4 ms·

The title is somewhat misleading - I assumed they discovered a new type of drug that was enhancing performance. Actually, it's just the first study to actually

The title is somewhat misleading - I assumed they discovered a new type of drug that was enhancing performance. Actually, it's just the first study to actually bear out the (not particularly shocking) conclusion that drugs that enhance cognitive performance help in a game that depends on cognitive performance.

scott_s 10y ago
I think you're not impressed because you already assumed these drugs enhance cognitive performance. That, I think, is what the study is really about: do these particular drugs actually enhance cognitive performance? But, in order to test that, they need to pick a cognitive task, and in this case, the cognitive task happens to be chess.
- the_watcher 10y ago
  No, I was just commenting that the title of the article was misleading to me. The study didn't find performance enhancing drugs, it found a link between drugs that allegedly enhance cognitive performance and an activity that requires high cognitive performance. Perhaps it's just semantics, but the findings of the study just weren't the type that I expected based on the title.
  - scott_s 10y ago
    And your initial comment sounded to me like you were taking it for granted that such drugs do indeed enhance cognitive performance - which I don't think is a given.
    - the_watcher 10y ago
      In that case, my fault for not being clear. You're right, I do lean towards the conclusion that some of those drugs enhance cognitive performance (particularly the ones that are used for treatment of ADHD), but you're also right that currently, there isn't sufficient evidence to treat that as a given.
    - saurik 10y ago
      I had the same confusion. I would have then said "New Study Finds Evidence for Cognitive Performance-Enhancing Drugs: They Help with Chess" or something. The way "for Chess" is tacked on the end makes it seem like the most important detail: I would argue just reading this title would make one go "oh, I guess we already had these for other tasks, but this is the first one for Chess". In fact, as worded, my second option was "what they really mean is that people are using them in the wild and they are what is making or breaking tournements", not "we have just discovered it is possible".
Nomentatus 10y ago
The researchers were surprised - it's been assumed that these drugs compensated for exhaustion and illness and restored a status quo; maybe this is an example of the proven fact that experts underperform laypeople when evaluating novel situations that only border on their expertise.

scott_s 10y ago

I think you're not impressed because you already assumed these drugs enhance cognitive performance. That, I think, is what the study is really about: do these particular drugs actually enhance cognitive performance? But, in order to test that, they need to pick a cognitive task, and in this case, the cognitive task happens to be chess.

the_watcher 10y ago
No, I was just commenting that the title of the article was misleading to me. The study didn't find performance enhancing drugs, it found a link between drugs that allegedly enhance cognitive performance and an activity that requires high cognitive performance. Perhaps it's just semantics, but the findings of the study just weren't the type that I expected based on the title.
- scott_s 10y ago
  And your initial comment sounded to me like you were taking it for granted that such drugs do indeed enhance cognitive performance - which I don't think is a given.
  - the_watcher 10y ago
    In that case, my fault for not being clear. You're right, I do lean towards the conclusion that some of those drugs enhance cognitive performance (particularly the ones that are used for treatment of ADHD), but you're also right that currently, there isn't sufficient evidence to treat that as a given.
  - saurik 10y ago
    I had the same confusion. I would have then said "New Study Finds Evidence for Cognitive Performance-Enhancing Drugs: They Help with Chess" or something. The way "for Chess" is tacked on the end makes it seem like the most important detail: I would argue just reading this title would make one go "oh, I guess we already had these for other tasks, but this is the first one for Chess". In fact, as worded, my second option was "what they really mean is that people are using them in the wild and they are what is making or breaking tournements", not "we have just discovered it is possible".

Nomentatus 10y ago

The researchers were surprised - it's been assumed that these drugs compensated for exhaustion and illness and restored a status quo; maybe this is an example of the proven fact that experts underperform laypeople when evaluating novel situations that only border on their expertise.