Absorbing information more effeciently?

>>8503124
bump

Stop reading and switch to audiobooks

>>8503381
Most audiobooks I find have the following problems:
1: The person reading them sounds like a fucking robot.
2: The person reads slower than I do.
3: The microphone is shit.

>a chain is only as strong as its weakest link

Apply that here, and consider you may be overestimating your reading level in comparing scientific text to articles designed for the layman.

>>8503456
It's not just scientific text though, I have the same exact problem with books. I can skim read tons of shit on 4chan and easily grasp things, but I somehow treat reading fiction differently.

>>8503124

Read with a goal in mind or just practice parsing. Try "thinking" like a robot. Also pick up a book on how to read. It cover reading techniques like when skimming gives you an advantage, comparative reading one of my favorite methods.

Honestly I think the reason you read differently in those two contexts is that the stuff you read online is rarely dense. Look at all the bullshit works I threw into the first sentence. "Honestly" "I think" etc. You're reading faster online because there's just less information.

Also, fiction is frequently written with an internal monologue in mind - the author writes in such a way that he/she affects the cadence and rhythm of words as you read them.

Plus there's the fact that you care much less about browsing a particular thread vs a tech doc or a book. Here, you can always go back to the catalog and look for another thread. The alternative is a commitment

>>8503462
It's because you actually have to sit down and read the same thing for a long period of time and interpret what is coming into your head.

It's not a satisfying dopamine rush reading through a whole thread of posts. Actual books and papers are harder because the rewards are harder to get to.

"Reading through shit on 4chan" is easy and doesn't really need your brain.