3 ms·

I'm not a scientist, so I might be missing some nuance, but it strikes me that the experiment could indicate a million other things that are not "Ritalin causes

I'm not a scientist, so I might be missing some nuance, but it strikes me that the experiment could indicate a million other things that are not "Ritalin causes the brain to focus on benefits of work rather than its costs". For all I know it could mean the person gets to believe more in their capacity to do the hard tasks. Or it could mean that the person feels less distracted and more willing to engage. Or many other things... Am I missing something?

cpncrunch 5y ago
No, you're absolutely right. Studies like this need to be taken with a grain of salt. Also, until it is replicated, we don't know if there is anything happening here at all.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
filoleg 5y ago
I think your hypothesis about confidence in the last paragraph is right on the mark. Iirc there were studies done trying to assess the same thing with regards to Adderall (aka amphetamine salts, which is used for adhd similarly to Ritalin). The researchers came to that exact same conclusion, that the drug didn’t actually make people smarter, but it gave them an illusion of being more capable, and they ended up performing better due to confidence.[0] 0. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0376871617302983 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03768...
jefftechentin 5y ago
Yeah these findings remind me of a passage from the book "Talent Is Overrated". Thesis of the book is that world class talent is mostly due to hard work over innate ability. He supposes that one way that children develop drives in different directions is some identification of ability (even when it is not there really) in some domain leads adults to heap praise on them for that particular talent, causing a virtuous cycle of work and praise. You can see this in parents who marvel at how great their children are at x, seems to be how kids are pushed. If kids are designed to be pushed to develop their skill sets by the dopamine inducing praise it could be that these drugs work because they tap into that pathway.
- ardit33 5y ago
  I am super skeptical of this. i play sports, and talent is evident. I have played soccer for 20 years and never gone past upper intermediate level. Yet, i have had younger people join, that didn't really know how to play, get really good. Their talent: They were super fast. Track athelete fast. They knew nothing about soccer, but after a year or two of playing, they became better than the players that had been playing for over 10 years. Their advantage: Sheer speed, and fast reflexes. At some point the mantra 'if you try hard enough you will became great', becomes sheer lie. Some people, with given the same amount of training, or even less, became much much better... But, hey, the '10k' hour rule type of books that give false hopes do sell, so the fradulent authors will keep em churning.,
  - jefftechentin 5y ago
    Book was more oriented to explaining world class performance not high school or college. It made a pretty convincing case by going through some really famous examples of excellent young talent (Tiger Woods, Jerry Rice and Mozart). Goes a lot into the studies on the matter and he argues it they paint a pretty clear picture.

cpncrunch 5y ago

No, you're absolutely right. Studies like this need to be taken with a grain of salt. Also, until it is replicated, we don't know if there is anything happening here at all.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

filoleg 5y ago

I think your hypothesis about confidence in the last paragraph is right on the mark. Iirc there were studies done trying to assess the same thing with regards to Adderall (aka amphetamine salts, which is used for adhd similarly to Ritalin). The researchers came to that exact same conclusion, that the drug didn’t actually make people smarter, but it gave them an illusion of being more capable, and they ended up performing better due to confidence.[0] 0. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0376871617302983 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03768...

jefftechentin 5y ago

Yeah these findings remind me of a passage from the book "Talent Is Overrated". Thesis of the book is that world class talent is mostly due to hard work over innate ability. He supposes that one way that children develop drives in different directions is some identification of ability (even when it is not there really) in some domain leads adults to heap praise on them for that particular talent, causing a virtuous cycle of work and praise. You can see this in parents who marvel at how great their children are at x, seems to be how kids are pushed. If kids are designed to be pushed to develop their skill sets by the dopamine inducing praise it could be that these drugs work because they tap into that pathway.

ardit33 5y ago
I am super skeptical of this. i play sports, and talent is evident. I have played soccer for 20 years and never gone past upper intermediate level. Yet, i have had younger people join, that didn't really know how to play, get really good. Their talent: They were super fast. Track athelete fast. They knew nothing about soccer, but after a year or two of playing, they became better than the players that had been playing for over 10 years. Their advantage: Sheer speed, and fast reflexes. At some point the mantra 'if you try hard enough you will became great', becomes sheer lie. Some people, with given the same amount of training, or even less, became much much better... But, hey, the '10k' hour rule type of books that give false hopes do sell, so the fradulent authors will keep em churning.,
- jefftechentin 5y ago
  Book was more oriented to explaining world class performance not high school or college. It made a pretty convincing case by going through some really famous examples of excellent young talent (Tiger Woods, Jerry Rice and Mozart). Goes a lot into the studies on the matter and he argues it they paint a pretty clear picture.