Some speed-reading apps make big claims. But how fast can humans actually read?

Some speed-reading advocates claim that with proper training (outlined in many popular books and YouTube videos ) or the use of special apps, it’s possible to increase your reading rate to 1,000 words per minute or more.

Such books, videos and apps generally assume our reading speed is constrained because we are inefficient at extracting information from the printed page. But is this the case?

To assess these claims, let’s first see what the science says about our reading capacities.

A 2019 meta-analysis of 190 published studies found that when silently reading English non-fiction, adults read at a rate of 175-300 words per minute. Interestingly, this rate increased to 200-320 words per minute for fiction. This difference may reflect the fact that fiction tends to be more engaging or may be easier to understand.

Advocates of speed-reading, however, claim these estimates are conservative and reflect “bad reading habits”. But this contradicts what actually happens when we read.

How we read

During reading, our eyes don’t move smoothly across a printed page but instead make rapid movements called saccades, separated by brief pauses called fixations.

Although language processing continues during saccades, visual processing is suppressed. Information on the printed page is only extracted during fixations.

These fixations are typically 200-300 milliseconds but vary in duration. For example, fixations tend to be longer when reading less common words because they require more time to identify.

Experiments show we perceive letters and words in a small region of our field of vision. When reading English, we typically perceive two to three letters to the left of fixation and seven to eight letters to the right. (This perceptual span varies across languages and writing systems.)

However, popular speed-reading books such as Speed-Reading for Dummies claim people can learn to “read, see, and process” 10-14 words in a single eye fixation.

This claim is clearly at odds with the evidence.

In fact, a rigorous study of readers who took speed-reading courses suggests they are simply skimming through text, with their comprehension declining in proportion to their skimming rate gain.

What about text display?

Advocates of many speed-reading technologies claim reading speed can be significantly increased by using apps displaying text in specific formats.

Bionic Reading , for instance, is an app that displays the first part of each word in bold font. This is claimed to speed up word identification by allowing readers to fixate the most informative part of each word.

BeeLine Reader is an app that displays text in different font colours, with the colour used at the end of one line matching the colour used at the beginning of the next. This colouring scheme, it is argued, improves the accuracy of eye movements from one line to the next, making it easier to identify the words at the start of each line.

Spritz , meanwhile, is an app that displays each word of a text in rapid succession in exactly the same spot on the screen. This method of displaying text, it is argued, makes eye movements unnecessary and allows the reader to view each word from its centre, speeding its identification.

Many other apps work similarly, by eliminating the need to make eye movements.

However, research has shown these apps have negligible effects on reading rates and can actually reduce comprehension. For example, a 2024 study compared those using Bionic Reading with those reading in the conventional manner. It found no significant difference in the reading rate or comprehension of the former.

Similarly, a 2022 study compared children’s reading of normal text with their reading of text displayed with BeeLine Reader. It found while the latter could help some second-grade readers more rapidly progress through densely formatted text (though not simpler texts), it could hamper comprehension for third-grade readers. Children also said using Beeline Reader was less convenient and no more enjoyable than reading normal text.

And a 2015 study compared normal reading methods to the speed of those reading using Spritz. It found no difference in reading rates but did find evidence Spritz impaired readers’ capacity to recall the text when their comprehension was tested.

Modelling reading

Because there is still comparatively little recent scientific research testing the claims of speed-reading advocates, I decided to examine the theoretical upper limit of reading speed using a computer model of reading called E-Z Reader .

This model simulates the core cognitive processes that control when and where readers move their eyes, including vision, attention, word identification and language processing.

In the first simulation, E-Z Reader was calibrated to the eye movements of a sample of university students reading simple declarative sentences. This simulation provided a baseline reading rate of 307 words per minute – near the upper limit of what’s possible but not unreasonable given the materials.

In the second simulation, the model moved its eyes with perfect accuracy, allowing E-Z Reader to accurately fixate the centres of words and identify them with maximum speed. (This simulation thus affords the main benefit of many reading apps.)

Under these conditions, reading rate increased to 318 words per minute – a modest 3.6% improvement.

In the final simulation, both eye movements and shifts of covert attention from one word to the next were eliminated from the model. This allowed visual and lexical processing of each word to begin immediately after the identification of the previous word. (Thus words could be processed in a manner broadly consistent with Spritz.)

These conditions increased the reading rate by 39.7% to 429 words per minute.

Although this speedup is significant, the simulation also predicted a significant reduction in comprehension. This reduction is consistent with research showing even brief lapses of attention cause comprehension failures – failures that can’t be corrected by simply looking back to reread the text in most speeding reading apps because it’s no longer visible.

The E-Z Reader simulations provide additional insights into how our visual system constrains reading speed in a manner impervious to training and technology.

The collective evidence shows if you want to understand what you’re reading, you’ll need to read at approximately 300 words per minute.