To-be-read (TBR) lists have become a default feature of modern reading. They live in apps, notebooks, screenshots, spreadsheets, and social platforms, growing with every recommendation algorithm, influencer post, and seasonal roundup. What began as a way to track interest has quietly evolved into something closer to an obligation, and for some, guilt.
That shift is partly a matter of scale. As digital reading culture has expanded, so have TBR lists themselves. Goodreads, now owned by Amazon, reports that its users collectively add more than 4 billion books to shelves each year, with Want to Read consistently ranking as the platform’s most populated category. The result is a feedback loop, fueled by reading communities on TikTok, Instagram, and Facebook, that expands TBR lists faster than most readers can keep pace with.
However, reading time has not increased proportionally. According to YouGov, the share of U.S. adults who report reading at least one book per year has remained relatively stable over the past decade, while the average number of books read annually has not shown meaningful growth. In other words, it appears that readers are collecting more titles than ever without gaining more time to read them.
That imbalance is where stress enters the picture.
Behavioral researchers have long noted that unfinished or deferred tasks occupy disproportionate mental space. Psychologists refer to this as the Zeigarnik effect, the tendency for incomplete tasks to remain more salient in our minds than completed ones. While originally studied in work settings, the effect applies equally to leisure activities that become framed as commitments. A growing TBR can function less like a list of possibilities and more like a running inventory of what hasn’t been done.
Reading platforms unintentionally reinforce this pressure. Many track progress publicly, display percentage completion, or surface reminders about books that have been “waiting” the longest. These features borrow from productivity tools, subtly reframing reading as something to manage rather than experience.
Industry observers point to a broader pattern of reader overwhelm related to ever-expanding to-be-read lists. On social reading communities such as Reddit and Facebook, users frequently describe anxiety and stress over large TBR shelves and difficulty keeping up with what they’ve added—sometimes suggesting that the pressure to read everything diminishes their enjoyment of reading itself.
This tension has created a paradox: access to books has never been easier, yet many readers report reading ruts and feeling less relaxed about reading than they once did.
Why Rethinking TBR Culture Matters
The issue isn’t organization. I suspect is more about reader expectations. When a TBR list shifts from a reference tool to a moral ledger, reading loses its role as discretionary time. The stress associated with large TBRs mirrors broader cultural patterns in which leisure activities are increasingly quantified, tracked, and optimized.
Some readers have begun responding by shrinking or abandoning traditional TBR systems altogether. Librarians and reading researchers increasingly recommend short, rotating “next reads” lists, or treating TBRs as archives rather than queues. Others emphasize mood-based selection, noting that reading satisfaction improves when choice reflects current interest rather than prior intention.
For an industry built on love of books, this shift matters. Sustained reading habits depend not on volume, but on pleasure. As reading culture continues to intersect with digital tracking and social visibility, the challenge may be less about discovering what to read and more about letting go of the pressure to read everything.
Thalia Mercer is a writer covering mystery and thriller fiction, with a focus on book-to-screen adaptations and contemporary reading culture. She writes about why certain stories resonate—and how they translate beyond the page.
