4 ms·

I don't think that is the case. Trained people will go A -> C. Also careless people will go A -> C, because it is easier to make a mistake when skipping the par

by Scea91 10y ago

I don't think that is the case. Trained people will go A -> C. Also careless people will go A -> C, because it is easier to make a mistake when skipping the partial steps.

ergothus 10y ago
I read a book where they talked about a Boeing (I think) pilot training exercise. They constructed checklists for new pilots of what to do in various situations, gathered from their best pilots (likely not exclusively their best, my memory is fallible). These lists worked very well - but they noticed their best pilots didn't exactly follow the list. The book I was reading made a point that early learning on a topic is rote (You do this then this because you are supposed to), while advanced practitioners _intuit_ . "I'll check this because it feels like that kind of problem, and if that isn't it I'll hit the other more likely things in turn or question my assumptions, but I don't think those steps out explicitly, I just do them". That certainly matches my programming experience, though my anecdote does not data make. IIRC, this book was focused on how to improve skills, and was making the point that you can't expect to jump straight to intuit without experience, you have do rote first. So in this example, "smart" people will go straight from A->C, people with only moderate experience will have to go A->B->C, people with enough experience will go from A->C, and careless people MIGHT end up A->C, but more likely never made it to B and so can't even get to C from where they are. Thus the appeal of "brain training" - people want to up their ability to intuit with less experience, and they feel that training can do it like most skills. This study (I've not yet read article) seems to be saying "no, it doesn't work that way". Assuming the headline and study are correct, it's shame but I don't feel people should be mocked for feeling it was worth a try. There are certainly a number of other studies that show forced mental effort helps avoid degradation at a minimum. (I recall a study about Bridge delaying Alzheimers as an example, though I can't say anything about how well that study has held up).
- toomanybeersies 10y ago
  This is how aeroplanes fall out of the sky. Pilots think they know more than the engineers, and decide to skip the checklist, where the checklist includes a very rare edge case that the pilot has never encountered.
  - ebrenes 10y ago
    Reminds me of this case where airlines routinely skipped a step during maintenance because it took too much time. Skipping that step in the manufacturer's process ended up costing 273 people their lives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191#Engine_separation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191#E...
- restofus 10y ago
  Are you referring to space fortress [1]? [1] https://www.brainturk.com/space-fortress https://www.brainturk.com/space-fortress

by Scea91 10y ago

I don't think that is the case. Trained people will go A -> C. Also careless people will go A -> C, because it is easier to make a mistake when skipping the partial steps.

ergothus 10y ago

I read a book where they talked about a Boeing (I think) pilot training exercise. They constructed checklists for new pilots of what to do in various situations, gathered from their best pilots (likely not exclusively their best, my memory is fallible). These lists worked very well - but they noticed their best pilots didn't exactly follow the list. The book I was reading made a point that early learning on a topic is rote (You do this then this because you are supposed to), while advanced practitioners _intuit_ . "I'll check this because it feels like that kind of problem, and if that isn't it I'll hit the other more likely things in turn or question my assumptions, but I don't think those steps out explicitly, I just do them". That certainly matches my programming experience, though my anecdote does not data make. IIRC, this book was focused on how to improve skills, and was making the point that you can't expect to jump straight to intuit without experience, you have do rote first. So in this example, "smart" people will go straight from A->C, people with only moderate experience will have to go A->B->C, people with enough experience will go from A->C, and careless people MIGHT end up A->C, but more likely never made it to B and so can't even get to C from where they are. Thus the appeal of "brain training" - people want to up their ability to intuit with less experience, and they feel that training can do it like most skills. This study (I've not yet read article) seems to be saying "no, it doesn't work that way". Assuming the headline and study are correct, it's shame but I don't feel people should be mocked for feeling it was worth a try. There are certainly a number of other studies that show forced mental effort helps avoid degradation at a minimum. (I recall a study about Bridge delaying Alzheimers as an example, though I can't say anything about how well that study has held up).

toomanybeersies 10y ago
This is how aeroplanes fall out of the sky. Pilots think they know more than the engineers, and decide to skip the checklist, where the checklist includes a very rare edge case that the pilot has never encountered.
- ebrenes 10y ago
  Reminds me of this case where airlines routinely skipped a step during maintenance because it took too much time. Skipping that step in the manufacturer's process ended up costing 273 people their lives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191#Engine_separation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191#E...
restofus 10y ago
Are you referring to space fortress [1]? [1] https://www.brainturk.com/space-fortress https://www.brainturk.com/space-fortress