4 ms·

Fyi... this a 2006 publication. (Not sure why HN submission says (2016).) Being 11 years old isn't an issue because the chess memory observation is interestin

by jasode 9y ago

Fyi... this a 2006 publication. (Not sure why HN submission says (2016).) Being 11 years old isn't an issue because the chess memory observation is interesting data. The age is significant because virtually every pop psychology & brain book in the last 10 years mentions this chess study as one of the anecdotes. (Similar to how all the pop psych books mention the Invisible Gorilla, Marshmallow Experiment, Stanford Prison Experiment, etc)

Bucephalus355 9y ago
Hey want to provide some quick clarification on your point. First, you are dramatically, 110% right that pop psychology books plunder really valuable research such as this for ultimately banal insights that they manage to hide in a 300 page book that could be 10 pages. K. Anders Ericsson, the absolute giant in the field of expertise research, is quite dismissive of Malcolm Gladwell and upset at his mis-interpretations of his work. Go look at his book, "Peak", which goes into depth on this (and funny enough looks like every other stupid pop psychology book, although it is not). Finally, if you want to explore the best research we have from the present through the last 40 years, highly recommend you check out "The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise". It's 40 chapters written by nothing but PhDs. They compare what expertise means across History, Firefighting, Surgery, Ballet, even Truck Driving and Software Design.
- civilian 9y ago
  Got any links for when K. Anders Ericsson slams Gladwell? Was it in a blog post or a podcast or something?
  - Bucephalus355 9y ago
    Just looked at the physical book. I work in DevOps but just in general want to say physical books are great and highly underrated for how quickly you can access info / other things. https://www.dropbox.com/s/mqmmlf1jpdexmav/Gladwell-Peak.jpeg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/mqmmlf1jpdexmav/Gladwell-Peak.jpeg... Lol you'll see in the comments I even wrote "hates Gladwell!". In fairness to Ericsson, he is very civil and it's a very respectable "takedown".

by jasode 9y ago

Bucephalus355 9y ago

Hey want to provide some quick clarification on your point. First, you are dramatically, 110% right that pop psychology books plunder really valuable research such as this for ultimately banal insights that they manage to hide in a 300 page book that could be 10 pages. K. Anders Ericsson, the absolute giant in the field of expertise research, is quite dismissive of Malcolm Gladwell and upset at his mis-interpretations of his work. Go look at his book, "Peak", which goes into depth on this (and funny enough looks like every other stupid pop psychology book, although it is not). Finally, if you want to explore the best research we have from the present through the last 40 years, highly recommend you check out "The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise". It's 40 chapters written by nothing but PhDs. They compare what expertise means across History, Firefighting, Surgery, Ballet, even Truck Driving and Software Design.

civilian 9y ago
Got any links for when K. Anders Ericsson slams Gladwell? Was it in a blog post or a podcast or something?
- Bucephalus355 9y ago
  Just looked at the physical book. I work in DevOps but just in general want to say physical books are great and highly underrated for how quickly you can access info / other things. https://www.dropbox.com/s/mqmmlf1jpdexmav/Gladwell-Peak.jpeg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/mqmmlf1jpdexmav/Gladwell-Peak.jpeg... Lol you'll see in the comments I even wrote "hates Gladwell!". In fairness to Ericsson, he is very civil and it's a very respectable "takedown".