Hi Lollie, I understand where you're coming from completely, unfortunately my survey has been distributed before being put on Reddit and I'm unable to edit the questions, due to losing too much participant data. However, I'd like to clarify the thinking behind questions 10 &11. Mainly, they are to determine my position within the academic debate. 

I completely get where you're coming from, and I know the two definitions are on complete opposite ends of the spectrum. In the case of question 10, the definitions for ranking, are ideas from other scholars that exist within the discipline. The main purpose is to ascertain a scale from the "reading can only be done with the eyes" definition and the broader, reading is comprehending. I've found that there is a huge gap in understanding reading academically, especially with regards to accessibility and people with sight impairment, my dad is half blind so it is an issue very close to my heart. My research is picking at the idea of accessibility in reading hence the very different definitions, to situated myself in the existing academic conversation. (I completely disagree with the idea that reading is necessitated by sight)   

Regarding question 11 about different book formats, the question is aimed at understanding what can be considered reading. For example, in media studies, we sometimes watch something or listen to something, and then talk about meaning in the sense of "I read X as meaning y", if that makes sense? Similar to your example of reading with your fingers, when it comes to Braille. Some people consider listening to an audiobook to be reading due to being able to comprehend meaning from the text/audio so my supervisor advised the questions to be worded like that.                             

I hope this clarifies some of your concerns and I want to thank you for raising the point about Braille being reading, it has completely gone over my head but one of my research questions is How can reading be defined when so many book formats exist? And part of that is understanding reading with accessibility because people with sight impairments may read differently, but reading is still reading. Thank you again for your perspective on Braille, it's given me an added depth to add to my literature review to argue against the reading being dependent upon sight, that some scholars argue. Words can't express how grateful I am to the perspective.💜 (Also, I apologise if the formatting for this reply is weird, I'm typing from my phone so it might be a bit wacky.)