4 ms·
> It's nonsense. The 10 year / 10,000 hours seems to come up frequently - care to cite or link to some interesting counters? (genuine curiosity)
by cloverich 14y ago
> It's nonsense.
The 10 year / 10,000 hours seems to come up frequently - care to cite or link to some interesting counters? (genuine curiosity)
- Jabbles 14y agoIt's an arbitrary amount of time that relatively few people are able to dedicate to any skill. The rare people that do are known as "experts". But you won't be as "expert" as someone with 20,000 hours. IMO it's a tautological phrase based on your chosen definition of "expert". That's why I dislike it. Pilots' experience is often measured in hours. 10,000 is nothing special (10 years?), but to a lay person they sure know a lot about piloting, and at a dinner party I'd defer to them as an "expert" on anything to do with flying.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- hluska 14y agoOne of the big articles in the field is by K. Anders Ericsson and Neil Charness. It is titled "Expert Performance - Its Structure and Acquisition." You can find a copy at: http://stuff.mit.edu/afs/athena.mit.edu/course/6/6.055/readings/ericsson-charness-am-psychologist.pdf http://stuff.mit.edu/afs/athena.mit.edu/course/6/6.055/readi... Alternately, you could read "Deliberate Practice and Acquisition of Expert Performance: An overview". It is also by Ericsson and you can find a copy here: http://www.cogsci.rpi.edu/~vekslv/classes/cogeng2010/lecture-03-15-expertise/part2-dp.pdf http://www.cogsci.rpi.edu/~vekslv/classes/cogeng2010/lecture...