Memory
myths
- Myth:
It is possible to produce everlasting memories. Even reputable
researchers use the term permastore (see: Prof. Harry Bahrick).
It is a widely-held belief that it is possible to learn things
well enough to protect them permanently from forgetting. Fact:
It is possible to learn things well enough to make it nearly
impossible to forget them in lifetime. Every long-term memory,
depending on its strength, has an expected lifetime. When the
memory strength is very high, the expected lifetime may be longer
than our own lease on life. However, if we happened to get extra
200 years to live, no memory built in present life would remain
safe without repetition
- Myth:
We never forget. Some accelerated-learning programs claim
that we never forget what we learn. Knowledge simply gets "misplaced"
and the key to good memory is to figure out how to dig it out.
Fact: All knowledge is subject to gradual decay. Even
your own name is vulnerable. It is only a matter of probability.
Strong memories are very unlikely to be forgotten. The probability
of forgetting one's name is like the probability of getting
hit by an asteroid: possible but not considered on a daily basis
- Myth:
Memory is infinite. Fact: Anyone with basic computational
understanding of memory will call this claim absurd, but 50%
of Americans still believe the earth was created by God less
than 10,000 years ago. We cannot even hope to memorize Encyclopedia
Britannica in lifetime. Because information is stored in synapses
which are finite, memory storage is naturally finite too. Even
worse, storing information long-term is not easy. Most people
will find it hard to go beyond 300,000 facts memorized in a
lifetime (with SuperMemo, 300,000 items
is quite realistic though). For the other extreme see: Memory overload may cause
Alzheimer's
- Myth:
Mnemonics is a panacea to poor memory. Some memory programs
focus 100% on mnemonic techniques. They claim that once you
represent knowledge in an appropriate way, it can be memorized
in a nearly-permanent way. Fact: Mnemonic techniques
dramatically reduce the difficulty of retaining things in memory.
However, they still do not produce everlasting memories. Repetition
is still needed, even though it can be less frequent. If you
compare your learning tools to a car, mnemonics is like a tire.
You can go on without it, but it makes for a smooth ride
- Myth:
The more you repeat the better. Many books tell you to review
your materials as often as possible (Repetitio mater studiorum
est). Fact: Not only frequent repetition is a waste
of your precious time, it may also prevent you from effectively
forming strong memories. The fastest way to building long-lasting
memories is to review your material in a precisely determined
moments of time. For long memories with minimum effort use spaced
repetition (see SuperMemo)
- Myth:
You should always use mnemonic techniques. Some enthusiasts
of mnemonic techniques claim that you should use them in all
situations and for all sorts of knowledge. They claim that learning
without mnemonic techniques is always less effective. Fact:
Mnemonic techniques also carry some costs. Sometimes it
is easier to commit things to memory straight away. The pair
of words teacher=instruisto in Esperanto is mnemonic
on its own (assuming you know the rules of Esperanto grammar,
basic roots and suffixes). Using mnemonic techniques may be
an overkill in some circumstances. The rule of thumb is: evoke
mnemonic techniques only when you detect a problem with remembering
a given thing. For example, you will nearly always want to use
a peg-system to memorize phone numbers. Best of all, mnemonic
tricks should be a part of your automatically and subconsciously
employed learning arsenal. You will develop it over a long run
time with massive learning
- Myth:
We cannot improve memory by training. Infinite memory is
a popular optimist's myth. A pessimist's myth is that we cannot
improve our memory via training. Even William James in his genius
book The Principles of Psychology
(1890) wrote with certainty that memory does not change
unless for the worse (e.g. as a result of disease). Fact:
If considered at a very low synaptic level, memory is indeed
quite resilient to improvement. Not only does it seem to change
little in the course of life. It is also very similar in its
action across the human population. At the very basic level,
synapses of a low-IQ individual are as trainable as that of
a genius. They are also not much different from those of a mollusk
Aplysia or a fly Drosophila. However, there is
more to memory and learning than just a single synapse. The
main difference between poor students and geniuses is in their
skill to represent information for learning. A genius quickly
dismembers information and forms simple models that make life
easy. Simple models of reality help understand it, process it
and remember it. What William James failed to mention is that
a week-long course in mnemonic techniques dramatically increases
learning skills for many people. Their molecular or synaptic
memory may not improve. What improves is their skill to handle
knowledge. Consequently, they can remember more and longer.
Learning is a self-accelerating and self-amplifying process.
As such it often leads to miraculous results.
- Myth:
Encoding variability theory. Many researchers used to believe
that presenting material in longer intervals is effective because
of varying contexts in which the same information is presented.
Fact: Methodical research indicates that the opposite
is true. If you repeat your learning material in the exactly
same context, your recall will be easier. Naturally, knowledge
acquired in one context may be difficult to recover in another
context. For this reason, your learning should focus on producing
very precise memory trace that will be universally recoverable
in varying contexts. For example, if you want to learn the word
informavore, you should not ask How can I call John?
He eats knowledge for breakfast. This definition is too
context-dependent. Even if it is easy to remember, it may later
appear useless. Better ask: How do I call a person who devours
information?. Now, even if you always ask the same question
in the same context, you are likely to correctly use the word
informavore when it is needed. For more on encoding variability
and spacing effect see: Spaced repetition
in the practice of learning
- Myth:
Mind maps are always better than pictures. A picture is worth
a thousand words. It is true that we remember pictures far
better than words. It is true that mind maps are one of the
best pictorial representations of knowledge. Some mnemonists
claim that all we learn should be in the form of a picture or
even a mind map. Fact: It all depends on the material
we learn. One of the greatest advantages of text is its compactness
and ease at which we can produce it. To memorize your grandma's
birthday, you do not really need her picture. A simple verbal
mnemonic will be fast to type and should suffice. In word-pair
learning, 80% of your material may be textual and still be as
good or even better than pictorials. If you ask about the date
of the Battle of Trafalgar, you do not need a picture of Napoleon
as an illustration. As long as you recall his face at the sound
of his name, you have established all links needed to deduce
relevant pieces of knowledge. If you add a picture of the actual
battle, you will increase the quality and extent of memorized
information, but you will need to invest extra minutes into
finding the appropriate illustration. Sometimes a simple text
formula is all you need
- Myth:
Review your material on the first day several times. Many
authors suggest repeated drills on the day of the first contact
with the new learning material. Others propose microspacing
(i.e. using spaced repetition for intervals lasting
minutes and hours). These are supposed to consolidate the newly
learned knowledge. Fact: A single effective repetition
on the first day of learning is all you need. Naturally it may
happen, you cannot recall a piece of information upon a single
exposure. In such cases you may need to repeat the drill. It
may also happen that you cannot effectively put together related
pieces of information and you need some review to build the
big picture. However, in the ideal case, on the day #1 you should
(1) understand and (2) execute a single successful active recall
(such as answering the question "When did Pangea start breaking
up?"). One exposure should then suffice to begin the process
of consolidating the memory trace
- Myth:
Review your material next day after a good night sleep.
Many authors believe that sleep consolidates memories and you
need to strike iron while it is hot to ensure good recall. In
other words, they suggest a good review on the next day after
the first exposure. Fact: Although sleep is vital for
learning and review is vital for remembering, the optimal timing
of the first review is usually closer to 3-7 days. This number
comes from calculations that underlie spaced repetition.
If we aim to maximize the speed of learning at a steady 95%
recall rate, most well-formulated knowledge for a well-trained
student will call for the first review in 3-7 days. Some pieces
must indeed be reviewed on the next day. Some can wait as long
as a month. SuperMemo
and other computer programs based on spaced repetition
will optimize the length of the first interval before the first
review
- Myth:
Learn new things before sleep. Because of the research showing
the importance of sleep in learning, there is a widespread myth
claiming that the best time for learning is right before sleep.
This is supposed to ensure that newly learned knowledge gets
quickly consolidated overnight. Fact: The opposite is
true. The best time for learning in a healthy individual is
early morning. Many students suffer from DSPS (see: Good
sleep for good learning) and simply cannot learn in the
morning. They are too drowsy. Their mind seems most clear in
the quiet of the late night. They may indeed get better results
by learning in the night, but they should rather try to resolve
their sleep disorder (e.g. with free running
sleep). Late learning may reduce memory interference, i.e.
obliteration of the learned material by the new knowledge acquired
during the day. However, a far more important factor is the
neurohormonal state of the brain in the learning process. In
a hormonal sense, the brain is best suited for learning in the
morning. It shows highest alertness and the best balance between
attention and creativity. The gains in knowledge structure and
the speed of processing greatly outweigh all minor advantages
of late-night learning
- Myth:
Long sleep is good for memory. Association of sleep and
learning made many believe that the longer we sleep the healthier
we are. In addition, long sleep improves memory consolidation.
Fact: All we need for effective learning is well-structured
sleep at the right time and of the optimum length. Many individuals
sleep less than 5 hours and wake up refreshed. Many geniuses
sleep little and practice catnaps. Long sleep may correlate
with disease. This is why mortality studies show that those
who sleep 7 hours live longer than 9-hour-sleepers. The best
formula for good sleep: listen to your body. Go to sleep when
you are sleepy and sleep as long as you need. When you catch
a good rhythm without an alarm clock, your sleep may ultimately
last less but produce far better results in learning. It is
the natural healthy structure of sleep cycles that makes for
good learning (esp. in non-declarative problem solving, creativity,
procedural learning, etc.)
- Myth:
Alpha-waves are best for learning. Zillions of speed-learning
programs propose learning in a "relaxed state". Consequently,
gazillions of dollars are misinvested by customers seeking
instant relief to their educational pains. Fact: It is
true that relaxed state is vital for learning. "Relaxed" here
means stress-free, distraction-free, and fatigue-free. However,
a red light should blink when you hear of fast learning through
inducing alpha states. Alpha waves are better known from cropping
up when you are about to fall asleep. They are better correlated
with lack of visual processing than with the absence of distracting
stress. You do not need "alpha-wave machinery" to enter the
"relaxed state". You can do far better by investing your time
and money in ensuring good peaceful environment for learning,
as well as skills related to time-management, conflict-resolution,
and stress-management. Neurofeedback devices may play a role
in hard to crack stress cases. However, good health, peaceful
environment and loving family are your simple bets for the "relaxed
state"
- Myth:
Memory gets worse as we age. Aging universally affects all
organs. 50% of 80-year-olds show symptoms of Alzheimer's disease.
Hence the overwhelming belief that memory unavoidably gets rusty
at an older age. Fact: It is true we lose neurons with
age. It is true that the risk of Alzheimer's increases with
age. However, a well-trained memory is quite resilient and shows
comparatively fewer functional signs of aging than the joints,
the heart, the vascular system, etc. Moreover, training increases
the scope of your knowledge, and paradoxically, your mental
abilities may actually increase well into a very advanced age
- Myth:
You can boost your learning with memory pills. Countless
companies try to market various drugs and supplements with claims
of improved memory. Fact: There are no memory pills out
there (August 2003). Many drugs and supplements indirectly help
your memory by simply making you healthier. Many substances
can help the learning process itself (e.g. small doses of caffeine,
sugar, etc.), but these should not be central to your concerns.
It is like running a marathon. There are foods and drugs that
can help you run, but if you are a lousy runner, no magic pill
can make finish in less than 3 hours. Do not bank on pharmiracles.
A genius memory researcher Prof.
Jim Tully believes that his CREB research will ultimately
lead to a memory pill. However, his memory pill is not likely
to specifically affect desired memories while leaving other
memories to inevitable forgetting. As such, each application
of the pill will likely produce a side effect of enhanced memory
traces for all things learned in the affected period. Neural
network researchers know the problem as stability-vs.-plasticity
dilemma. Evolution solved this problem in a way that will
be hard to change. Admittedly though, combination of a short-lasting
memory enhancement with a sharply-focused spaced repetition
(as with SuperMemo) could indeed bring further enhancement to
learning
- Myth:
Learning by doing is the best. Everyone must have experienced
the value of learning by doing. This form of learning often
leads to memories that last for years. No wonder, some educators
believe that learning by doing should monopolize educational
practice. Fact: Learning by doing is very effective in
terms of the quality of produced memories, but it is also very
expensive in expenditure of time, material, organization, etc.
The experience of a dead frog's leg coming to life upon touching
a wire may stay with one for life (perhaps as murderous nightmares
resulting from the guilt of killing). However, a single picture
or mpeg of the same experiment can be downloaded from
the net in seconds and retained for life with spaced repetition
at the cost of 60-100 seconds. This is incomparably cheaper
than hunting for frogs in a pond. When you learn to program
your VCR, you do not try all functions listed in the manual
as this could take a lifetime. You skim the highlights and practice
only those clicks that are useful for you. We should practise
learning by doing only then when it pays. Naturally, in the
area of procedural learning (e.g. swimming, touch typing, playing
instruments, etc.), learning by doing is the right way to go.
That comes from the definition of procedural learning
- Myth:
It is possible to memorize Encyclopedia Britannica. Anecdotal
evidence points to historical and legendary figures able of
incredible feats of memory such as learning 56 languages by
the age of 17, memorizing 100,000 hadiths, showing photographic
memory lasting years, etc. No wonder that it leads to the conviction
that it is possible to memorize Britannica word for word. It
is supposed to only be the question of the right talent or the
right technique. Fact: A healthy, intelligent and non-mutant
mind shows a surprisingly constant learning rate. If Britannica
is presented as a set of well-formulated questions and answers,
it is easy to provide a rough estimate of the total time needed
to memorize it. If there are 44 million words in Britannica,
we will generate 6-15 million cloze deletions, these will require
50-300 million repetitions by the time of job's end (see spaced repetition theory),
and that translates to 25-700 years of work assuming 6 hours
of unflagging daily effort. All that assuming that the material
is ready-to-memorize. Preparing appropriate questions and answers
may take 2-5 times more than the mere memorization. If language
fluency is set at 20,000 items (this is what you need to pass
TOEFL in flying colors or comfortably read Shakespeare), the
lifetime limit on learning languages around 50 might not be
impossible (assuming total dawn-to-dusk dedication to the learning
task). Naturally, those who claim fluency in 50 languages, are
more likely to show an arsenal of closer to 2000 words per language
and still impress many
- Myth:
Learning while sleeping. An untold number of learning programs
promises you to save years of life by learning during sleep.
Fact: It is possible to store selected memories generated
during sleep by: external stimuli, dreams, hypnagogic and hypnopompic
hallucinations (i.e. hallucinations experienced while falling
asleep and while waking up). However, it is nearly impossible
to harness this process into productive learning. The volume
of knowledge that can be gained during sleep is negligible.
Learning in sleep may be disruptive to sleep itself. Learning
while sleeping should not be confused with the natural process
of memory consolidation and optimization that occurs during
sleep. This process occurs during a complete sensory cut-off,
i.e. there are no known methods of influencing its course to
the benefit of learning. Learning while sleeping is not only
a complete waste of time. It may simply be unhealthy
- Myth:
High fluency reflects high memory strength. Our daily
observations seem to indicate that if we recall things easily,
if we show high fluency, we are likely to remember things for
long. Fact: Fluency is not related to memory strength!
The two-component model of long-term
memory shows that fluency is related to the memory variable
called retrievability, while the length of the period
in which we can retain memories is related to another variable
called stability. These two variables are independent.
This means that we cannot derive memory stability from the current
fluency (retrievability). The misconception comes from the fact
that in traditional learning, i.e. learning that is not based
on spaced repetition, we tend to remember only memories that
are relatively easy to remember. Those memories will usually
show high fluency (retrievability). They will also last for
long for reasons of importance, repetition, emotional attachment,
etc. No wonder that we tend to believe that high fluency is
correlated with memory strength. Users of SuperMemo can testify
that despite excellent fluency that follows a repetition, the
actual length of the interval in which we recall an item will
rather depend on the history of previous repetitions, i.e. we
remember better those items that have been repeated many times.
See also: automaticity
vs. probability of forgetting
The list of
myths is by no means complete. I included only the most damaging
distortions of the truth, i.e. the ones that can affect even a
well-informed person. I did not include myths that are an offence
to our intelligence. I did not ponder over repressed memories,
subliminal learning, psychic learning, or remote viewing
(unlike CIA). The list is simply too long.
See also:
Memory
FAQ
Sleep
myths (see: Good sleep for good learning
for a more comprehensive list)
- Myth:
Since we feel rested after sleep, sleep must be for resting.
Ask anyone, even a student of medicine: What is the role
of sleep? Nearly everyone will tell you: Sleep is for
rest. Fact: Sleep is for optimizing the structure
of memories. If it was for rest or energy saving, we would cover
the saving by consuming just one apple per night. To effectively
encode memories, mammals, birds and even reptiles need to turn
off the thinking and do some housekeeping in their brains. This
is vital for survival. This is why the evolution produced a
defense mechanism against skipping sleep. If we do not get sleep,
we feel miserable. We are not actually as wasted as we feel,
the damage can be quickly repaired by getting a good night sleep.
Our health may not suffer as much as our learning and intelligence.
Feeling wasted in sleep deprivation is the result of our brain
dishing punishment for not sticking to the rules of an intelligent
form of life. Let the memory do restructuring in its programmed
time
- Myth:
Sleeping pills will help you sleep better. Fact: Benzodiazepines
can help you sleep, but this sleep is of far less quality than
naturally induced sleep (the term "sleeping pill" here does
not apply to sleep-inducing supplements such as melatonin, minerals,
or herbal preparations). Not only are benzodiazepines disruptive
to the natural sleep stage sequence. They are also addictive
and subject to tachyphylaxis (the more you take the more you
need to take). Sleeping pills can be useful in circumstances
where sleep is medically vital, and cannot be achieved by other
means. Otherwise, avoid sleeping pills whenever possible
- Myth:
Silence and darkness are vital for sleep. This may be the
number one advice for insomniacs: use your sleeping room for
sleep only, keep it dark and quiet. Fact: Silence and
darkness indeed make it easier to fall asleep. They may also
help maintain sleep when it is superficial. However, they are
not vital. Moreover, for millions of insomniacs, focusing on
peaceful sleeping place obscures the big picture: the most important
factor that makes us sleep well, assuming good health, is the
adherence to one's natural circadian rhythm! People who go to
sleep along their natural rhythm can often sleep well in bright
sunshine. They can also show remarkable tolerance to a variety
of noises (e.g. loud TV, family chatter, the outside window
noise, etc.). This is all possible thanks to the sensory gating
that occurs during sleep executed "in phase". Absence of sensory
gating in "wrong phase" sleep can easily be demonstrated by
lesser changes to AEPs (auditory evoked potentials) registered
at various parts of the auditory pathway in the brain. Noises
will wake you up if you fail to enter deeper stages of sleep,
and this failure nearly always comes from sleeping at the wrong
circadian phase (e.g. going to sleep too early). If you suffer
from insomnia, focus on understanding your natural sleep rhythm.
Peaceful sleeping place is secondary (except in cases of impaired
sensory gating as in some elderly). Insomniacs running their
daily ritual of perfect darkness, quiet, stresslessness
and sheep-counting are like a stranded driver hoping for fair
winds instead of looking for the nearest gas station. Even worse,
if you keep your place peaceful, you run the risk of falling
asleep early enough to be reawakened by the quick elimination
of the homeostatic component of sleep. Learn the principles
of healthy sleep that will make you sleep in all conditions.
Only then focus on making your sleeping place as peaceful as
possible. For more see: Good
sleep, good learning
- Myth:
People are of morning or evening type. Fact: This is more
of a misnomer than a myth. Evening type people, with chronotherapy,
can easily be made to wake up with the sun. What people really
differ in is the period of their body clock, as well as the
sensitivity to and availability of stimuli that reset that rhythm
(e.g. light, activity, stress, etc.). People with an unusually
long natural day and low sensitivity to resetting stimuli will
tend to work late and wake up late. Hence the tendency to call
them "evening type". Those people do not actually prefer evenings,
they simply prefer longer working days. The lifestyle affects
the body clock as well. A transition from a farmer's lifestyle
to a student's lifestyle will result in a slight change to the
sleeping rhythm. This is why so many students feel as if they
were of the evening type
- Myth:
Avoid naps. Fact: Naps may indeed worsen insomnia in people
suffering from DSPS, esp. if taken too late in the day. Otherwise,
naps are highly beneficial to intellectual performance. It is
possible to take naps early in the day without affecting one's
sleeping rhythm. Those naps must fall before or inside the so-called
dead zone where a nap does not produce a phase response
(i.e. shift in the circadian rhythm)
- Myth:
Night shifts are unhealthy. Fact: People working in night
shifts are often forced out of work by various ailments such
as a heart condition. However, it is not night shifts that are
harmful. It is the constant switching of the sleep rhythm from
day to night and vice versa. It would be far healthier to let
night shift people develop their own regular rhythm in which
they would stay awake throughout the night. It is not night
wakefulness that is harmful. It is the way we force our body
do things it does not want to do
- Myth:
Going to bed at the same time is good for you. Fact: Many
sleep experts recommend going to sleep at the same time every
day. Regular rhythm is indeed a form of chronotherapy recommended
in many circadian rhythm problems. However, people with severe
DSPS may simply find it impossible to go to sleep at the same
time everyday. Such forced attempts will only result in a self-feeding
cycle of stress and insomnia. In such cases, the struggle with
one's own rhythm is simply unhealthy. Unfortunately, people
suffering from DSPS are often forced into a "natural" rhythm
by their professional and family obligations
- Myth:
People who sleep less live longer. In 2002, Dr Kripke compared
the length of sleep with longevity (1982 data from a cancer
risk survey). He figured out that those who sleep 6-7 hours
live longer than those who sleep 8 hours and more. No wonder
that a message started spreading that those who sleep less live
longer. Fact: The best longevity prognosis is ensured
by sleeping in compliance with one's natural body rhythm. Those
who stick to their own good rhythm often sleep less because
their sleep is better structured (and thus more refreshing).
"Naturally sleeping" people live longer. Those who sleep against
their body call, often need to clock more hours and still do
not feel refreshed. Moreover, disease is often correlated with
increased demand for sleep. Infectious diseases are renowned
for a dramatic change in sleep patterns. When in coma, you are
not likely to be adding years to your life. Correlation is not
causation
- Myth:
A nap is a sign of weakness. Fact: A nap is not a sign of
weakness, ill-health, laziness or lack of vigor. It is a philogenetic
remnant of a biphasic sleeping rhythm. Not all people experience
a significant mid-day slump in mental performance. It may be
well masked by activity, stress, contact with people, sport,
etc. However, if you experience a slump around the 5th to 8th
hour of your day, taking a nap can dramatically boost your performance
in the second half of the day
- Myth:
Alarm clock can help you regulate the sleep rhythm. Fact: An
alarm clock can help you push your sleep rhythm into the desired
framework, but it will rarely help you accomplish a healthy
sleep rhythm. The only tried-and-true way to accomplish a healthy
sleep and a healthy sleep rhythm is to go to sleep only when
you are truly sleepy, and to wake up naturally without external
intervention
- Myth:
Being late for school is bad. Fact: Kids who persistently
cannot wake up for school should be left alone. Their fresh
mind and health are far more important. 60% of kids under 18
complain of daytime tiredness and 15% fall asleep at school
(US, 1998). Parents who regularly punish their kids for being
late for school should immediately consult a sleep expert as
well as seek help in attenuating the psychological effects of
the trauma resulting from the never ending cycle of stress,
sleepiness and punishment
- Myth:
Being late for school is a sign of laziness. Fact: If a
young person suffers from DSPS, it may have perpetual problems
with getting up for school in time. Those kids are often actually
brighter than average and are by no means lazy. However, their
optimum circadian time for intellectual work comes after the
school or even late into the evening. At school they are drowsy
and slow and simply waste their time. If chronotherapy does
not help, parents should consider later school hours or even
home-schooling
- Myth:
We can sleep 3 hours per day. Many people enviously read
about Tesla's or Edison's sleeping habits and hope they could
train themselves to sleep only 3 hours per day having far more
time for other activities. Fact: This might work if you
plan to party all the time. And if your health is not a consideration.
And if your intellectual capacity is not at stake. You can sleep
3 hours and survive. However, if your aspirations go beyond
that, you should rather sleep exactly as much as your body wants.
That is an intelligent man's optimum. With your improved health
and intellectual performance, your lifetime gains will be immense
- Myth:
We can adapt to polyphasic sleep. Looking at the life of
sailors, many people believe they can adopt polyphasic sleep
and save many hours per day. In polyphasic sleep, you take only
4-5 short naps during the day totaling less than 4 hours. There
are many "systems" differing in the arrangement of naps. There
are also many young people ready to suffer the pains to see
it work. Although a vast majority will drop out, a small circle
of the most stubborn ones will survive a few months and will
perpetuate the myth with a detriment to public health. Fact:
We are basically biphasic and all attempts to change the
inbuilt rhythm will result in loss of health, time, and mental
capacity. A simple rule is: when sleepy, go to sleep; while
asleep, continue uninterrupted
- Myth:
Sleep before midnight is more valuable. Fact: Sleep is most
valuable if it comes at the time planned by your own body clock
mechanism. If you are not sleepy before midnight, forcing yourself
can actually ruin your night if you wake up early
- Myth:
The body will always crave excess sleep as it craves excess
food. Some people draw a parallel between our tendency to
overeat with sleep. They believe that if we let the body dictate
the amount of sleep, it will always ask for more than needed.
As a result, they prefer to cut sleep short with an alarm clock
to "optimize" the amount of sleep they get. Fact: Unlike
storage of fat, there seems to be little evolutionary benefit
to extra sleep. Probably, our typical 6-8 hour sleep is just
enough to do all "neural housekeeping". People with sleep deficit
may indeed tend to sleep obscenely long. However, once they
catch up and get into the rhythm, the length of their sleep
is actually likely to decrease
- Myth:
Magnesium, folates, and other supplements can help you sleep
better. Fact: Nutrients needed for good health are also
good for sleep. However, supplementation is not likely to play
a significant role in resolving your sleep problems. Vitamins
may help if you are in deficit, but a vast majority of sleep
disorders in society come from the lack of respect or understanding
of the circadian rhythm. Only wisely administered melatonin
is known to have a beneficial effect on the advancement of sleep
phase. If you are having problems with sleep, read Good sleep for good life.
As for supplements, stick to a standard healthy diet. That should
suffice
- Myth:
It is best to wake up with the sun. Fact: You should wake
up at the time when your body decides it got enough of sleep.
If this happens to be midday, a curtain over the window will
prevent you from being woken up by the sun. At the same time
sun may help you reset your body clock and help you wake up
earlier. People who wake up naturally with the sun are indeed
among the healthiest creatures on the planet. However, if you
do not wake up naturally before 4 am, trying to do so with the
help of an alarm clock will only add misery to your life
- Myth:
You cannot change the inherent period length of your body clock.
Fact: With various chronotherapeutic tricks it is possible
to change the period of the clock slightly. It can be reset
or advanced harmlessly by means of melatonin, bright light,
exercise, meal timing, etc. It can also be reset in a less healthy
way: with an alarm clock. However, significant lifestyle changes
may be needed to resolve severe cases of DSPS or ASPS. The therapy
may be stressful, and the slightest deviation from the therapeutic
regimen may result in the relapse to an undesirable rhythm.
Those who employ free-running sleep may take the easiest way
out of the period length problem: stick to the period that is
the natural outcome of your current lifestyle
See also: Sleep
FAQ
Creativity
myths (see: Genius and Creativity
for a more comprehensive list)
- Myth:
You must be born with a creative mind! Fact: Some kids
indeed show an incredible curiosity and rage to master. However,
there are many techniques that can help you multiply your creativity.
Creativity is trainable. See Genius
and Creativity for some hints
- Myth:
If you miss childhood, your genius is lost! Fact: Human
brain is plastic by definition. In many fields of learning,
childhood neglect makes later progress harder; however, training
can always produce miracles. Childhood is very important for
growth, but if you lost it, you can still catch up in many areas
with intense training
- Myth:
Do not memorize! Fact: This fallacy comes
from the fact that many sources fail to delineate the full spectrum
of knowledge applicability from dry useless facts to highly
abstract reasoning rules. Understanding, thinking, problem solving,
creativity, etc. are all based on knowledge. This rule should
rather be formulated as: Knowledge selection is critical
for success in learning. The correct and non
pejorative definition of the word memorize is to: "commit knowledge
to memory". Along this definition, you can say: Do memorize!
Just make a smart selection of things to learn. See: Smart
and dumb learning for a discussion and examples
- Myth:
Proliferation of geniuses is a threat to humanity. Fact: Most
of the good things that surround us are a product of nature,
love, or human genius. It is true that the output of genius
minds is often used for evil purposes; however, halting genius
would be equivalent to halting or reversing the global progress
- Myth:
If you do something stupid, so are you! Fact: Human
brain is an imperfectly programmed machine. It never stops learning
and verifying its errors. Its knowledge base is painfully limited.
The same brain may be able to disentangle the complexities of
the string theory and then slip on simple sums. Notes left by
Newton, Leibnitz or Babbage show that they erred on their way
to great discovery or meandered in an entirely wrong direction.
We measure genius by its top accomplishments, not by the lack
of failures
- Myth:
Geniuses do not forget things! Fact: Genius brains
are made of the same substance as average ones. Consequently,
their memories are subject to the exactly same laws of forgetting.
All knowledge in the human brain declines
along a negatively exponential curve. Forgetting is as massive
in a genius mind as it is in any other. The best tools against
forgetting are (1) good knowledge representation (e.g. mnemonic
techniques) and (2) review (based on active recall and spaced
repetition). Geniuses may hold an advantage by developing powerful
representation skills that make learning much easier. They often
develop those skills early and without a conscious effort. However,
the science of mnemonics is well developed and you can see a
dramatic difference in your knowledge representation skills
after a week-long course
- Myth:
Geniuses sleep little! Fact: When looking at
Edison, Tesla, or
Churchill it is easy to believe that cutting down on sleep
does not seem to pose a problem in creative achievement. Those
who try to work creatively in conditions of sleep deprivation
will quickly discover though that fresh mind is by far more
important than those 2-3 hours one can save by sleeping less.
A less visible side effect of sleep deprivation is the effect
on memory consolidation and creativity in the long term. Lack
of sleep hampers remembering. It also prevents creative associations
built during sleep. It is not true that geniuses sleep less.
Einstein would work best if he got a solid nine hours of sleep
- Myth:
Early to ripe, early to rot! Fact: Terman Study contradicts
this claim. A majority of precocious kids go on to do great
things in life
- Myth:
You need a degree! Fact: Edison got only
3 months of formal schooling. Lincoln spent less than a year
at school. Benjamin Franklin's formal education ended when he
was 10. Graham Bell was mostly family trained and self-taught.
Steve Wozniak,
Steve Jobs, Dean Kamen, and Bill Gates were all college drop-outs.
Isaac Newton found school boring and was considered by many
a mediocre student. However, there is one thing they all had
in common: they loved books and could spend whole days reading
and studying
- Myth:
Genius can be evil! Fact: Evil, by definition, is foolish.
One can show genius skills in a narrow field and still be an
evil person, but an evil human being does not deserve a title
of a genius. True wisdom can reach far beyond a narrow field
of specialization. It will inevitably encompass the matters
of ethics. This is why all true geniuses are deeply concerned
with the future of humanity. See: Goodness of knowledge
- Myth:
Be unique! This boosts creativity! Fact: The relationship
between uniqueness and creativity is reverse. It is true that
many creative people are unique or strange in behavior. This
comes from their creative way of looking at things and unwillingness
to stick to those forms of tradition that defy reason. By no
means an effort towards uniqueness will boost creativity. It
is true that Einstein smoked a pipe, but it does not mean that
you will be more of a genius if you take on smoking a pipe
- Myth:
TV makes you stupid! Fact: TV or radio can be harmful
if you are unable to control what you watch or listen, or if
you are unable to optimize the proportion of your time spent
on broadcasts. Otherwise, TV is still hard to match in its ability
to present to you a pre-selected and emphatically graphic video
material for the purposes of education or getting informed.
Video education based on the material from reputable channels
may be the most efficient form of tutor-less education. Swap
MTV for Discovery, and make a good selection. Although you cannot
employ incremental video watching yet (cf. incremental
reading), a dose of daily VCR viewing will help you stay
up to date with the news and brush up your general education
- Myth:
Curiosity killed the cat! Fact: As long as you stay
within the boundaries of politeness, live by a better proverb:
Curiosity is your pass to the kingdom of knowledge
-
Myth:
Mozart effect. Listening to Mozart increases intelligence.
Fact: Mozart was one of the greatest musical geniuses
in history. His music might be used in musicality training
and produce far better neural effects than, say, today's pop
music. However, Mozart's impact on neural growth cannot be
verifiably judged better than that of solving cross-word puzzles,
singing, playing soccer or learning chemistry. To a philistine,
Mozart may do as much good as a recitation of Goethe's poems
to a baboon. Neither is listening to Mozart superior to listening
to your favorite pieces of music for the sake of boosting
"happy brain messengers". Mozart has been cannibalized by
the accelerated learning industry as a simple way towards
a quick buck. Few gimmicks are as simple as packaging a Mozart
CD with a label "Learn 10 times faster". Mozart Effect
powerfully illustrates the myth-making power of money. This
power has also spawned other cheap "learning solutions" such
as learning while
sleeping, learning
while relaxing, or memory-boosting
supplements. Regrettably, even highly respected and reputable
websites, journals or TV program fall prey to these catchy
memes. Your vigilance needs to triple in these areas
- Myth:
We use only 0.1% of our brain power. Some reputable researchers
derived the 0.1% figure from a simple calculation involving
the number of neurons and the numbers of synapses residing in
the human brain. The resulting figure seemed to imply an astounding
computational capacity. Fact: The brain is energetically
a very expensive organ. Only major improvements in human diet
in the course of human evolution made it possible to provide
for a substantial gain in the brain mass. If the 0.1% or even
the 10% claim was to be true, the unused portions of the brain
would quickly fall prey to natural selection resulting in energy-saving
shrinkage of the brain. Portions of brain are programmed to
execute highly specialized functions, other portions can easily
be used to store vast expanses of declarative knowledge. The
process of forgetting has been fine tuned to maximize the use
of the existing storage in the reproductive lifetime. Nevertheless,
it is not likely we ever run out of memory space when using
the trick of spaced repetition to maximize the inflow of new
information to memory
- Myth:
Gifted kids become genius adults. Fact: It is the personality
and the training that determine the final outcome. Most of gifted
kids are lucky to do well; however, giftedness should not be
taken for granted
See
also: Genius and creativity FAQ
SuperMemo
myths
Ever since
it was conceived, SuperMemo had to struggle with myths slowing
down its popularization. Preventing the reappearance of myths
appears to be a never-ending battle. The knowledge about all things
SuperMemo has grown to a substantial volume. Not all users can
afford reading dozens of articles. Many are prone to arrive to
the same wrong conclusions independently of others. Some of these
myths are rooted in general myths of memory (as above). Others
seem to spring from the common sense thinking about learning.
Here are some most damaging myths related to spaced repetition
and SuperMemo:
- Myth:
SuperMemo can only be used for learning languages. SuperMemo
gained most popularity by its effectiveness in learning vocabulary
of foreign languages. Hence the myth that SuperMemo is a program
for learning languages. A related myth is that it is a program
that can only be used for cramming facts, while it cannot effectively
be used for complex sciences, rules, modeling, problem solving,
creativity, etc. Fact: SuperMemo can be used in any form
of declarative learning (i.e. learning of things you can find
in textbooks as opposed to learning to ride a bike, etc.). Word-pair
learning appears to be the simplest application, while learning
complex facts and rules of science may require far more skills
in formulating the learning material. This is why many users
are indeed unsuccessful when trying to learn, for example, astronomy.
If you read 20 rules of formulating
knowledge you will realize the number of snags that have
to be overcome. Those snags contribute to Myth #1 on the limited
applicability of SuperMemo
- Myth:
SuperMemo is a great tool for cramming. Many first-time
users hear it by word of mouth that SuperMemo is a great tool
for cramming. They are ready to buy the program only for the
purpose of an exam coming in a week. Fact: SuperMemo
is nearly useless for cramming knowledge that is supposed to
last less than a week. For fast cramming to an exam, use traditional
review, recall, repeat approach known to crammers for ages.
The power of SuperMemo increases in proportion to the expected
lifetime of knowledge in your memory. SuperMemo is useful if
you need to remember things for a year (e.g. legal code). It
is more useful if you learn for a decade (e.g. a programming
language). But it is unsurpassed in gathering lifetime knowledge
(e.g. anatomy, geography, history, etc.)
- Myth:
SuperMemo is hard to use. Several
thousand FAQs and the 5 MB help file make many think SuperMemo
is complex. It may appear like a program dedicated to heavyweight
professionals. This makes it seem like a program of little use
to mere mortals. Fact: It is true that some users start
from the "wrong end" or wrong pre-conceived assumptions. They
may indeed get lost or frustrated. However, a well-tested and
certified fact is that SuperMemo can be used effectively after
a 3 minute
introduction! A great part of its power (perhaps a half)
can be harnessed by learning just two operations: Add new (adding
new questions and answers) and Learn (making
repetitions). Naturally, things get gradually more complex when
you start adding multimedia, foreign language support, templates,
categories, etc. At the other end, incremental
reading, a powerful reading and learning technique,
may require months of training before bringing quality results.
You can easily start using SuperMemo today, and gradually build
skills needed to expand its power
- Myth:
SuperMemo is useless. Some people truly believe that the
natural mechanisms of building long-term memories are superior
to spaced repetition. Fact: Our brain prefers "easy"
over "important". We excel at remembering celebrity trivia.
We are dismal at recalling mathematical formulas learned in
high school. In addition, those who deny the value of spaced
repetition usually fail to appreciate the value of associative
memory, or fail to delineate the distinction between cramming
facts and learning universal inference rules. There are many
traps of ignorance that prevent people from ever trying SuperMemo.
See: SuperMemo is Useless
and No
force in the world can convince me to SuperMemo
- Myth:
As you add more material to SuperMemo, your repetition loads
mount beyond being manageable. No item added to SuperMemo
is considered "memorized for good". For that reasons, all items
are subject to review sooner or later. This makes many believe
that there is an inevitable increase in the cost of repetitions.
Fact: It is true that a large number of outstanding repetitions
is the primary excuse for SuperMemo drop-outs. However, computer
simulations as well as real-life measurements show that, with
the constant daily learning time, the acquisition of new knowledge
does not visibly slow down in time (except the very first couple
of months). In other words, from a long-term perspective, the
acquisition of new knowledge is nearly
linear. Older items are repeated less and less quickly leaving
room for new material. The exponential nature of this "fading"
explains why we can continue with a heavy inflow of new material
for decades
- Myth:
SuperMemo repetitions take too much time. Many users struggle
with an increasing load of repetitions and may conclude that
the effort is not worth the outcome. Fact: Just 3 well-selected
items memorized per day may produce a better effect than a hundred
crammed facts. This means that even a minute per day will make
a world of difference, as long as you pay attention to what
you learn. Not all knowledge is worth the effort of 99% retention.
High retention should be reserved only for mission-critical
facts and rules. Last but not least: knowledge formulating skills
may cut the learning time in beginners by more than 90%
- Myth:
SuperMemo is expensive. At prices approaching $40 for the
newest Windows version, SuperMemo may seem too expensive for
users in poorer countries of Africa, Asia or even Eastern Europe.
Fact: Older versions of SuperMemo for DOS and Windows
are free. Its on-line version
is still free. Even the newest version of SuperMemo is available
free for contributors to SuperMemo
Library
- Myth:
SuperMemo requires a computer. Fact: See: paper and pencil SuperMemo
- Myth:
We do not need SuperMemo, all we need is to build an index to
knowledge sources. With multiple on-line sources of knowledge,
some people are tempted to believe that memorizing things is
no longer needed. All we supposedly need to learn is how to
access and use these external sources of knowledge. Fact:
Knowledge stored in human memory is associative in nature.
In other words, we are able to suddenly combine two known ideas
to produce a new quality: an invention. We cannot (yet) effectively
associate ideas that live on the Internet or in an encyclopedia.
All creative geniuses need knowledge to form new concepts. The
extent of this knowledge will vary, but the creative output
does depend on the volume of knowledge, its associative nature,
and its abstractness (i.e. its relevance in building models).
Lastly, even "index to knowledge" is subject to forgetting and
needs to be maintained via repetition or review. See: SuperMemo is Useless
- Myth:
Many people are successful without using SuperMemo, hence its
importance is secondary. Fact: Neither Darwin nor Newton
had access to computers, yet computer illiteracy may make today's
scientist entirely impotent. Similarly, with a growing importance
of knowledge, neglecting the competitive advantage of a wider
and stable knowledge will increasingly limit one's chances of
successful career in science, engineering, medicine, politics,
etc.
- Myth:
Natural mechanism of selecting important memories is good enough.
We do not need a crutch. The evolution produced an effective
forgetting mechanism that frees our memory from space-consuming
and perhaps irrelevant garbage. This mechanism proved efficient
enough to build the amazing human civilization. Consequently,
many believe that there cannot be much room for improvement.
Fact: The forgetting mechanism was built in abstraction
from our wishes and decisions. It only spares memories that
are used frequently enough. Now though, we are smart enough
to decide on our own which knowledge is vital and which is not.
A single peek into a dictionary may often take more time than
the lifetime cost of refreshing the same word in SuperMemo.
And that is the least spectacular example. Human history is
rich in monumental errors coming from ignorance. NASA's confusion
of imperial and metric units cost a lost Mars probe. Confusion
of comma with a dot in Fortran, cost a Venus probe. Errors in
English communication caused many aerial and maritime catastrophes.
A piece of knowledge in surgeon's mind may be worth the life
of his patient. Forgetting is too precarious to leave mission-critical
knowledge in its hands. SuperMemo puts you in command
- Myth:
Developing photographic memory is a better investment. Fact:
A great deal of claims related to photographic memory are
vastly exaggerated or plain false. Mnemonic tools are vital
for efficient learning, but they are no substitute to SuperMemo.
They are complementary. Techniques such as Photoreading
use the same catchy photo-scanner concept. Unlike SuperMemo,
they are easy to publicize and comprehend. However, SuperMemo's
superiority in the arsenal of a student's tools is easily demonstrable
with plain facts of science, as well as in the practice of learning.
For more see: articles
at supermemo.com
- Myth:
Memorizing multiplication table only deprives one of computing
skills. Like kids using calculators, those who memorize
the multiplication table with SuperMemo are supposed to be less
numerate (i.e. less fluent in their calculation skills). Fact:
Memorizing the basic 9x9 multiplication table is the cornerstone
of all calculation on paper and in mind. Memorizing the 20x20
multiplication table is also a good way of training basic multiplication
skills. It is hardly possible to actually memorize the
20x20 table. Intuitively, most students do it the right way
by using the combination of their familiar 9x9 table and their
adding skills. For example, 14*16 is remembered as 10*14+6*14=140+6*10+6*4=140+60+24=224.
This means that the student uses (1) a simple decomposition,
(2) zero-shifting rule, (3) the 9x9 table once (to figure out
that 4*6=24) and then (4) addition (to add the resulting three
numbers). In contrast to the myth, all students who learned
the 20x20
multiplication table report a dramatic increase in their
multiplication skills. Alas, there is relatively very little
carry over to division skills. These require additional learning
material and slightly more complex skills (see: Division
Table)
- Myth:
SuperMemo is so simple that it is not needed (PalmGear user's
comment). Fact: Simplicity of an idea usually enhances
its usefulness. The underlying idea of SuperMemo (increasing
intervals) is indeed very simple. However, doing all computations
by hand makes little sense, and not employing spaced repetition
is bound to negatively affect learning. Consequently, SuperMemo
is necessary for knowledge where retention levels are to reach
above 80%. Otherwise, any disorganized system of repetitions
becomes very wasteful. Ironically, many users of SuperMemo for
Windows complain that the program is too complex (see Myth: SuperMemo
is Hard)
- Myth:
The main learning bottleneck is short-term memory, hence SuperMemo
is not needed. Some educators live by the wrong conviction
that it is the short-term memory that is the bottleneck of learning.
This comes from common daily observations of devastating leak
in sensory memory. We retain only a fraction of what we perceive.
Fact: The opposite is true. Short-term memory is indeed
very leaky. However, we can retain in short-term memory far
more than we can retain over the long term. The myth is partly
derived from the conviction that long-term memory is virtually
limitless.
The error comes from noticing the huge long-term storage, while
neglecting the difficulty with which we retain knowledge in
that storage. An advanced student will quickly learn all mnemonic
tricks necessary to retain far more in his or her short-term
memory than (s)he is able to convert into a lasting knowledge
- Myth:
Drilling fluency is more important that drilling for retention.
Some students and educators believe that they need to train
for quick retrieval which often determines the performance (e.g.
as in IQ tests). They believe that clocking the repetition improves
the retention. Fact: The myth originates from the research
by B.F. Skinner's student Ogden
Lindsley in the 1960s, which shows how fluency training
can demonstrably enhance learning (e.g. in classroom conditions).
Lindsley's fluency research does not translate directly to spaced
repetition methodology though due to the problem of spacing
effect (see also: Memory myth: Fluency reflects
memory strength). The procedure that may enhance recall
after a single session is not necessarily optimum for repeated
active recall in spaced repetition. A clocked drill is more
likely to evoke the spacing effect as retrieval difficulty enhances
memory consolidation. Consequently, a timed drill will actually
increase the frequency of repetitions and overall repetition
workload per item. In SuperMemo terms, the effect is similar
to an attempt to reduce the
forgetting index below 3%. Assuming maximum attention, slow
considerate repetition is likely to leave more durable memory
traces than a clocked fluency drill. Fluency training makes
sense for knowledge whose retrieval is time-critical. This may
refer to procedural learning, training before tests based on
fluency, foreign language training, reading fluency, etc. However,
for fields where creativity is more important than speed, or
where solving the problem is more important than solving it
fast, "slow" (i.e. meticulous and considerate) learning is recommended.
Independently, in SuperMemo, it is the user who determines the
grading criteria in learning. Fluency may, but does not have
to be included in self-assessment. In other words, although
speedy drills are not recommended, SuperMemo does not prevent
the user from employing them
See also:
SuperMemo
FAQ
Skepticism
Remain skeptical.
Read more about the myths listed above. Drop me an e-mail
if you disagree. Or if you believe I missed a dangerous myth that
should be included.
Some websites
devote all their energy to dispel myths that propagate throughout
the population. Myths are friends of ignorance. They do damage
to individuals and societies. They are also food for ruthless
scams that currently breed rich on the net. Here are a couple
of links to websites that I would like to praise for their commendable
efforts in the struggle against ignorance, superstition, as well
as plain deception:
- Skeptic's
Dictionary - Prof. T. Carroll's monumental effort listing
the most dangerous, most deceptive, most bizarre, as well as
the most amusing beliefs, myths and "theories" such as: astrology,
clairvoyance, creationism, dianetics, divination, dowsing, homeopathy,
NLP, psychokinesis, reincarnation, Silva method, telepathy,
teleportation, UFO, etc.
- Quackwatch
- Dr Stephen Barrett's equally impressive struggle against harmful
diets and medical procedures deceptively employed for profit.
Dr Barrett discloses companies, individuals, websites, and products
that ascribe miraculous properties to acupuncture, chiropractic
healing, super-DHEA, Calorad, gingko, herbal weight-loss tea,
iridology, macrobiotics, magnetotherapy, super-melatonin, orthomolecular
therapy, psychic practices, etc.
- James
Randi Educational Foundation - best known for his Million
Dollar Challenge, James Randi tirelessly fights against
anything paranormal. Anyone able to demonstrate paranormal,
supernatural, or occult phenomena via a scientifically controlled
experiment can claim Randi's $1 million reward
- Skeptic
Friends Network
- Skeptic
Planet - skeptic sites search engine. A search for homeopathy
yields 500 articles, astrology 900, while creationism
2000 (Aug 3, 2003)
- Anti-quackery
- collection of anti-quackery links
- CSICOP
- Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the
Paranormal
- BBC
Horizon takes on homeopathy - BBC Horizon fails to
win James Randi's Million Dollar Challenge with a scientific
experiment that failed to prove that homeopathy actually works
- Talk
Origins - a collection of articles contesting intelligent
design theories in response to a related Talk Origins Usenet
newsgroup with unrestricted discussion forum
- Truth
or Fiction - anti-rumor website
- Logical
Fallacies - definitions and examples of logical fallacies
that underlie most myths, rumors, and superstitions
- More
links from Randi's JREF
- Skeptical
Information Links - 532 links to skeptical websites
(Aug 3, 2003)
What is
not myth?
Sometimes
I receive requests for the evaluation of legitimate learning methods.
I will only shortly list here the keywords that are worth studying.
You will find plenty of information about the above on the net.
Legitimate concepts and authors that might be misunderstood at
best (or besmeared at worst): mind maps, Mega Memory, mnemonic
techniques, peg-list system, loci method, Mind Manager, ThinkFAST,
Robert Stickgold, Tony Buzan, Sebastian Leitner, expanded rehearsal,
reactivation theory, SAFMEDS, bright-light therapy, chronotherapy,
melatonin, neurogenesis in adulthood, brain growth through training,
neural compensation (e.g. in brain damage), and physical exercise
as a brain booster. See also: Links to interesting memory
and learning websites
|