#RMS_036

The dramatic rise in audiobook consumption has prompted researchers to re-evaluate the nature of literary engagement. Traditionalists often characterize listening as a passive alternative to the active decoding required by visual texts. However, recent studies indicate that at the level of meaning construction, the brain makes little distinction between the two formats; the mental simulation of a narrative activates similar neural networks regardless of the input source. Despite this underlying cognitive overlap, functional differences significantly influence how information is processed. Visual reading inherently supports regression—the rapid, often unconscious backward movement of the eyes to re-examine a previous phrase—which is instrumental in parsing dense syntactic structures. Audio, conversely, imposes a relentless linear progression that makes such instantaneous review cumbersome. Consequently, while listening offers a robust medium for narrative absorption, it may prove less effective when the objective is the rigorous analysis of structurally complex arguments. According to the text, why might visual reading be better suited for complex material than listening?