Ask HN: How do you read? (And Yellowstone is a supervolcano) | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: How do you read? (And Yellowstone is a supervolcano)

4 pointsmatt18 comments

A few days ago a collegue mentioned that she was going to visit Yellowstone next month. Remembering some details from a chapter in Bill Bryson's A Short History of Nearly Everything on the park, I attempted to explain to her that Yellowstone was, in fact, a supervolcano.

The problem was that I couldn't remember many details other than that Yellowstone was a supervolcano, that it was due to erupt, and that if it exploded we'd all be in a lot of trouble. Frustrated that I didn't remember more than that, I went back and found the following from the book:

"Yellowstone sits on top of an enormous hot spot, a reservoir of molten rock that rises from at least 125 miles down in the Earth. The heat from the hot spot is what powers all of Yellowstone's vents, geysers, hot springs, and popping mud spots. Beneath the surface is a magma chamber that is about forty-five miles across-roughly the same dimensions as the park-and about eight miles thick at its thickest point. Imagine a pile of TNT about the size of Rhode Island and reaching eight miles into the sky, to about the height of the highest cirrus clouds, and you have some idea of what visitors to Yellowstone are shuffling around on top of."

At one point a few months back I read those lines, and yet all I remember now is "Yellowstone is a massive supervolcano." I read an entire chapter and that's was all I could explain to someone; very few specifics.

Two questions: When you read do you remember specifics or just the big picture? Has anyone found any good ways to improve their ability to remember details like this?

I think a lot of it has to do with your interests. For example, you're a HN reader and you come away with "Yellowstone == supervolcano." A new mom would probably read the quoted text and think "Yellowstone is dangerous, don't take the family there." A kid who is into fireworks and explosions might remember "TNT the size of Rhode Island, cool!"

When I read, I usually just remember the big picture plus the small details that I personally find fascinating.

When you read, what percent of the information do you think you actually retain?

I acknowledge that might be the wrong way to look at it though. The unconscious mind probably picks up a lot more than we think and that knowledge enables us to make connections that we previously would be unable to do.

There are trade offs between reading time and reading comprehension. For example you can skim through a short story in one minute and come away with 75%. Or you can read through the same story in 5 minutes and come away with 90% (made up numbers).

If I were taking a test with limited time and a lot of reading, I might choose the speed reading because it's most "cost effective". If I were studying, virtually unlimited time, and trying to retain the information, I would go with the latter. If I were just reading for entertainment, it would probably be something in between (which might end up being slower and retaining less).

I agree that subconsciously we probably pick up a lot more than we realize.

I've also read that book and had a similarly spotty recollection until last week. The Yellowstone supervolcano is irrelevant to my life and I can't do anything to prevent it. If it erupts in my lifetime, then I'll care a lot, but I can't predict that so it's not worth worrying about it. I was reminded of it last week when I saw my little sister for the holidays: she's a geologist and was wearing a t-shirt that referenced it. Family asked and she went on at length about it, more than Bryson does in that excerpt. It's relevant to her life in a way it isn't (and hopefully never will be) to mine.

Don't feel bad about not remembering unimportant things.

If you want to learn from a book (as opposed to memorising a shopping list or something) then the advice is always the same: get an overview first, then notice the details. Facts seem to need an overall framework in which they can "live". Without it, they get lost.

A standard technique goes like this: read just the first and last paragraphs of each chapter. Then read the first sentence of each paragraph of the first chapter. Then read the actual chapter as fast as you can (don't focus on details or bits you don't understand). Finally, go through it one last time and make notes. Now go on to the next chapter.

However, if you truly want to memorise an astounding number of facts (e.g. a list of a thousand pieces of information, or all the common words in a foreign language), then you need to use sophisticated mnemonic techniques. It takes a little practice, but you get surprising results very quickly. For example, after about 15 minutes practising the techniques in this book, http://www.amazon.co.uk/Use-Your-Memory-Understand-Improve/d..., I was able to memorise the order of a shuffled deck of cards with about 95% accuracy. It wouldn't have taken more than a few days to learn to memorise several decks at once with 100% accuracy.

Hi, I was on the Bryson train....

there are a good many techniques to enhance memory, most usually deal with some form of visual imagery. I'm pretty sure this hinges on the idea that a very large proportion of the brain is given over to visual processing, so one would assume that capturing a visual image of an idea would better help one to recall that idea many years in the future. And the image of the gaping maw of a spewing super-volcano, is pretty hard hitting. That's probably why it eclipsed the details and left you with the "bigger picture" as you so unconsciously put it ;)

for instance, do you remember what Coprolites are? probably not, and probably for a good reason, they are Fosillised Dino turds.... not a worthwhile image for association, methinks

;)

but they are also esoteric, so I wouldn't get caught up about not remembering what you consciously don't attend to. Association is a powerful tool, and you would probably surprise yourself if you could see everything you _can_ recall about things that hold your attention well.

I find remembering the images that the text created helps me recall the smaller details. For example, using the size of Rhode Island and the height of cirrus clouds easily painted a vivid image in my head. I'll remember that image in the future and the context it was used, but not necessarily the smaller details like "125 miles down in the Earth", or "forty-five miles across".

However, if I want to remember those smaller details, then consciously linking them to the vivid image makes recalling them a lot easier whenever I recall the image.

I believe this is the same reason why learning new languages is much easier when we're surrounded by people who speak them. When we can link pieces of the language to various interactions in the real world, our brain then has visual stimuli to connect various bits of the language with in our brain. Of course everyone is unique and what works for one person may not be optimal for the other.

Yellowstone has seen a lot of quake activity lately, btw.: http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2009/01/05/yell...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com