
Research Upends Traditional Thinking on Study Habits - jamesbritt
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/07/health/views/07mind.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
======
Groxx
Summary being: study multiple times, spaced out, in different locations, and
work on multiple related topics in a time period rather than finishing one
before starting the next.

That multiple _locations_ works better than a single one is pretty counter to
everything people parrot, but makes sense in retrospect: everything in your
mind is associated with everything else. If you teach it something in only one
location, it's not as easy to recall it in another location. More locations
break that location-centric quality.

And: hard tests teach better than easier ones. They make you examine your
knowledge more thoroughly, meaning you're more likely to retain it (Duh, but
it's nice to hear it scientifically supported). _So why do we keep catering to
the lowest common denominator_?

~~~
michael_dorfman
_That multiple locations works better than a single one is pretty counter to
everything people parrot,_

Do people really parrot that? I've spent my fair share of time in the
educational system myself, my wife is a teacher, and I've got a number of
children in school, and I've never _once_ heard anyone recommend that pupils
study in a single location.

~~~
Groxx
_Every_ suggestion I've heard from any school system has been to set up a
single, quiet "homework space". And essentially anyone who's gone through said
system says the same thing, without examining it - it's what they were told,
it _effectively_ worked for them, why look into it more?

~~~
jamesbritt
It's what I was told growing up, and now I'm wondering if studying in a
variety of locations might not help one to acquire better focusing skills.

To be able to do some quick studying or review no matter where your (provided
you have the material) seems an epic win. Stuck on a bus? Do some studying. In
a boring class? Study for another one.

It's sort of like writers who say they have a schedule they stick to, no
matter what; they don't wait for the magic inspiration, they sit their ass
down and get to work. Likewise, if you insist on waiting until you have the
Just So study environment, you may never get to studying, or will do a lot
less of it.

------
leot
I wrote the following to the article's author:

While your article attacks the advice that one should study in a consistent,
distraction-free environment, it only pays lip service to the importance of
motivation and focus. Yet most educators will tell you that motivation and
focus are prerequisites for effective learning. Students ignore this
conventional wisdom at their peril -- sporadic, effort-free "study" in novel
contexts is assuredly less effective than genuine, effortful undistracted
study, irrespective of other factors.

If you had reviewed the literature[1] on the effects of distractions on
learning, you might have realized that the conventional wisdom on focused
study is, in fact, extremely valuable. Instead, I worry your article will see
hundreds of students studying even more poorly than they already do, filled
with a sophmoric confidence that what they are doing is scientifically
superior to the more challenging alternative.

[1] E.g., a quick search turned up Helene Hembrooke and Geri Gay "The laptop
and the lecture: The effects of multitasking in learning environments"
10.1007/BF02940852

~~~
nochiel
Actually, if you had read the article to the end, or in a different location,
you might have noticed and remembered where the article says:

"None of which is to suggest that these techniques...will turn a grade-A
slacker into a grade-A student. Motivation matters."

That is hardly "lip service". It is an explicit declaration that there are no
silver bullets when it comes to successful studying except for hard work and
discipline.

~~~
leot
Well, did read it to the end. "Lip service" means that those things got
mentioned, but not elaborated upon or strongly stressed.

~~~
nochiel
Not to belabour the point or be pedantic but as far as I am aware, "Lip
service" implies a lack of conviction not elaboration.

[http://www.google.com/dictionary?aq=f&oq=&langpair=e...](http://www.google.com/dictionary?aq=f&oq=&langpair=en|en&q=lip%20service&hl=en)

------
astrofinch
Relevant:

[http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-05/ff_woznia...](http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-05/ff_wozniak)

I'd guess that the closer your study pattern follows this optimal spaced
repetition pattern, the faster and better you learn stuff. This is related to
the result on mixing things up during each study session.

~~~
shadowfox
Are there any free tools that help with this?

~~~
elviejo
Anki: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anki> and Mnemosyne
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mnemosyne_(software)>

I like both... and spaced repetition will change the way you learn forever

------
tkahn6
This isn't studying, but memorizing. Studying is when you have to think
critically about a subject and understand it, whereas with memorizing you just
have to remember the magic phrase or word that get's you points on a test.

I find that having a single, clean, quiet place is the best for me.

~~~
wikyd
I don't think there's anything in that article that suggests that the
techniques only improved memorizing and not your specific definition of
studying. Also, there are definitely things that I have learned and since
forgotten that I had to think critically about and understand. I think this
article is about techniques to improve the retention of knowledge.

Take, for example, the math students who had to apply formulas to find
different properties of prisms. The students who learned and practiced all of
the formulas at once (which most likely requires critical thinking to
determine what each problem is asking for) did much better than the students
who just practiced sets of problems for each formula sequentially (which is
more like memorization).

I thought the most interesting part of the article wasn't the findings on
varied environments or multiple shorter study sessions, but that studying
multiple things in one session improved retention. Speculating as to why, the
brain subconsciously makes connections between the different topics,
strengthening each concept.

~~~
tkahn6
I'm not saying memorization has no purpose. On the contrary, it's pretty much
required if you don't want to have to re-derive everything every time you go
to use it.

Also FTA: _In one classic 1978 experiment, psychologists found that college
students who studied a list of 40 vocabulary words in two different rooms —
one windowless and cluttered, the other modern, with a view on a courtyard —
did far better on a test than students who studied the words twice, in the
same room._

This says nothing about studying in the way I defined it.

------
jgamman
never! give me my cave or give me death (or inability to think, roughly
equal).

