Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Biotech Science

Proof That Practice Does Make Perfect 142

Posted by Soulskill from the its-just-like-falling-off-a-bike dept.
eldavojohn sends us an article about a discovery by Carnegie Mellon researchers that explains why repetitive studying or training is effective. Previous research had suggested the opposite, which ran counter to nearly everyone's personal experience. Scientists hope that this information will help us to learn more about diseases which affect the memory, such as Alzheimer's. From the article: "In a series of experiments the researchers blocked different receptors, including NMDA, to see the receptors' effect on long-term neural stimulation. They found that while the NMDA receptor is required to begin neural strengthening, a second neurotransmitter receptor -- the metabotropic glutamate (mGlu) receptor -- comes into play after this first phase of cellular learning. ...blocking mGlu receptors caused strengthening to stop."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Proof That Practice Does Make Perfect More

Proof That Practice Does Make Perfect

Comments Filter:

  • I think they're looking at this the wrong way ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) on Friday January 04, 2008 @02:23AM (#21906706)
    ... blocking mGlu receptors caused strengthening to stop.

    What I want to know is, how many people block their own mGlu receptors? I mean, there are an awful lot of people that just do not seem capable of learning from experience. Maybe they should be concentrating on finding a drug that will unstick those people's mGlu's.

    • Re:I think they're looking at this the wrong way . (Score:5, Funny)

      by User 956 ( 568564 ) on Friday January 04, 2008 @02:25AM (#21906716) Homepage
      What I want to know is, how many people block their own mGlu receptors? I mean, there are an awful lot of people that just do not seem capable of learning from experience.

      So *that* explains the 2004 election. It all makes sense now.
      • This is a bit offtopic, but...

        So *that* explains the 2004 election. It all makes sense now.

        I think you just proved your parent comment's sig....

        Oh the irony.

        Back on-topic; The difference between scientists and politicians is that, by and large, when the result doesn't match the hypothesis, the scientist will retool the experiment around a different hypothesis, while the politician will just stubbornly and hardheadedly insist that the result is non-typical and change nothing.

        I'm going to assume also, that yo

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by foobsr ( 693224 )
          the scientist will retool the experiment around a different hypothesis

          More like 'transform the data to make it fit to the hypothesis', not only for mundane reasons like timelines, general pressure etc. .

          For a broader scope, read KUHN, 'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions'.

          CC.

    • Instant +5 Insightful: just say "All Americans suck because {insert generalization here}"


      Hmm.... Let me try.... "All Americans suck because they fall for .sigs like the above."

      How'd I do???

      -Mike

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Tesen ( 858022 )
      Is it possible that mGlu receptors can vary between the different areas of the brain? We have parts of the brain (enter proper phrase here, hey I am a CS major...) responsible for sight, hearing etc. What if the MGlu receptors are more efficient in these areas of the brain for top athletes? But for the rest of us, our hand eye coordination (not to mention reflexes etc.) suffer because of the MGlu receptors do not interact with the appropriate neurotransmitter as well? Or am I totally off base here?

      Tes
    • Before you go off looking to alter the biology before you understand the evolutionary reason for it, first ask the question "why do many people block their own MGlu receptors?"...you may discover that there is one if not many advantages to doing so.

      Personally I don't learn from repetition, at least not of the type described. I learn by applying knowledge, aka experimentation... which is repeatedly using a concept in a variety of ways until enough of it's aspects are internalized that I can make a mental mod
      • Even so, as long as there's no long term effect I'd be happy to drink a PowerMem(TM)

        And if you're up late studying for that early-morning final exam, try new extra-strength CRAMboost ... you'll forget you ever knew how to forget!
  • Carnegie Mellon researchers that explains why repetitive studying or training is effective. Previous research had suggested the opposite

    Previous researchers? You mean like Pavlov? Oh wait

  • The importance of this can't be lost on everyone.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by shaitand ( 626655 ) on Friday January 04, 2008 @02:43AM (#21906800) Journal
    Granted I'm a layperson and may have misunderstood what I just read but could I really be the only one googling for a readily available, safe, fast acting, and short lived mGlu inhibitor. Granted you probably don't want to pick any neuro chemicals to do without but inhibiting mGlu during short term study sessions.

    By all means correct me if I am misunderstanding or better yet, if you know of that inhibitor.

    • Granted I'm a layperson and may have misunderstood what I just read but could I really be the only one googling for a readily available, safe, fast acting, and short lived mGlu inhibitor. Granted you probably don't want to pick any neuro chemicals to do without but inhibiting mGlu during short term study sessions.

      By all means correct me if I am misunderstanding or better yet, if you know of that inhibitor.

      Scratch that, reverse it all. Otherwise I stand firmly by my statement.

      • Scratch that, reverse it all. Otherwise I stand firmly by my statement.

        That's alright, I think I understood you better the second time. ;)
        • What is interesting is the best way I found to get a dose of mGlu is to eat msg just before trying to memorize something. Perhaps we have found the secret to Asian memory eh? ;) Course if it's too large a dose it will act as a neurotoxin.
          • So... Take out, not all you can eat! I knew I was going wrong somewhere.

            Is there a mGlu-suppressant in double-cheeseburgers? That would explain just about everything.

  • just training (Score:2, Insightful)

    by rastoboy29 ( 807168 ) *
    Anyone who's ever had to rely in a serious way on their training can tell you this is true.

    Say you buy a gun for protection, but you don't practice with it, never think about it. How well do you think you're going to do when you need it in a life threatening situation? Frankly, you'd be better off without a gun at all because as likely as not the assailant would take it away from you and use it against you.

    I think "most people's intuition" is that rote learning doesn't work well, not repet

    • Who associates "intuition", "study" and "learning" with guns?
      You must be one of these American macho cowboys. (I'm one of these pantsy Europeans)

      I'd expect a car-analogy for slashdot, or a reference to absense of sexual activity and masturbation.

    • Re:just training (Score:4, Funny)

      by digitalhermit ( 113459 ) on Friday January 04, 2008 @07:42AM (#21908026) Homepage
      I hate the move "The Karate Kid" for many reasons, but there was one true thing. After practicing for (supposedly) hours, at the end of the movie the kid was able to block or hit someone because he'd learned a particular move through repetition. After taking a year of karate, I was joking around with a friend and sparring in the office. He did some feints, aborted punches, almost kicks... I did the same. Then at one point time seemed to stand still. I felt - rather than knew - that he was about to throw a punch. It's almost as if I was playing a video game where the bad guy did the same thing over and over again. He threw the punch....

      And while trying to block it, I knocked my glasses of my head with own hand and sent them hurtling to the ground...

      And still in slow motion I tried to catch them...

      And fell...

      The fall seemed to last forever.

      And of course there was a cute girl watching.

      In my mind I'd gone over a hundred times what would happen if I had to defend myself against a bunch of ruthless thugs while she was there. But for some reason it didn't happen. Instead of some Matrix-like martial arts sequences that I'd rehearsed a thousand times in my mind, I fell on my ass and almost broke my glasses and it looked like I'd punched myself to cause it.

  • This isn't as obvious as it looks (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 04, 2008 @03:06AM (#21906900)
    Most people will agree that practice makes perfect. If you ask them which is more important, practice or talent, they will say that talent determines the degree of ultimate achievement. This, and other recent research, says they're wrong. Talent is highly over rated. Studies of experts and expert behavior show that a certain kind of practice produces talent.

    Just doing something a lot doesn't necessarily produce better ability. For instance one may play an hour of chess every day for years and never get much better. What is needed is 'deliberate practice'. Deliberate practice is methodical and involves learning from feedback. It is reflected in the old adage: "Practice doesn't make perfect; perfect practice makes perfect."

    http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ768512&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ768512 [ed.gov]

    Ericsson cites a study of musicians studying at university. Their professors were asked to rate the students' chances of making it as a symphony musician. The correlation with previous practice was very strong. Those who would become symphony musicians had practiced 10,000 hours before they got to university. The second group, who wouldn't likely make it had practiced 7500 hours or less. A third group who would become music teachers had only practiced around 2500 hours.

    Ericsson gives many examples of research that point out that deliberate practice is by far more important than 'talent'. Most people having trouble believing that.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by theheadlessrabbit ( 1022587 )
      i must say, I agree with that 100% what we call 'talent' is the end result of practice.

      I am an artist, (abstract painter) and based on my recent critical and commercial success, I am led to be believe that I am a rather good artist.

      people will often come up and say to me, "oh, I wish I had your talent..."

      but, I grew up on a rough street, I couldn't go outside without being beaten senseless. My parents couldn't afford video games or computers, so I stayed inside and drew and painted all the time. But I d
      • Don't denigrate yourself. You have an innate talent and you practiced with a deliberate intent. You didn't sit and contentedly draw stick figures for 44K hours. I too am an artist, although I sculpt. There are those who will never in their lifetimes, regardless of the hours put in, be able to sculpt well. They simply don't have the innate spatial abilities. That's what talent is, underlying abilities.

        You have them, otherwise you'd be drawing extremely fine stick figures.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Arnonymous Coward ( 1208208 )
      Similar results have been found in Chess Grandmasters [wiley.com], Mathematicians (Gustin 1985), and world-class athletes (Helsen et al 1998). Many people look at the greats like Euler, Newton, Bobby Fischer, Ronaldinho*, etc, and think "oh, they did what they did because of such great natural talent," but in reality those guys worked HARD. Certainly some people are incapable of their achievement - mentally retarded people, or those who have developed a learned helplesness in the face of tough problems - but after som

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Arnonymous Coward ( 1208208 )

        Whoops, reposting with correct formatting:

        Similar results have been found in Chess Grandmasters [wiley.com], Mathematicians (Gustin 1985), and world-class athletes (Helsen et al 1998).

        Many people look at the greats like Euler, Newton, Bobby Fischer, Ronaldinho*, etc, and think "oh, they did what they did because of such great natural talent," but in reality those guys worked HARD. Certainly some people are incapable of their achievement - mentally retarded people, or those who have developed a learned helplesness i

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Kazrath ( 822492 )
      I disagree with your assessment. It is pretty safe to say that not every person is created equal. Some have natural biological advantages in their physical and/or mental capacities. Practice or Training will allow a person to reach their maximum potential but it will not allow a non-talented person to achieve greatness. Your theory in effect would dictate that there be no professional level sports players or everyone in school taking the same classes would always end up with the same scores. Obviously,
    • You are taking something on the level of a neuron and using that as evidence of something macroscopic. It just doesn't work like that. "Talent" is something that would involve many brain areas working together. This evidence does not support what you are suggesting.

      Something like "learning to playing chess" has no business being discussed on the neuronal level.

      This evidence doesn't even support what the summary is suggesting. Learning (in the popular -- not neuroscientific -- sense) does not make any sense
  • Previous research had suggested the opposite, which ran counter to nearly everyone's personal experience.

    What could have possibly have contradicted a learning curve such as "the more I play, the better I get"?
    • Cognitive sciences go deeper than your simplistic example (not to take away from your otherwise perfectly acceptable premise). It is commonly accepted ("as previous research had suggested") that rote memorization and repitition don't really do a whole lot for cognition. Memorizing and analyzing are two very different skill sets indeed.
    • I wouldn't know, except one of our armchair specialists had a nice comment above (hooray for reading 60+ comments so far, only have of which are repeated!)

      Previous studies have shown that repetitive behavior weakens synaptic pathways in specific parts of the brain (initially). Results like that make you wonder WTF is going on, if someone excels from practice their synapses should have been strengthened.

      This study found that a second compound (later) strengthens specific synaptic pathways (slightly dif

  • No, It Does Not (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Bios_Hakr ( 68586 ) <xptical@@@gmail...com> on Friday January 04, 2008 @03:26AM (#21906980)
    Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect.

    If you do the same bad thing over and over, all you get is a bad habit. If you record, analyze, correct, and repeat all your actions, you will get better.

    I fly RC helis and airplanes. When doing pattern flying, I equip my birds with a GPS (garmin forerunner). After a practice session, I import the data into Google Earth and try and find out why my loops aren't round or why my vertical lines are not straight.

    Lots of golfers record themselves at the driving range. After, they can overlay their swing with that of the Club Pro or another golfer and see exactly what they are doing wrong.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by foobsr ( 693224 )
      Perfect practice makes perfect.

      Which implies that something that deserves the attribute 'perfect' does exist, which I doubt. Thus I would rather opt for 'Good practice gives you a chance to improve'.

      After, they can overlay their swing with that of the Club Pro or another golfer and see exactly what they are doing wrong.

      Though I apply a similar feedback-technique in order to improve (not for golf, but that is not relevant), I doubt (and I am also told so) that this is very effective, as it introduce
  • ... comes out that "proves" the opposite

  • WRONG! as my cello teacher used to say.... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Perfect practice makes perfect. Without method you are simply forming bad habits...
    • I often go back to what someone once said,
      Practice makes permanent

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by initialE ( 758110 )
      "Practice makes permanent" is another one I've heard.
    • While I love your oft used cliche, I prefer, "focused practice makes perfect". I'm a semi-pro musician (I make money, but only as secondary income) and I can tell you practicing perfectly with no goal in sight is wasted practice.
  • How do I attain the Perfect Mind? Where is my Zen? Repetition? Innate or God Given? I will gladly suffer schizophrenia to out nerd you.

  • Tagged as 'duh'? Really? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Skrapion ( 955066 ) <skorpion@@@firefang...com> on Friday January 04, 2008 @04:29AM (#21907244) Homepage
    Could everybody who tagged this as 'duh' explain to me exactly how you felt it was obvious that while the NMDA receptor is required to begin neural strengthening, the mGlu receptor causes strengthening to stop?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by yoprst ( 944706 )
      Sure. You should read it like this:
      eldavojohn sends us an article about a discovery by Carnegie Mellon researchers that explains why repetitive studying or training is effective.....
      From the article:
      "In a series of experiments the researchers bla-bla-bla, bla bla, bla bla ...
      ...bla to stop"
      Duh!
    • It isn't new knowledge.

  • Quick learning? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Mushdot ( 943219 )

    As well as helping understand learning problems, maybe this kind of research could pave the way for increased speed of learning, a bit like in the Matrix where Neo learns Kung Fu.

  • Repeatedly doing a research makes the results better.

  • The 30,000 hour test (Score:4, Informative)

    by gelfling ( 6534 ) on Friday January 04, 2008 @07:59AM (#21908116) Homepage Journal
    I remember reading that many experts in expertise, if there is such a thing, believe that in order to master something, like a musical instrument or painting or an academic study you need about 30,000 hrs of training and practice. That's about 8 hrs a day for 10 years.
  • I've tended to notice that for me, how often I practice also has a bearing on my perfecting a task - and then, how often I use said skill in practice. Repetition strengthens specific neural pathways, I think there's no doubt of that - the more often you perform a specific action, the more neurotransmitters flow between specific neurons, the stronger that bond becomes. On the flipside, disuse weakens those pathways, and when you go to access them again, they may not even be there. As an amusing anecdote,

  • Glutamate, huh? That would be the G in MSG. Interestingly there has been recent research that has confirmed some long-held beliefs that there is a fifth taste (in addition to sweet, sour, salty and bitter) which has been called 'unami' link [foodcandy.com]

    You wouldn't expect MSG to raise brain glutamate levels, though, as ionized amino acids have a hard time crossing the blood-brain barrier. But I imagine that there are some chemists out there presently working on a food additive that can be marketed as not only mak

  • She: I'm perfect!
    He: I'm practice! ...I think I saw this in Voo Doo, MIT's humor magazine, in the 1960s, but it's probably much older than that.

  • For a difficult course I typically read the book, then highlight, then if its really hard make notes on the things I read twice.

    Its time consuming but saved my butt in business law and other courses that requires a vast amount of memorization and knowledge.

    Also when I was a science major I wrote down the period table and lists of ions 10x like spelling in elementary school.

    IT works.

  • I pick up most non-technical subjects easily, but anything that involves mathematics I have to practice, practice, practice.

    I filled notebooks for algebra, geometry, trigonometry, and basic physics classes with example equations and practice problems - it was the only way I could be sure I would remember them at test time.

    And then I would promptly forget them. Although it wouldn't take as long as the first time I learned how to solve a quadratic equation, I couldn't do it unless I had an example to wor

  • I can pick up most things just by observing. There are exceptions however like reading music.

    so, educators who like people to "practice" their boring subjects, listen up. busy work and repetition are different.

  • ... So... they proved learning... wow... today I proved my 30 year study that when I turn my eyes towards an object I can see it... what a revelation.
  • FYI, so-called "neural network software" has been exploiting this kind of repetitive neural strengthening for years. It's called Hebbian learning, in honor of Donald Hebb, who first described it in 1949 [hmc.edu]. Not everyone believes that neural net software corresponds to anything really happening in the brain, it just works and produces useful results. I suppose this article could be used to motivate the biological "truth" of Hebbian learning.
  • My old boss, who was a scratch golfer used to remind me as I was hacking away on the course: "Practice doesn't make perfect...practice makes permanent."
  • Otherwise, why do some Americans still believe Iraq is involved in 9/11? Or that Iraq has WMD? Or that America has the "best" healthcare system? Ceaseless repetiton by the government and the right-wing media is "practice" for the consumers of the government / mass media swill, and what these consumers "learn" is usually far from the actual facts. And with enough repetition of "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques", half the people at GitMo probably thinks they were part of the 9/11 plot.
  • TCP/IP for your brain.
  • The easiest way to learn is by Positive Transference, which is by incorporating what you want to learn into what you already know. If you want to learn French and like music, then listen and sing french songs as against studying french grammar.
  • Most educators can tell you that practice does NOT make perfect; practice makes permanent. Practice only makes "perfect" when one practices what is perfect (or correct.)

Slashdot Top Deals

Business is a good game -- lots of competition and minimum of rules. You keep score with money. -- Nolan Bushnell, founder of Atari

Close