Eat, Pray, Love
It explains. Hardcover files this book as non-fiction. A fact, not a factor: it plays no part in our call.
Either. Don't overthink it
Thin evidence · 100 ratings of this reading, short of the 250 we trust. So the call is made without the recording’s half of the case. Why we hold that line
It genuinely does not matter much: with the reading left out the case is the format alone, and the format is not fighting you either way (between the bottom 34% and the top 23% of our shelf of books for extra work in audio). Pick whichever you will actually finish. Only 100 people have rated the reading, so it is not part of this call either way, and 250 is where we start letting a judgement about a reading move a verdict.
Length does not decide this
12h 51m to listen, at 1×10h 17m to listen, at 1.25×8h 34m to listen, at 1.5×7h 21m to listen, at 1.75×6h 26m to listen, at 2×about 12 hours to readabout 9 hours to readabout 7 hours to readabout 6 hours to readabout 4½ hours to read
The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 368 pages at 30 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 368 pages at 40 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 368 pages at 50 pages an hour, which is about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 368 pages at 65 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 368 pages at 80 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.
Slot → commute-safe
The mark sits a hair past the line, and we have rounded the slot down: on a book where the call itself is a draw, we would rather under-ask for your attention than over-ask for it.
Harder work in audio than Slaughterhouse-Five.
Harder work in audio than 71% of the books we hold.
About as much work in audio as most of the non-fiction we hold.
Harder work in audio than 75% of the long books we hold.
Reading load against listening load
Where that puts this one among the books we hold: in the top 28% of our shelf of books for effort on the page and in the top 29% of our shelf of books for effort in your ears. The middle of the scale is not the middle of the shelf (most books sit below the average on both), so a book at 0.00 is already in the top 43% for effort on the page. Each of the three is measured against the whole shelf separately, so the bottom figure is not the top two subtracted. It is this book’s own distance from the middle.
What the audio disadvantage is made of. Two things and no others: how fast readers say this one moves, and how demanding the reviews we read found it. There is no third: the structural one has no data source, so it contributes nothing rather than being guessed at. Both directions are declared priors we have never fitted against a real verdict, which is the weakest-evidenced part of the whole model.
How the call was made
Where a bar carries ticks, the grey one is the middle of our shelf and a coloured one is a line we publish, cool where we start backing the page, warm where we start backing the recording. The evidence squares at the foot are a different thing: how far each of our four sources went, hatched where there was nothing to measure at all.
- The audio case
- −0.37With the reading left out, this figure is the format alone: the gap between the formats is small but falls on the page side (between the bottom 34% and the top 23% of our shelf of books for extra work in audio). Inside the band where neither side has made its case on this number alone, so the call is settled by what else is on the page.
- Narration payoff
- 0.00The reading took no part in this call. It scored 1.02 below the middle of our shelf of books (the second mark on the bar), but only 100 people have rated it, short of the 250 at which we let a judgement about a reading move a verdict, so it is recorded at 0.00 and the call rests on the book and the format. No line is drawn on this row, because none was applied.
- What is at stake
- −2.41It sits in the bottom 1% of our shelf of books for how well the print crowds think of a book: not a book the crowds are precious about, so there is less to protect and we can be relaxed about it. Blended across 1,870,528 Goodreads ratings and 630 on Hardcover, each scored inside its own population first, and never added together.
For the page
- The crowds’ regard did not reach the line where we protect a first read, this reason did not apply
For the recording
- Too few listeners have rated this reading, so we left the voice out of the call, this reason did not apply
- Audio is neither helping nor fighting this one
- Only 100 listeners have rated this reading, under the 250 we ask for, this reason did not apply
Neither column won it: the two came out level, which is the answer above.
A bigger dot counted for more: the voice and the ear are sized by their share of the sum above, the other two by how much stands behind them. A hatched square is a reason that did not apply here, which is not the same as one that counted for little.
- Evidence
- 0.90How much of the picture we actually have, out of 1.00: four questions, each answered as far as the source could answer it, less anything taken off for reading fewer reviews than we aim to.The reading100 people have rated this reading: enough to lean onThe second sourceHardcover knows this book, with 630 readers there: as good as it getsThe matchHow sure we are that the recording we scored is this book: as good as it getsThe reviewsWe read 300 reviews to judge how demanding it is: as good as it gets
What each crowd complains about
In the reviews we read, how often readers brought it up and how often listeners did, each against what is usual for that same crowd across our whole shelf, which is the grey tick. The track stops at 4×. Listeners are only ever compared with listeners.
Neither crowd brings any of the three up more often than its own crowd usually does. Whatever this book asks of you, its listeners are not saying the format is what makes it hard.
What the two crowds said
Showing the stars as each shop prints them. The two crowds are not measured from the same place: on our shelf Audible’s listeners average 0.35 of a star above Goodreads’ readers, so a recording that is ordinary for Audible can still out-star a book that is genuinely well liked for Goodreads. Switch the toggle to take that difference off.Showing each figure as its distance from its own crowd’s middle on our shelf, in standard deviations, so 0 is a typical book for that crowd. Listeners start 0.35 of a star up, partly because anyone who finishes a twenty-five-hour recording chose it deliberately, and this takes that off. It is not a claim that audio is better, the story figure is still Audible’s own (people rating a story they heard), and none of it moves the verdict above.
100 ratings of this readingstar chartstoo few to draw beside the book’s, and 250 is where we start trusting the shape
overallAudible
overall, pooled by the shop, so we hold no ruler for it
113 ratings · performance and story, as the shop pools them
the performanceAudible
the performance, against Audible’s own crowd
100 ratings
the story, as heardAudible
the story, as heard, against Audible’s own crowd
100 ratings
the book itselfGoodreads
the book itself, against Goodreads’ own crowd
1,870,528 ratings
Every reading we hold
One complete reading of this book, and it is the reading every audio figure above is measured on. If there is another, we have not found it. The shelf grows in reviewed batches, never because somebody searched for a book.
- Elizabeth Gilbertthe one we measured12h 51m10h 17m8h 34m7h 21m6h 26m · One voice · Audible UK and US
- The author reads it
Only 100 people have rated this reading, short of our published bar of 250, so we name it and print no scores for it.
Hear it · Audible’s clip, its length read from them on load
1 other listing we set aside, listed with the reason for eacheach one is sold as this book and is not a complete reading of it
- Elizabeth Gilbert7h 39m6h 07m5h 06m4h 22m3h 50m · 513 ratingsAbridged: it runs 60% of the full reading
The recording these numbers came from
- Runtime
- 12h 51m at 1×
- Read by
- Elizabeth Gilbert
- Kind
- One voice
- ASIN
- B09VQ4R2S4 · Audible UK
- Rated in
- Audible UK and US · 94 + 6 ratings of the performance
- Judged on
- 100 ratings of the narration
- Published
- Bloomsbury Publishing · 2022
Too few people have rated this reading for us to call it our pick (our published bar is 250), so these are its details rather than a recommendation, and Audible sorts a search by newest, so check before you buy. The runtime is the check: if the one in front of you says 12h 51m, that is the reading these numbers describe. “Judged on” is the crowd behind every judgement we make about this reading: the smaller of the performance and story counts, which is why it is a little under the two shop counts added. We do not link out to a shop, and we take nothing if you buy there.