210 likes | 326 Views
Causes of expertise. 10,000 hours, or not? Genius, or not?. Article 1. Article 1. “Nonsense” Extreme views: environmental Ericsson et al. are “extreme” Quotes:. Hmm …. Article 1. “Nonsense” Extreme views : environmental Ericsson: Expertise “requires” practice to be 10k hours
E N D
Causes of expertise 10,000 hours, or not? Genius, or not?
Article 1 • “Nonsense” • Extreme views: environmental • Ericsson et al. are “extreme” • Quotes: Hmm…
Article 1 • “Nonsense” • Extreme views : environmental • Ericsson: Expertise “requires” practice to be • 10k hours • Deliberate • “Motivated” • “Falsified by one exception” • Hmm: only the strongest version of the theory would be. • “Exceptions”: Helen Glover (rower); Donald Thomas (high jump); Crissie Wellington (Ironman) • What would constitute “practice” for these events?
Article 1 • “Nonsense” • Extreme views : environmental • The “insidious” claim • Put in the practice • Don’t get the results • Who do you blame? Refer to previous slide…
Article 1 • “Nonsense” • Extreme views : environmental • “Patent nonsense” What – 50-60%? “Highly selected?” See: Questioning the Millennium: A Rationalists Guide to a Precisely Arbitrary Countdown, revised (Harmony Books, 1999). A book on calendars and the idea of the millenium. Ends with a section on autistic calendar savants. ISBN: 0609605410 (hardcover, 208 pages).
Article 1 • “Nonsense” • Extreme views : environmental • Only study experts • These don’t differ in “talent” • Doesn’t mean that talent doesn’t exist • Fair enough • Go further…
Article 1 • “Nonsense” • Extreme views : environmental • Only study experts • These don’t differ in “talent” • Doesn’t mean that talent doesn’t exist • Fair enough • Go further… • If extremely talented individuals were to compete against each other, they’d have to indulge in tremendous amounts of practice to succeed, right? • Only studying experts is a problem
Article 1 • “Nonsense” • Extreme views : environmental • Last point: • What? • Where does Ericsson say anything about genetic limits? • Who’s to say everyone uses these this environment equally? • This is truly patent nonsense
Article 1 • “Nonsense” • Extreme views : hereditarian • Odd – supposed to be refuting extreme hereditarian views, but seems to spend all the time refuting Ericsson’s portrayal of such.
Article 1 • “Nonsense” • Extreme views : hereditarian • Critical periods • Really “sensitive” periods • Fits with practice hypothesis – and the idea of positive feedback and the “building block” approach to learning • Last point
Article 1 • “Nonsense” • Extreme views : hereditarian • Last point • One more swipe at Ericsson • But again, fair enough • (same pt as before)
Article 1 • Common sense • Practice is important • Not everyone will be elite: • Physical limits • Injuries • Early experience/sensitive periods • Aging • Amount of practice doesn’t explain remaining variance in performance among the elite
Article 1 • Science • Early experience • Not born with much • Everything is built from birth on • By the age of 6 movement within cohort over next 12 years becomes less likely • (note – this does not make it genetically endowed) • Individual differences • Inter- and intra-…between and within • Categorizes as abilities – back to square one!
Article 1 • Science • Traits and situations • What the individual has, versus their situation • Again, what they have need not be genetically defined • Talent ID • Yep, skipped forward • Talent ≠ genetic endowment • Could be just the early experiences we’ve mentioned before • Simonton (1999, Psychological Review): “Any package of personal characteristics that accelerates the acquisition of expertise” • These can be enhanced through some gene supporting certain features, but the manner by which the gene supports any element is indirect
Article 1 • For more, see
Article 2 • Variation in performance rating and deliberate practice • See also Polgar sisters… • The father wrote a book – Bringing up genius… • Theme was that genius was made, not born!
Article 2 • Variation in hours practiced (alone) and performance rating in chess
Article 2 • Variation in hours performance rating deliberate practice in music (see details)
Article 2 • Generally, 30% of variation in performance rating was due to deliberate practice • Authors suggest this implies variation in number of hours taken to attain expertise • Factors suggested to be associated with this variation: • Starting age • Intelligence • ! • Personality • ! • Genes • ! • Factors not suggested • Early experience? Mentorship? Supporting environments? Readiness to learn?