Here's a comment on a comment about a video within a video to say that I was distracted by your comment and needed to rewatch 😵‍💫😄

The switches aren't really needed. No function.

Amen

Thanks! I've done some videos where I haven't been as diligent. But I think it's important, especially if people want to read or reference the academic articles. Also helps to make sure I'm not just making stuff up!

@@benjaminkeep Most people don't even know what referencing is and don't read further. Most people make stuff up anyway i.e. Malcolm Gladwell, [insert TED Talk guest] But, when it comes to research on learning I need find these very important. It luminates a path.

so basically self awareness allowed me all that now this channel explicit stuffthat might have been self learnt

@@TheBlackManMythLegendSo basically you answered to yourself 😂

I love your questions and I wish I could answer them. I am not at all a specialist in motor learning. You might be interested in reading a solid motor learning textbook - Motor Learning and Control: Concepts and Applications by Magill and Anderson. That's where I have initially found some of these interesting studies (like the one on ballet you mention). I would think less in terms of "X specific approach is always counter-productive or always productive" and more in terms of "X approach has some risks and tradeoffs, so how do we get the maximum benefit from them?" With the mirrors, for instance, instead of 100% mirrors or 0% mirrors, you might consider mixing up practice both with and without a mirror, and gradually reducing reliance on the mirror and increasing reliance on one's own proprioception. Maybe this would be appropriate for someone who has a lot of difficulty with the movement initially. Or you might consider keeping the feedback but altering the delay - film the person doing the exercise and then have them review the film afterwards to evaluate mistakes and then practice again trying to improve those mistakes. This "breaks" the immediate feedback cycle / external focus that the mirror creates. In a lot of cases these learning principles don't, a priori, tell us exactly how to teach X skill. More often, they give us tools for interpreting the learning experience so that we can explore the instructional space in an intelligent way.

@Benjamin Keep, PhD, JD Thank you so much for your thoughtful and informative reply. I have obtained the textbook. I also wanted to say how much I appreciate you putting references in the video description box. It really elevates the learning medium and allows the viewer to feed their curiosity.

Hi Striver - This is really a question for a full video, which I might do at some point. Let me just give you some ideas to chew on. A key question is “what does an IQ test measure?” Here are some possible answers: 1) “G” - a general intellectual capacity that exists in everyone’s brain that is largely innate and mostly stable over the lifespan 2) various components of intellectual capacity that are largely independent of what people know, and 3) a mish-mash of problem-solving and cultural knowledge. When people talk about the importance of IQ, they talk about how IQ scores are correlated with school performance and job success. But, as people on the internet are fond of reminding us, “correlation is not causation”. IQ tests were originally designed in France to identify students who needed extra help in school. That is, they were supposed to correlate with school performance - if they didn’t they wouldn’t be useful. Curiously, in France, no one really cares or thinks about IQ. But in the U.S. (and U.S.-influenced countries) IQ found it’s cultural home. Interpretation (1), from my list above, is the hardest to justify. You can propose “G”, but there’s no functional reason why such a thing should exist. Health might be a useful analogy. You can give someone a fitness test - have them run a mile, do some push ups, etc. And give them some bloodwork. And you could potentially combine all this information into a single number: an overall health score. But is this score a real thing? Do people walk around having an intrinsic “H” that is their innate/baseline health? I think that is a very hard argument to make. Blood pressure is blood pressure. The number of push-ups you can do tells you something about your upper body strength relative to your body weight. Etc. There is no “H,” just interacting components of health - some less changeable, some more changeable. But all of this is really still from the frame of modern, Western society. IQ tests don’t mean much to cultures very different from the ones they were designed for - if kids don’t go to school, but learn hunting, fishing, canoe building, etc., IQ tests aren’t very predictive or interesting. That tells you something about what IQ is measuring. One of the bedrocks of the argument for G is that IQ tests do not require much knowledge. If they require knowledge, then it becomes just a regular old test: how well do you know this stuff? But there’s fairly strong arguments that even things like Raven’s progressive matrices require knowledge to solve. IQ scoring has to be based on age - another sign that what we’re looking at is knowledge. Of course, you have to make a distinction between IQ test scores and something more specific, with agreed-upon operational definitions (like working memory capacity, or the ability to rotate 3D objects or navigational ability). More generally still, a thing becomes scientifically legitimate only when researchers (largely) agree on it. If it’s controversial - especially controversial for as long as G has been - that should raise some eyebrows. IMO, It’s really the general public that has driven interest in IQ (in the same way that polygraph tests are still used by many government agencies even though there has never been good evidence that they work - and they, in fact, do not). Measurement in the social sciences is hard. And a lot of people just get it wrong. Mostly, I think (3) is the answer, although I could be convinced of elements of (2). And the correlations are largely explained by a mixture of bad data (for job performance) and similarity in task demands (i.e., school is asking you to perform the same kind of task). Check out the references below if you’re interested in more details: www.swisswuff.ch/files/richardson2002whatiqteststest.pdf (about what IQ tests test) www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10888691.2014.983635 (about IQ correlations with job performance) The cognitive scientists that don't care that much about intelligence (or g or what have you) don't write about it (although they are occasionally critical of it, like the authors of the above pieces). You can move from these pieces to find others who are critical of the idea. Intelligence is how well the cognitive toolkit that you have happens to align with the task demands. And most of that toolkit involves knowledge and skills that you learn. IQ tests do measure something - even if it's just cultural knowledge, it can be valuable to know whether someone has that knowledge. But that doesn't mean that "g" exists.

To your first point: this is why good teachers are really important. : ) But yes, not easy! Language learning is not really my specialty, but I have dabbled in it from time to time. Here are my general thoughts. Not sounding “natural” or articulate might mean a few different things. Word choice is a big one. I find myself using more general or slightly incorrect words that other people nevertheless still understand. Sentence complexity is another. In Chinese, I often revert back to the same kinds of constructions over and over again (e.g., X, but Y; the more X, the more Y; etc.). Pronunciation might be another. Again, my pronunciation is generally good enough to be understood, but not good enough to be mistaken for a native Chinese speaker. With word choice, can you identify some words you rely on too much and look up some alternatives. Then try to spend a week (or whatever length of time you think is appropriate) never using those overly-relied-upon words. Speaking, listening, reading, and writing are distinct skills, but there are plenty of times when doing one can benefit another. With sentence constructions, reading and writing can help. Reading exposes you to potentially more complex sentences and more interesting sentence constructions, and writing (coming up with your own sentences to express your own thoughts, with an eye to using these constructions) gives you some practice at making more complex sentences without the time pressure you have with speaking. There’s still the leap to speech (and the gap between the written language and the spoken language), but I like not having the time pressure. Gives you a chance to try new things. What I try to do with Chinese sometimes is to repeat a sentence that a native speaker has just told me. Which doesn’t sound as crazy as it sounds (you’re re-voicing to confirm you understand). And I try to get the cadence and pacing exactly the same. Repeat as needed outside of earshot. You could do this with movies or other audio as well. This could help with word choice, sentence construction, and pronunciation. I also think there’s an element of play at work. Hearing people play with Japanese and playing with it yourself pays big dividends (I know they love the double entendre). You may not end up sounding exactly like a native speaker, but you start to make it your own when you can not just tell a story, but tell it in a particular way that you want to tell it. I have a friend who is Turkish, but is fluent in English. She sometimes comes up with phrases that no native English speaker would come up with, but are clever and interesting and just perfect descriptions of what she’s talking about. Good luck!

@@benjaminkeep Wow, thanks for the surprisingly in-depth response! I'm don't want to drag out my reply too much so I will just leave my main takeaways! Yes!! I do repeat a lot of the same constructions over and over again! Some words as well! I will make sure to note them down so that I can be mindful of better alternatives! What you say about reading and writing is very true as well. I find reading so interesting due to all the cool metaphors and descriptions, colorful vocabulary and sentence structures, and etc! Writing also seems to bring my focus to another level, but I do find it mentally exhausting (probably a good sign that my brain is working hard). Because of your channel I also have been trying to do more recall practice, so thanks for that. When I'm reading I usually like just lazing around and going from chapter to chapter without stopping, but I'm going to try to take a few minutes every now and then to do some recall practice and note down any interesting patterns I find. I guess what you mention about trying to repeat what the other person said with the same cadence and rhythm and everything is also kind of a form of recall practice right? I will try that as well!

@@pluckpack Sorry I didn't see this earlier! Let me know how things go! Yes, repeating the cadence, rhythm, accent, etc. is a kind of recall practice. Though usually the time delay is pretty short. Good luck!

@@benjaminkeep No worries! Spending more time doing recall has been really good! You become so much more perceptive I found. I think the best setup I have found so far is doing lot's of interleaving between writing and reading. If I try to write some idea, stop, and start reading a book afterwards, it's like my brain starts actively searching for sentences and words from the book that may complete the thought I was trying to write about. Similarly, If I read something and start writing afterwards, I naturally just start remembering sentences and passages from what I just read so that I can use them in my writing!

Hi Nathan - great question. First, a caveat: motor learning is not my specialty. But from reading the research in this area, my understanding is that most of the experiments establishing the superiority of external focus do give some basic instructions in how to perform the task, like for basketball "square your shoulders to the basket" and "let the ball rest on the pads of your fingers and your hand, not your palm". Zachry, T., Wulf, G., Mercer, J., & Bezodis, N. (2005). Increased movement accuracy and reduced EMG activity as the result of adopting an external focus of attention. Brain research bulletin, 67(4), 304-309. bme2.aut.ac.ir/~towhidkhah/MotorControl/Notes/attention&motorcontrol/ref/Zachry-et-al_2005.pdf. Or "Bring the dart toward your right ear and throw the dart." Emanuel, M., Jarus, T., & Bart, O. (2008). Effect of focus of attention and age on motor acquisition, retention, and transfer: a randomized trial. Physical therapy, 88(2), 251-260. academic.oup.com/ptj/article/88/2/251/2742361 It's just that after those basic instructions, during the practice sessions, you tell people to "focus on the dart hitting the target" or "focus on the basketball falling through the hoop" rather than "focus on your wrist movement". The best explanation for this effect, as I understand it, is that "internal focus" disrupts automatic processes - it restricts potential motor movements. I don't think this means that you never correct someone's posture or swing or whatever. There's certainly a time for saying "you should follow through more, let's practice the movement". It just means that when you're practicing you should be using external focus the majority of the time.

@@benjaminkeep This is so true, in my experience. In learning a second language, it's much better for me if I focus on WHAT I'm saying or trying to say, on the meaning, instead of focusing on HOW I'm saying it, the form. It may work for others, but for me, when I focus on the form, I start, stop and stutter, my anxiety rises, and my mind goes blank. When I focus on the meaning, the message, I stumble sometimes, yes, but I keep going based on whether or not the meaning is getting across. It seems the form is akin to internal focus and the meaning is more akin to external.

There are lots of things you could do, but one thing to NOT do is to keep pressing forward. I can't remember where I read this, but Newton, reading Descartes' treatise on physics ran into the same problem. He'd get confused after a couple of pages so he would stop and start over from the beginning again, making a little more progress each time. I would consider doing the free recall stuff I advocate (just writing down the things you know so far, identifying open questions, etc.). You could also consider reading other stuff on the same topic. Either picking a different resource or using the internet.

You might look into aphantasia - it's a lack of the ability to form mental images. I don't know much about it, TBH, just read a few articles. It's only recently got more research attention I think.

@@benjaminkeep After looking into what is available (not much), That condition seems to be precisely what I am experiencing. Yet it appears that it was recently noticed since only a tiny population has the condition. So now I'm curious if forming mental images is crucial for specific development and learning types. Thank you for the feedback and the direction to go in. I appreciate it.

@@seukosia Not sure if this is interesting to you at all but Andrew Huberman's podcast episode about mental visualisation mentions aphantasia quite often. The episode is more about how to use mental imagery to augment your learning but it might still be interesting for you.

Yes, the experience of ADHD is something I know less about. Perhaps I'll explore it in a future video.

And/or autism.

I can't speak to ADHD specifically, but I can say my brain does not work like this video. I can not focus in a quiet library. I've never been able to study or write a paper sitting at a desk in a quiet place. TV on in the background, radio playing loud fast-paced music... This is where I can best focus, study, write, and learn. If any parents read this remember that everyone learns in different ways. I'm a college graduate who spent less than 2 days studying in the library. Noise and stimulation help me focus.