Things that are unclear to me
Helicobacter Pylori
n-block. However, one source says the ceiling is 25 minutes/day the
other one says no ceiling has yet been determined. Which one is it?
2. Has there been any rebuttal to David Moody's allegations (http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_intelligence#Development_and_physiology)?
3. What is more difficult: adding one more stimulus or adding one more
to N?
4. What is more beneficial to fluid intelligence: adding one more
stimulus or adding one more to N?
Pontus Granström
test, which really isn't the case, based on completion frequency,
correct answers on each question is around 80% to 5% for the last
question. This time they were given 18 questions during 10 minutes.
This correlates highly with "less speeded" RAPM.
There might be many explanation to this.
One is that RAPM is a test that is speeded even with the original time
limits. (Generation speed and RAPM suggest that 0.4 of the variation
is explained by this).
That it measures accuracy over several equally difficult problems.
Meaning that it actually taps all difficulties.
That the underlying biology to complete problems fast is shared by completing
the more difficult problems.
That it draws on the attentional control required to solve more
difficult problems.
Might be more reasons and of course combinations of those I listed.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dual N-Back, Brain Training & Intelligence" group.
> To post to this group, send email to brain-t...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to brain-trainin...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/brain-training?hl=en.
>
>
Reece
time will be optimal for all people. There is certainly an increasing
opportunity cost at some point evident one starts having to skip work,
school, sleep, etc in order to train -- this would certainly make for
an interesting optimization problem, although I realize this was not
your question. Benefits, it seems, come from total training time more
so than length of time played per day (although playing more each day
will of course lead to faster increases in total training time). There
may very well be some minimum training time (per week, month?)
required to realize benefits.
Pontus Granström
the PFC might in fact be harmful just like a muscle that is over
trained.
Gwern Branwen
> I have been wondering if you can overdo it, if constantly stressing
> the PFC might in fact be harmful just like a muscle that is over
> trained.
As I recall, didn't we discuss a mouse study where mice that were
stressed out (by water platform trials or something) failed to make as
large gains in whatever WM exercise as the ones not stressed out? (I
thought I had linked this in the FAQ, but I guess not.)
--
gwern
http://www.gwern.net/
Gwern Branwen
<helico...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 1. I read that improvements in fluid intelligence are made with using
> n-block. However, one source says the ceiling is 25 minutes/day the
> other one says no ceiling has yet been determined. Which one is it?
> 2. Has there been any rebuttal to David Moody's allegations (http://
> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_intelligence#Development_and_physiology)?
I don't think there has. Pontus disagrees. Search the group archives
for 'Moody' and 'speed' for details.
> 3. What is more difficult: adding one more stimulus or adding one more
> to N?
Stimulus, anecdotally. I can't say since I've never tried anything but DNB,
> 4. What is more beneficial to fluid intelligence: adding one more
> stimulus or adding one more to N?
N, based on Jaeggi 2010 and the Single N-Back results:
http://www.gwern.net/N-back%20FAQ.html#jaeggi-2010
--
gwern
http://www.gwern.net/
Pontus Granström
n-back to give support of the null effect of brain training. While you
clearly think it is important to pay attention to subtle differences
this should apply for all.
Pontus Granström
speeded tests are valid . Arithmetic (simple math problems) correlates
highly with G, still they are nowhere the most advanced concepts of
mathematics. Shouldn't Moody claim
that arithmetic isn't a valid way of measuring intelligence since
there exists so much more complex mathematical ideas. That these
problems are quite simple and due to the short time 20 min (?) you are
not asked advanced stuff about
combinatorics or complex analysis? Still it seems that people who do
well these "high school" problems during 20 minutes
tend to cope better with the advanced stuff in university mathematics.
Why is this? This is very much in parallel with speed RAPM and less
speeded RAPM. Because they are both linked to the same underlying
biology.
Our ability to stay focused, think and move around stuff in WM. This
is basically what G is, reasoning ability is mereley a little bit more
than WMC/AC.
In similar ways, I do not believe that RAPM is a roof for "cognitive
quality of thought" as Moody proposes. If we view thinking as lifting
weights, it can easily be said that simple patterns in numbers might
demand the same amount of
attentional control as solving something very "advanced"´. Moreover a
G-load is not determined by how complex some people *thinks* it is but
rather what predictive power it holds. The are four difficulties (or 5
rather) it's not like G is determined
by a decreasing scale of "reasoning concepts". But rather that our
reasoning concepts depend on how much and efficiently we can focus and
test different solutions. If G were reasoning then it would specific
for that task. I cannot reason to remember a string of digits or
rotate objects. However all need attention and updating of working
memory.