4 ms·

> The well-known 10,000-hour principle, popularized by Malcolm Gladwell, illustrates an important lesson for developers. ... It’s not often I’ll wholesale dism

by _bpgl 8y ago

> The well-known 10,000-hour principle, popularized by Malcolm Gladwell, illustrates an important lesson for developers. ... It’s not often I’ll wholesale dismiss an article on HN because of one sentence, but this is one of those times. The fabulist Gladwell is not credible in general, and his 10,000 hour “rule” can no longer be thought to even remotely approach science, or even fact. The author lost all credibility with this sentence.

EnFinlay 8y ago
I think it's an interesting look at the spread of bad information. When the concept of "everyone is 10,000 hours from being an expert" first surfaced, it was spread far and wide. As time went on and more evidence came out that this wasn't accurate, the NOT of the concept wasn't as interesting, so it wasn't spread nearly as much. Basically, I don't blame people for still thinking it's true or a good rule of thumb. It's usually just used to say "if you want to be good at something, you have to practice", which is true.
- wpietri 8y ago
  Honestly, this makes it worse for me. Practice makes perfect was not exactly a novel concept before Gladwell. The phrase itself has been popular since before the US Civil War: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=practice+makes+perfect&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cpractice%20makes%20perfect%3B%2Cc0 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=practice+makes... I mainly blame Gladwell for this, of course, but people repeating this are definitely getting side-eye from me.
  - EnFinlay 8y ago
    > Practice makes perfect... "Hmm, sounds too cliche" > The well-known 10,000-hour principle, popularized by Malcolm Gladwell, illustrates an important lesson.. "Much better, I've used more words"
arithma 8y ago
When this was discredited, was there alternative research on how people actually accrue skill, or was this just a dismissal of a claim and no alternate information provided? It's a shame if this kind of research is not being done, but obviously, it's understandable that a catch-all "how much experience does any skill need to build for anyone?" is not easily, if at all, answerable.
- kossmoboleat 8y ago
  I only read that Gladwell overemphasized the specific number but that the overall idea is still true. The original research Ericsson was trying to emphasize that long duration of training using deliberate practice are key. There's an episode of the Freakonomics podcast that describe the whole situation and it has interviews with both Gladwell and Ericsson: http://freakonomics.com/podcast/peak/ http://freakonomics.com/podcast/peak/ > ERICSSON: Now, right. Gladwell basically thought that was kind of an interesting magical number and suggested that the key here is to reach that 10,000 hours. I think he’s really done something very important, helping people see the necessity of this extended training period before you reach high levels of performance. But I think there’s really nothing magical about 10,000 hours. Just the amount of experience performing may in fact have very limited chances to improve your performance. The key seems to be that deliberate practice, where you’re actually working on improving your own performance — that is the key process, and that’s what you need to try to maximize.

by _bpgl 8y ago

EnFinlay 8y ago

I think it's an interesting look at the spread of bad information. When the concept of "everyone is 10,000 hours from being an expert" first surfaced, it was spread far and wide. As time went on and more evidence came out that this wasn't accurate, the NOT of the concept wasn't as interesting, so it wasn't spread nearly as much. Basically, I don't blame people for still thinking it's true or a good rule of thumb. It's usually just used to say "if you want to be good at something, you have to practice", which is true.

wpietri 8y ago
Honestly, this makes it worse for me. Practice makes perfect was not exactly a novel concept before Gladwell. The phrase itself has been popular since before the US Civil War: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=practice+makes+perfect&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cpractice%20makes%20perfect%3B%2Cc0 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=practice+makes... I mainly blame Gladwell for this, of course, but people repeating this are definitely getting side-eye from me.
- EnFinlay 8y ago
  > Practice makes perfect... "Hmm, sounds too cliche" > The well-known 10,000-hour principle, popularized by Malcolm Gladwell, illustrates an important lesson.. "Much better, I've used more words"

arithma 8y ago

When this was discredited, was there alternative research on how people actually accrue skill, or was this just a dismissal of a claim and no alternate information provided? It's a shame if this kind of research is not being done, but obviously, it's understandable that a catch-all "how much experience does any skill need to build for anyone?" is not easily, if at all, answerable.

kossmoboleat 8y ago
I only read that Gladwell overemphasized the specific number but that the overall idea is still true. The original research Ericsson was trying to emphasize that long duration of training using deliberate practice are key. There's an episode of the Freakonomics podcast that describe the whole situation and it has interviews with both Gladwell and Ericsson: http://freakonomics.com/podcast/peak/ http://freakonomics.com/podcast/peak/ > ERICSSON: Now, right. Gladwell basically thought that was kind of an interesting magical number and suggested that the key here is to reach that 10,000 hours. I think he’s really done something very important, helping people see the necessity of this extended training period before you reach high levels of performance. But I think there’s really nothing magical about 10,000 hours. Just the amount of experience performing may in fact have very limited chances to improve your performance. The key seems to be that deliberate practice, where you’re actually working on improving your own performance — that is the key process, and that’s what you need to try to maximize.