NationStates Jolt Archive

I've noticed that a lot of posters seem to have problems reading or understanding posts. I've seen this phenomenon elsewhere on other forums, but it seems especially bad here - bad enough that I have begun to seriously wonder about the reading comprehension skills of NS users/players in general.

Examples include: players who won't bother to read moderately long posts, a thread I posted asking about male and female morality in which I ended up editing several times with statements that I was not seeking advice for the example I used, and many others.

Has anyone else observed this?

Anyone have any information on the relationship between internet usage and reading comprehension.

snip

I disagree!
people like reading all sorts of things! why do people always say our level is lower!!!!



P.S.;) joking of course.

I've noticed that a lot of posters seem to have problems reading or understanding posts. I've seen this phenomenon elsewhere on other forums, but it seems especially bad here - bad enough that I have begun to seriously wonder about the reading comprehension skills of NS users/players in general.

Examples include: players who won't bother to read moderately long posts, a thread I posted asking about male and female morality in which I ended up editing several times with statements that I was not seeking advice for the example I used, and many others.

Has anyone else observed this?

Anyone have any information on the relationship between internet usage and reading comprehension.

tl;dr

tl;dr
:confused:

In some cases it might not be so much a case of bad reading comprehension as it is a case of not wanting to back down in front of a giant group of strangers. Like in Reservoir Dogs when Joe point out that his goons can't pick their code names because "nobody knows each other, so no one wants to back down," the same principle applies here, even despite the anonymity.

In short, I think it's more of an extension of hubris than bad reading skills. I think when someone really gets put down in a debate they know it, but continue to post as if they haven't anyway. That said, I have seen some staggeringly bad reading skills here, and some even worse writing habits.

People read what they want to read for one. If they are pre-disposed to a certain political position/view. They will read into a statement with that in mind. Therefore a generalized statement can be read two completely different ways.
Sarcasm is also a very misunderstood item in writing. Some people get it, while others just take it as someone being serious.
Another big difference I see here is a language barrier. Since 99% of the posts are done in English. I think there is dialect issues and just plain writing the wrong words in a post. Therefore confusion ensues on what the poster is trying to say. How many times have you seen people have to post a second post just to explain what they meant. Anyway this is what I think happens here for the most part.

what someone should do is start a thread with a long post, say about religion/race/etc... and at the bottom put a disclaimer about this about trying to find out statistically how many incompetent readers there are on NS

People are lazy. What can you say. I usually read long posts if it keeps my interest. Always start with an attention-getter and put statistics every few sentences so people want to read on. Everyone loves statistics...until it's in high School.

what someone should do is start a thread with a long post, say about religion/race/etc... and at the bottom put a disclaimer about this about trying to find out statistically how many incompetent readers there are on NS


Hehe. I like that. I think I'll try it at some future point.

I've noticed that a lot of posters seem to have problems reading or understanding posts. I've seen this phenomenon elsewhere on other forums, but it seems especially bad here - bad enough that I have begun to seriously wonder about the reading comprehension skills of NS users/players in general.

Examples include: players who won't bother to read moderately long posts, a thread I posted asking about male and female morality in which I ended up editing several times with statements that I was not seeking advice for the example I used, and many others.

Has anyone else observed this?

Anyone have any information on the relationship between internet usage and reading comprehension.


Yes. A lot.

What I've noticed in particular is that people believe that my statements are somehow a moral defense of some act - when in fact I usually decline to make a moral judgment at all.

They then spend the rest of the thread ranting - wanting to know how I live with my evil self.

No matter how many times I go over it, telling them that I am not making a moral judgment, they insist that I am. Again and again and again and again.

players who won't bother to read moderately long posts,
often i only post a reply to the one point (or points if there are many) that i disagree with in a long post. like what i'm doing here

it could be seen as poor reading comprehension i suppose if everyone does it, but the other way of seeing it is that everyone pretty much agrees with everyone else :)

wait a minute... did i just say that about NS?! how wrong could i be :headbang:

First of all, I think that the average reading comprehension of the general public is pretty low. So in that respect, NS is just a reflection of the rest of the population.

Someone else already mentioned the language issue. We have a lot of people reading and posting in a language that is not their native one, which adds to the problem. However, it's usually easy to tell the difference between someone with a language barrier and someone who is a native English speaker with poor reading/writing skills - they make different kinds of mistakes. (I'm actually amazed at how well some of our non-native speakers are able to write in English - there are several who you would never guess to be non-native speakers unless they told you.)

And, of course, many people simply don't care what you actually wrote. If one of their "hot-button" words flashes on to their retinas, regardless of context, it sends them into an ideological fury which they vent by posting the same old knee-jerk rant.

:rolleyes:

:confused:

Too Long;Didn't Read.

I would have hoped someone got that little joke.

I think a lot of the apparently poor comprehension is that certain posters want to argue about their handful of issues constantly. As a result they latch on to some aspect of the post to reply too, and ignore other things that were in the OP. Fass' first response on the Military Jobs thread, for instance.
People here aren't stupid, they just pretend to be because that allows them to argue off topic.

What?

what someone should do is start a thread with a long post, say about religion/race/etc... and at the bottom put a disclaimer about this about trying to find out statistically how many incompetent readers there are on NS

Brilliant!

Although I would probably be one of them...

Well in regards to long posts, I often will not read a long post if it isnt of particular interest and is 'blocked' (ie lack of paragraphs or too few paragraphs).

I find reading off a computer screen can be quite challenging if the text is in a big block (no paragraphs) or has too few paragraphs. Unless I particularly want to read a particular post, if it is overly long and not adequately paragraphed, I will often only read some of the beginning and some of the end and only skim through the middle.

[Tears running profusely down my face]

Could someone read this thread to me?

[/water works]

I thought that maybe there were some people on here who were just illiterate, but when just about everyone either misunderstands what I said, or understands it to mean something completely different, I think maybe I can't come up with a coherent thought at all.

(or maybe it is my spelling)

Could someone read this thread to me?



If I read it for you, will you comprehend it for me?

If I read it for you, will you comprehend it for me?

Sure. Though, since i can't read what you just wrote there, I have no idea what I'm agreeing to.

Too Long;Didn't Read.

I would have hoped someone got that little joke.

SomethingAwful
4chan
Fark.com

The trifecta of internet WIN

Sure. Though, since i can't read what you just wrote there, I have no idea what I'm agreeing to.
Great, you cant read it, but you've gone ahead and agreed, which should work out well since I've also agreed even though I'm not able to comprehend what it is we have agreed to..

If we could pool resources, we'd be unstoppable, or at the very least able to read and comprehend...;)

Well in regards to long posts, I often will not read a long post if it isnt of particular interest and is 'blocked' (ie lack of paragraphs or too few paragraphs).

I find reading off a computer screen can be quite challenging if the text is in a big block (no paragraphs) or has too few paragraphs. Unless I particularly want to read a particular post, if it is overly long and not adequately paragraphed, I will often only read some of the beginning and some of the end and only skim through the middle.
That explains a lot.

There is some of that, but mostly arrogance on the part of those who complain they were misunderstood, or complain that no one understood a post that was in poor order, or had little in the way of actual basis of fact.
So, they accuse the readers of said crappy posts, of poor comprehension.

Seen a lot of that too.

That explains a lot.
It does? :confused:

'A lot' is kinda' vague. I dont see how even one effect of my behaviour (described in my earlier post), could possibly be percievable to you, so I dont see how knowledge about the behaviour could be of any explanatory value to you at all. What exactly do believe it explains?

I'm a college professor and I can say with no hesitation, the average reading comprehension of the average 19 year old SUCKS! Reading comprehension is a major part of what I teach (law) and the ability of recent high school grads to grasp the meaning of the written word is so bad I have to spend valuable time explaining how to do it.

Example:
I handed my criminal law class a decision of a state supreme court in which a man had been charged with Aggravated Assualt for shooting someone. He asked for jury instructions on the lesser included crimes of 1st, 2nd and 3rd Degree Assualt at trial, but the trial judge refused to give those lesser included offense instructions. On appeal to the state supreme court, he argued the trial judge had erred and he had been denied a fair trial because he didn't get those instructions given to the jury. The state supreme court rejected his claim and said the trial judge was correct and went through the instructions in detail and explained why the trial judge was right and set out the rules and analysis to be used in making a determination of this issue.

I then gave the class a hypothetical factual situation in which a man was charged with 1st Degree murder and asked them to write a paper and discuss, using the case I had given them as the law that applied, whether the accused murderer would be entitled to jury instructions on the lesser offenses of 2nd Degree Murder, Manslaughter or Negligent Homicide.

Over half the class complained they didn't understand the assignment because the case I gave them dealt with Assualt and the assignment dealt with murder. The ability to read and comprehend what was stated in the case and analogize to another situation was something they just could not do.

Since most (not all, but it seems to me to be "most") posters on NS are American teenagers, I have no problem believing that most cannot read with comprehension and understanding. I see it every day and have no doubt, after discussion with my peers from across this country, that it is not a problem localized to where I live and I have no doubt it is a prevalent problem on these boards. The comprehension of the written word is a skill that most don't learn these days in our public schools, let alone the understanding of the finer nuances found in subtle sarcasm and irony.

I've noticed that a lot of posters seem to have problems reading or understanding posts. I've seen this phenomenon elsewhere on other forums, but it seems especially bad here - bad enough that I have begun to seriously wonder about the reading comprehension skills of NS users/players in general.

Examples include: players who won't bother to read moderately long posts, a thread I posted asking about male and female morality in which I ended up editing several times with statements that I was not seeking advice for the example I used, and many others.

Has anyone else observed this?

Anyone have any information on the relationship between internet usage and reading comprehension.
LOL i was actually doing it to this very post.
I only partially read it but i agree.

snip
Your students were just lazy and wanted a plausable excuse for not doing their homework. Trust me I use it all the time.

Your students were just lazy and wanted a plausable excuse for not doing their homework. Trust me I use it all the time.
That excuse used to save me no ends of effort, but no one has bought it since Senior Year in High School.
And the laziness thing probably applies to the world of NS, as well. Am I really going to spend more than 2 minutes reading a post about the Angolan Cheese Market, when I could spend that time on more rewarding pursuits, like watching porn? Of course not.

That excuse used to save me no ends of effort, but no one has bought it since Senior Year in High School.
And the laziness thing probably applies to the world of NS, as well. Am I really going to spend more than 2 minutes reading a post about the Angolan Cheese Market, when I could spend that time on more rewarding pursuits, like watching porn? Of course not.
If only someone could combine the Angolan Cheese Market with porn...

If only someone could combine the Angolan Cheese Market with porn...
I suppose it really depends on where the Angolans are getting the milk from.

You can't read, write nor spell. You speak before you think, yet you are seeking someone to debate. - Robert L. Sager


:headbang:

You are as dumb as a Mule and twice as Ugly if a strange man offers you a ride in a car i say take it!

I've noticed that a lot of posters seem to have problems reading or understanding posts. I've seen this phenomenon elsewhere on other forums, but it seems especially bad here - bad enough that I have begun to seriously wonder about the reading comprehension skills of NS users/players in general.

Examples include: players who won't bother to read moderately long posts, a thread I posted asking about male and female morality in which I ended up editing several times with statements that I was not seeking advice for the example I used, and many others.

Has anyone else observed this?

Anyone have any information on the relationship between internet usage and reading comprehension.

With any sort of writing, one has to consider the nature of one's readers. If it is determined that people are unwilling or unable to comprehend long-winded posts, I would think that the sensible solution would be to change one's writing style rather than just complain about the world being too stupid to understand.

You are as dumb as a Mule and twice as Ugly if a strange man offers you a ride in a car i say take it!
you really really like the simpsons don't you?;)

I'm a college professor and I can say with no hesitation, the average reading comprehension of the average 19 year old SUCKS! Reading comprehension is a major part of what I teach (law) and the ability of recent high school grads to grasp the meaning of the written word is so bad I have to spend valuable time explaining how to do it.

Example:
I handed my criminal law class a decision of a state supreme court in which a man had been charged with Aggravated Assualt for shooting someone. He asked for jury instructions on the lesser included crimes of 1st, 2nd and 3rd Degree Assualt at trial, but the trial judge refused to give those lesser included offense instructions. On appeal to the state supreme court, he argued the trial judge had erred and he had been denied a fair trial because he didn't get those instructions given to the jury. The state supreme court rejected his claim and said the trial judge was correct and went through the instructions in detail and explained why the trial judge was right and set out the rules and analysis to be used in making a determination of this issue.

I then gave the class a hypothetical factual situation in which a man was charged with 1st Degree murder and asked them to write a paper and discuss, using the case I had given them as the law that applied, whether the accused murderer would be entitled to jury instructions on the lesser offenses of 2nd Degree Murder, Manslaughter or Negligent Homicide.

Over half the class complained they didn't understand the assignment because the case I gave them dealt with Assualt and the assignment dealt with murder. The ability to read and comprehend what was stated in the case and analogize to another situation was something they just could not do.

Since most (not all, but it seems to me to be "most") posters on NS are American teenagers, I have no problem believing that most cannot read with comprehension and understanding. I see it every day and have no doubt, after discussion with my peers from across this country, that it is not a problem localized to where I live and I have no doubt it is a prevalent problem on these boards. The comprehension of the written word is a skill that most don't learn these days in our public schools, let alone the understanding of the finer nuances found in subtle sarcasm and irony.


To be fair, if your criminal cases are on a par with our absolutely riveting cases in Scotland, you're lucky they didn't either top themselves (colloquialism for suicide) or die of boredom before they even finished reading the case, never mind actually producing an essay related to it.

Specifically relating to NS and forums... a lot of people don't get sarcasm and other literary nuances, because these tend to rely significantly on tone, which is difficult to get across in the space of a generally short forum response.

I can safely say that I have terrible reading skills, if it's sarcasm. Sarcasm, is WASTED on me. Completely and utterly...I am quite literal.

And as for reading comprehension in general...it doesn't really seem too bad here compared to some places I've been. Especially considering some of the serious topics and political views on here.

What I will see more often though, is that people are just plain mean on here at times. Just rude.

-Asylum Nova

PS: Yes, I edited my post. XP

I then gave the class a hypothetical factual situation in which a man was charged with 1st Degree murder and asked them to write a paper and discuss, using the case I had given them as the law that applied, whether the accused murderer would be entitled to jury instructions on the lesser offenses of 2nd Degree Murder, Manslaughter or Negligent Homicide.

Over half the class complained they didn't understand the assignment because the case I gave them dealt with Assualt and the assignment dealt with murder. The ability to read and comprehend what was stated in the case and analogize to another situation was something they just could not do.
It seems to me that your example doesnt establish a reading comprehension problem (as existing) but rather a problem relating to critical thinking skills (which doesnt mean of course that a reading comprehension problem doesnt also exist).

It seems to me that your description indicates the students read and comprehended the case (to the point where they knew it was one kind of case - assault, while the assignment was another kind - murder), but were not able to appropriately reason, or apply critical thinking skills to what they comprehended.

It may be that they could and did comprehend the facts of the cases but they couldnt make any use of that comprehension because they were not able to recognise extract and generalise the needed information (specifically the principals illucidatedn in the case) in order to apply apply them to the set of facts that formed the basis of the assignment. Whether or not this was the case, based on the description you've posted, it could well be.

I have to say that I have often been surprised at some people's apparent lack of ability to appropriate use analogy based reasoning. It seems that it isnt uncommon, for instance, for people to fail to distinguish between what is materially relevent and what is not when attempting to reason via analogy.