Audiobooks vs. Reading

As someone who prefers the tradition of holding a book in my hand and reading the pages I've been very reluctant to get into audio books. …until recently.  I decided to do a free trial of the audio subscription service Audible and found myself consuming multiple books in just a few days, even hours.  It was great way to multitask and pass time.  Now I find myself indulging in more books than I ever have before, often listening to them multiple times back to back.  I’m surprised at how much I’m enjoying it, which brings me to the topic at hand. In the ever-evolving world of literature, the debate between audiobooks and traditional reading continues to spark interest. Both formats offer unique experiences and benefits, but they also come with their own set of drawbacks. Let's first explore the pros and cons of each:

The Pros and Cons of Reading a Book

Pros:

1. Deep Engagement: Reading a book allows for deep engagement with the text. You can pause, reflect, and re-read passages to fully grasp the content.

2. Improved Focus and Concentration: Traditional reading requires focus and concentration, which can help improve these skills over time.

3. Enhanced Imagination: Reading stimulates the imagination as you visualize characters, settings, and events described in the text.

4. Better Retention: Studies suggest that reading can lead to better retention and comprehension of information compared to listening.

5. No Distractions: Reading a physical book or an e-book typically involves fewer distractions compared to listening to an audiobook on a device that might also have notifications and other apps.

Cons:

1. Time-Consuming: Reading a book can be time-consuming, especially for slow readers or those with busy schedules.

2. Physical Strain: Prolonged reading can cause eye strain and discomfort, particularly if the lighting is poor or the text is small.

3. Portability Issues: Carrying physical books can be cumbersome, especially when traveling or commuting.

4. Limited Multitasking: Reading requires your full attention, making it difficult to multitask.

The Pros and Cons of Audiobooks

Pros:

1. Convenience: Audiobooks are incredibly convenient, allowing you to listen while commuting, exercising, or doing household chores.

2. Multitasking: You can easily multitask while listening to an audiobook, making it a great option for busy individuals.

3. Accessibility: Audiobooks are accessible to people with visual impairments or reading difficulties, providing an inclusive way to enjoy literature.

4. Narration Quality: A good narrator can bring a story to life, adding emotion and depth to the characters and plot.

5. Portability: Audiobooks are stored digitally, making them easy to carry around on your smartphone or other devices.

Cons:

1. Distractions: Listening to an audiobook on a device can lead to distractions from notifications or other apps.

2. Retention Issues: Some people find it harder to retain information from audiobooks compared to reading.

3. Narrator Dependence: The quality of the audiobook experience can heavily depend on the narrator's performance. A poor narrator can detract from the enjoyment of the book.

4. Cost: Audiobooks can be more expensive than physical books or e-books, especially if you don't have a subscription service.

   
   

Conclusion

Ultimately, the choice between audiobooks and traditional reading comes down to personal preference and lifestyle. If you value deep engagement and better retention, traditional reading might be the way to go. On the other hand, if convenience and multitasking are important to you, audiobooks could be a better fit. Both formats have their own unique advantages and can complement each other, offering a versatile approach to enjoying literature.

The Psychology behind reading vs audiobooks

A recent New York Times opinion piece by Daniel Willingham addressed the question of whether listening to a book is the same as reading it. Willingham, a psychologist at the University of Virginia, speaks with authority: He is a leading researcher of reading comprehension. He begins the piece with a frequently asked question: “Is it cheating if I listen to an audiobook for my book club?”

Willingham gives an even-handed answer, doling out points to both the written and the spoken word. He argues that they’re both worthwhile but is careful to note that doesn’t mean they are equivalent. Far from it. I’ve been listening to audiobooks for years now, and while it's not my professional obligation to do so, I’ve also spent quite a bit of time thinking about the trade-offs with listening versus reading. In line with Willingham’s notes in the article, I listen to audiobooks when I wouldn’t otherwise be engaging a book—say, at the gym or while walking. That’s certainly an advantage of listening over reading. But I was surprised to find that Willingham didn’t mention what I consider to be the biggest difference between the two mediums: Engagement.

The critical difference, for me, between reading and listening is that reading is something you do, where listening is something that happens to you. Reading is an act of engagement. The words on the page aren’t going to read themselves, which is something they literally do in an audiobook. If you’re not actively taking in written information, then you’re not going to make progress on the book. Audiobooks, on the other hand, make progress with or without your participation. You can tune out, your mind wandering around the subject at hand, and there will still be forward motion in the story.

Willingham alludes to this point by saying that harder books—“difficult texts” as he calls them—require more engagement. Sometimes you need to go back and reread things. That means that harder material is better suited to reading rather than listening. But I’m not sure I agree with that characterization.

Rather what is better suited to reading is technical material. We would never to think to listen to a math problem. We know that in order to understand it, we have to sit there and dissect it. Similarly, if there’s a step-by-step argument—where A leads to B, and B leads to C, and all of that implies D—which you really want to take in, then you should probably be reading that text, not listening to it.

But this is different than the idea of listening to “difficult” material. For example, I’ve recently been listening to David Graeber’s excellent Debt: The First 5000 Years. Written for a general audience, it’s still a tough read—lots of information, lots of evidence, lots of arguments. And I can assure you: I haven’t picked up on every nuance he’s laid down. But that doesn’t mean that I’m better off going out to get a hard-copy of the book and reading it on the page.

The reason is that, frankly, I’m just not going to do that. It’s not a high enough priority on my reading list. It’s either engage with the material via audiobook or don’t encounter it at all.

And while I haven’t retained every piece of information that he’s presented, I have spent a lot more time thinking about an important topic than I otherwise would. There’s almost no other venue in my life in which the social history of debt would come up. Yet Graeber’s account is totally fascinating. He makes compelling counterintuitive arguments about where debt came from and what its social function is. I’m better off for having contemplated them. I’ve grappled with this difficult topic for hours at this point, sustaining attention toward a problem in a way that I otherwise wouldn't. This fill-in-the-cracks nature of audiobooks is a critical advantage.

Ultimately, I think it’s fair—necessary even—to consider audiobooks and written texts as fundamentally different mediums. Asking which is superior is a bit like asking, “Should I see the movie or read the book?” or even “Should I read the summary article or the entire book?” They are different forms based on the same work. Which one you should engage depends on what you are willing to give to it (time, above all) and what you hope to get out of it.

Perhaps the most crucial difference between an audiobook and a written text is the presence of the narrator.

A written text has no narrator besides the one in your head. And it does its best to render the author's tone faithfully. But anyone who listens to audiobooks knows that the narrator makes a huge difference, just as the casting makes an impact on a play. Listening to American Gods with a full cast versus a single narrator? Are you kidding, is that even a choice? Same with authors, especially actors and comedians, reading their own books. Trevor Noah’s Born a Crime wouldn’t be such a hit if it weren’t read by Noah himself doing all the accents and lending the narrative a this-was-my-life pathos. It builds in a dynamic that just doesn’t exist in the same form with written texts.

So, no, listening to a book isn’t cheating. Depending on the performance of the text, it might even be the better option. And you shouldn’t just limit yourself to “easy” works like popular memoirs or Jack Reacher novels if your interests range beyond them. At the end of the day, time spent contemplating new ideas and experiencing new worlds is what matters. And if audiobooks open new ideas and worlds for you, then that’s all that counts.

Audiobooks vs. Reading: Which is Better for You?

In the ever-evolving world of literature, the debate between audiobooks and traditional reading continues to spark interest. Both formats offer unique experiences and benefits, but they also come with their own set of drawbacks. In this blog post, we'll explore the pros and cons of each to help you decide which format suits your lifestyle and preferences best.