Does listening to an audiobook count as reading it?

Answer 1

I guess I disagree with most of the other answers. Listening to audiobook in my opinion absolutely does count as reading it. I believe as a listener I get more out of the audio book than I would from reading it. Inflection and cadence of the narrator add something extra that I can't get from traditionally reading it.

Answer 2

No. I think they're completely different brain process with different benefits. Personally, I enjoy the feeling of churning through a book and creating a whole mental world with nobody but the words' help more, but listening to audiobooks can lead to captivating, gratifying roadtrips.

Answer 3

Yes it does, study after study shows that the same parts of your brain are being used when you are reading a book as well as listening to a audiobook. Also people who have dyslexic, ADHD, etc. are greatly benefited by this as they can comprehend books in a whole new sense with works for them! They are no longer feel left out of the book scene and can have these amazing experiences and benefits anyone else has when reading! It really is just a life changing thing for them, it's like having the keys for a door that used to be locked! Not even mentioning the education aspect of this. Even for people without these conditions audiobooks can help reading comprehension, speed, memory and almost every other aspect of reading! With that said it all depends on the person, if you think you get more out of reading a physical book, read a physical book! If you think you get more out of listening to audiobook, listen to audiobook! But yes, overall reading and audiobook are most definitely equal!

Answer 4

No, I don't think so. Audiobooks are great, you are still absorbing the story while able to multitask by walking the dog, doing chores, etc. , But I think reading a book and listening to a book are two different experiences.

Answer 5

Yes, listening to an audiobook count as reading.

Answer 6

In my own opinion, it doesn’t because when you read an audio book, it’s hard to understand the book if you can’t see it for yourself.

Answer 7

yes its reading

Answer 8

yes it

Answer 9

how

Answer 10

yes

Answer 11

Listening to an audio book is exactly like reading print.

Answer 12

It doesn't since you're listening, not reading. Unless you're reading the book while listening to the audiobook which means you're doing both.

Answer 13

yes, you still get the same information even though you arent reading it with your eyes. you still know what happens and you find out the same story line and ending. I myself can't follow along very easily with audiobooks so I prefer physical reading. but do whatever works for you.

Answer 14

Yes

Answer 15

If you are on the go, it will be better than reading it, but if you are in no rush, reading it helps your reading and comprehension skills.

Answer 16

not unless you can "mind travel the web and understand i/o computer language as it pertains to sound.

Answer 17

No

Answer 18

no

Answer 19

It's how blind & visually impaired individuals read.

David Wesson. :)

Answer 20

In my opinion, No. You aren't using the same type of brain function while listening to something, as you are, when visually seeing the same thing. Reading comprehension and Listening/Verbal comprehension are completely different methods of learning.

Answer 21

no because your listening

Answer 22

No if does not count as "reading it" you where hearing someone else reading it so uh no?

Answer 23

tidak

Answer 24

在前面，非常简单地提到战国时期的时代环境。现在我们先来看一下司马迁写《史记》的编导手法，在他的笔下如何描写孟老夫子，这是非常有趣的事。

本来写传记，一个人有一个人的生平事迹，应该分开来，单独地写。但是司马迁往往会把一两个人的列传合起来写，或者连带几个人写成一堆。难道他是为了节省稿纸，节省笔墨吗？不是的，他是把历史上同一类型的人和事，或者类同之中又完全相反的人和事，配合起来写成一篇。我们读了，可以作一强烈的对比，在互相矛盾、相反相成中找出道理，可以自求启发，从历史经验的镜子中，反映出立身处世的准则。

因此，司马迁写孟子，是拿和孟子有相同类型的荀子写作一篇，叫做《孟子荀卿列传》。在这一篇里，他又举了很多与孟子、荀卿类型相反的人物，相互辉映。

看来他好像偷懒省事或者是认为那些人不足以另作一篇传记似的。其实不然，一个文人笔下的传记文章，如果有意乱扯，加上文字渲染的话，小题大作，大可洋洋洒洒，各自构成专篇。可是司马迁的风格，是有他的哲学的、学术的中心思想，他绝不愿意乱来。

所以，他在这篇文章中带出了战国当时一大堆的有名诸子，并非是漫不经心地随意而为，实在是有他聪明绝顶、度金针而不落言诠的妙用。我们读《史记》，几乎和《春秋》三传一样，任何一字一句，绝不可以轻易放过。甚至《史记》中任何一个表，都不是随便绘制的。————《孟子旁通》

Answer 25

I think listening to an audiobook is better, but we all have opinions and we gotta respect them. Although, if you're more of a visual learner its better to read and vice versa

Answer 26

I have listened to over 1000 audio books. But something that never fails to happen is when someone asks me “have you read this book?” And my answer is “yes”, I feel like I’m lying to them because I listened to it and did not technically read it.

With that being stated, no it is not the same as reading it.

Answer 27

I am not sure 🤔. I say yes although it is very different.

Answer 28

Yes

Answer 29

Humans acquire a natural language effortlessly at birth. For most hearing people, that’s spoken language. We speak and listen. Reading and writing is a technology many of us have learned to use, but it’s not our native language. When the technology was in its infancy, relatively speaking—well into the Common Era—people, even when reading alone, would speak the words aloud.

Some studies show that reading interferes with the visual pathway to the brain, making it harder to visualize the stories depicted as they happen. There are those who like to stress how different people are ‘visual learners’, ‘auditory learners’, etc. I think much of this is blown out of proportion; there’s still no getting around the fact that none of us were born readers, while we acquired natural language from infancy.

I’ve seen comments that audiobooks are not enjoyable because they go too slowly—one can read faster than one can listen. My perspective, on the other hand, is that if it’s not worth getting every word of a book, it’s not worth reading at all. A personal experience: I was reading a (print) book, and liked one passage in particular well enough to read it aloud to a friend. In the span of one page, I had found two or three humorous lines that I had missed before when reading it silently; my eye and brain had glanced quickly past them. Even when I read silently, I want to get as much as possible.

There are of course some types of literature which are better read. Reference works, for instance. Scholarly works never intended to be read aloud, particularly those with footnotes and many parenthetical comments. But some works were never really meant to be read silently (e.g. Shakespeare’s plays and sonnets), and yet that is what many people do all the time.

The observation that it’s harder to mark portions to go back to is well founded. However, I find that even when I mark portions in print books, I rarely actually go back to them. I’m more likely to read the whole thing through again (which isn’t very likely considering all the new books I want to read). With audiobooks, on the other hand, you can rate portions of books, even shuffle playback based on which portions I’ve listened to least or which I liked best.

I only recently began to read the Harry Potter series (late to the game!) and I wouldn’t have passed up the experience of hearing Stephen Fry read it to me. It is wonderful. In fact, I think the book must have been meant to be read aloud. There are passages of suspense (the countdown till Harry’s birthday, for instance) that would be utterly spoilt by a straying eye.

With audiobooks, I enter a state of ‘flow’ more often than I do with print books. I especially like to listen while walking; I have found myself wondering where I was when a chapter had finished because of how much I was engrossed in the book

Answer 30

What is the answer