

Jonah Lehrer: The Future Of Reading - cwan
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/09/the-future-of-reading-2/

======
trimber
I'm not familiar with the research cited in the article, however it seems the
author is making some inconsistent points refering to it.

He says there are two different ways of reading(ventral route and dorsal
stream) and that the latter way is preferable because it is more conscious of
the actual text being read. When reading on digital devices he worries that we
will only be reading through the ventral route, because the clear display
quality will make it so easy for us the read the letters and words.

Now, there is a few things I'm wondering about: In practice, do we actually
ever read through the dorsal stream? In the research experiments quoted, this
was archived through rotating letters or errant punctuation, both of which we
do not usually encounter in actual books.

The author also mentions the dorsal stream being activated because of an
obscure word, or an awkard subclause. This seems more like the thing that
would in practice cause us to use the dorsal stream. Is the dorsal stream
active in cases of difficult texts, e.g. scientific papers?

If that is so, then it seems to me that it is not so much a question of wether
you read on a digital device with great display quality or a simple book, but
instead it seems to be of much greater importance what it is that you are
reading. A Dan Brown book, would probably only activate the ventral route on
both mediums, whereas the newest P[!|=]=NP proof would probably always
activate the dorsal stream. Is my understanding of the ventral route and
dorsal stream correct?

