<p>Yes, inhibiting sub-vocalization is likely to impair comprehension.</p>

<p>Here is the abstract from Slowiaczek &amp; Clifton (1980):</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Two experiments demonstrated that subvocalization is of value in reading for certain types of meaning. Blocking subvocalization by requiring subjects to count or say “cola-colacola …” aloud impaired their reading comprehension but generally not their listening comprehension. The effect of blocking subvocalization was found to be specific to tests that required integration of concepts within or across sentences, as contrasted with tests that required only memory of individual word concepts. Two hypotheses were offered: first, that subvocalization results in a more durable memory representation needed for integration of concepts; and second, that subvocalization enables a prosodic restructuring that makes information needed for sentence comprehension accessible.</p>
</blockquote>

<h1>Reference</h1>

<blockquote>
  <p>Slowiaczek, M. L., &amp; Clifton Jr, C. (1980). Subvocalization and reading for meaning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(5), 573-582.</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-29T23:07:48.483Z
2013-03-29T23:07:48.483Z
Jeff
<p>Sometimes when reading, text segments are not so important or relevant, when that happens I tend to read between lines in a visual manner, without <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subvocalization">sub-vocalizing</a> or pronouncing the words in my mind.</p>

<p>Could that way of reading affect text comprehension?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-12-06T13:44:17.950Z
I don't think most people normally simulate talking when they're reading (and I don't mean mouth movements, but rather pronouncing the words in your mind): I read much faster than I talk. It does change certain aspects of how you experience the text, yes.
Cerberus
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-12-06T17:34:34.320Z
@jlawler has there been any research on what needs to be present to what degree to allow for literacy? Eyesight is of course key, but besides that?
kaleissin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-12-14T21:06:52.823Z
Also, subvocalizations are often not detectable by the reader. It may be the case that you are indeed subvocalizing and not aware of it. The only way to tell would be with a  electromyography or functional MRI. Introspection is unfortunately a very error-prone technique in this area.
Mark Beadles
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-12-15T13:13:53.363Z
see this related question: http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/questions/1691/is-sub-vocalization-when-reading-and-writing-merely-a-symptom-of-lack-of-fluency
Jeromy Anglim
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-12-15T14:43:29.963Z
@JeromyAnglim The answer you have given to that question is more applicable here, I think. It seems the two questions are not about the same issue, though. Given that fluency and comprehencion could be related, but sub-vocalization maybe not. I'd be happy to accept that answer regarding the issue here.
rraallvv
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-12-15T14:49:32.773Z
@JeromyAnglim If I've got your point, subvocalization could be related to text complexity. So is more likely to improve comprehension when one uses subvocalization.
rraallvv
<reading>
What is the effect of not sub-vocalizing on reading comprehension?
rraallvv
# What is the effect of not sub-vocalizing on reading comprehension?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2012-12-06)

Sometimes when reading, text segments are not so important or relevant, when that happens I tend to read between lines in a visual manner, without [sub-vocalizing](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subvocalization) or pronouncing the words in my mind.

Could that way of reading affect text comprehension?

**Tags:** reading

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I don't think most people normally simulate talking when they're reading (and I don't mean mouth movements, but rather pronouncing the words in your mind): I read much faster than I talk. It does change certain aspects of how you experience the text, yes.  
> **username_2**: @jlawler has there been any research on what needs to be present to what degree to allow for literacy? Eyesight is of course key, but besides that?  
> **username_3**: Also, subvocalizations are often not detectable by the reader. It may be the case that you are indeed subvocalizing and not aware of it. The only way to tell would be with a  electromyography or functional MRI. Introspection is unfortunately a very error-prone technique in this area.  
> **username_4**: see this related question: http://cogsci.stackexchange.com/questions/1691/is-sub-vocalization-when-reading-and-writing-merely-a-symptom-of-lack-of-fluency  
> **username_0**: @JeromyAnglim The answer you have given to that question is more applicable here, I think. It seems the two questions are not about the same issue, though. Given that fluency and comprehencion could be related, but sub-vocalization maybe not. I'd be happy to accept that answer regarding the issue here.  
> **username_0**: @JeromyAnglim If I've got your point, subvocalization could be related to text complexity. So is more likely to improve comprehension when one uses subvocalization.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_5 on 2013-03-29. Score: 7 | Accepted answer

Yes, inhibiting sub-vocalization is likely to impair comprehension.

Here is the abstract from Slowiaczek & Clifton (1980):

> Two experiments demonstrated that subvocalization is of value in reading for certain types of meaning. Blocking subvocalization by requiring subjects to count or say “cola-colacola …” aloud impaired their reading comprehension but generally not their listening comprehension. The effect of blocking subvocalization was found to be specific to tests that required integration of concepts within or across sentences, as contrasted with tests that required only memory of individual word concepts. Two hypotheses were offered: first, that subvocalization results in a more durable memory representation needed for integration of concepts; and second, that subvocalization enables a prosodic restructuring that makes information needed for sentence comprehension accessible.

# Reference

> Slowiaczek, M. L., & Clifton Jr, C. (1980). Subvocalization and reading for meaning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19(5), 573-582.


---

