn hegel that's a good point, can't wait to hear what u dream up next"

>>8064917
>get it/memorize it
>memorize it
That's retention.

>an ability to retain things in mind; specifically : a preservation of the aftereffects of experience and learning that makes recall or recognition possible

>>8064922
according to that retarded study u retain the most when u read outloud...so according to that i guess we should all be subvocalizing? and ironically it seems to imply that it takes more focus to listen to an audiobook so i guess audiobook prefers are actually more patrician that people that need to hold a piece of paper with the fucking words printed on it in front of their face to actually pay attention, lol stay plab nerd

>>8064923
>obsesses over what behavior comes off as more patrician

>>8064926
yeah, technically. but, what I meant is, there's no point in comparing it with listening in that regard. When you're reading, you retent the entire 100% if you want to, and if you don't then that's completely due to your lack of motivation, and not lack of an actual linguistical reading skill.

>>8064931
>according to that retarded study u retain the most when u read outloud...so according to that i guess we should all be subvocalizing
Interesting, how the most active approach is the one where you learn the most.

>>8064932
>When you're reading, you retent the entire 100% if you want to, and if you don't then that's completely due to your lack of motivation, and not lack of an actual linguistical reading skill.
Why does it matter? I don't read to prove my "linguistical reading skill." I read to engage with the text and that is clearly done most effectively by reading off a page.

>>8064917
>whatever isn't absolutely fucking clear to you, you just stop at and obsess over for however long it takes you to get it/memorize it.


And if you're listening to an audiobook, that gets glazed over at a continuous pace and you never get it

I also tend to zone out and get distracted when listening to audiobooks, so I don't even bother anymore

>>8064938
>>8064941
well by all means use your active approach then if it suits you better. (I don't know who it wouldn't tbqh.)
I'm just saying that it's an empty discussion whether you, when reading, retain more "as the book progresses", because the book progresses at your own pace. You don't retain more, you retain everything that you wanted to retain.

>>8064908
This should be really easy for you to just think about and understand, you hardly even need a study.

>>8064955
(...whereas listening actually requires a special skill that needs to be developed)

>>8064822
Imagine listening to Ulysses instead of reading it, what the fuck.

>>8064931
>he fell for the subvocalizing meme
HOLY FUUUCK WHAT IS GOING OOON

>>8064967
I've been subvocalizing while reading books(not 4chan posts) since I started reading as a lad.

Is that why I blaze through 4chan and slug through literature?

>>8064983
I am unsure how real subvocalizing (or lack thereof) actually is. But reading aloud is objectively better in every single way.

>>8064988
Simultaneously reading while rewriting the text is the most patrician way to comprehend literature