Thinking in pictures

I spoke about using metaphor a few posts back. This is basically thinking in pictures. Now, you can go beyond just using tropes and breathe visual life into these metaphors with actual pictures and videos salted and peppered throughout your revision.

Just like I try to put a pic at the top of each article that links to the article's content in an interesting and memorable way, so you could illustrate your revision notes with a few choice pics/Photoshop mash-ups/film stills that are odd enough to be highly memorable while still being relevant. (For memory geeks out there, this phenomenon where oddity improves memory is called the 'bizarreness effect'. Read more about in this Google book).

I strongly advise trying it out because you are going have to pack a lot in over the coming months. Even if you conservatively estimate that for each course there are 50 references to remember that's approximately 500 to somehow get into your head. This is the same sort of number that expert memorizers deal with when they remember multiple packs of cards or whatever their memory fetish is. There's a neuroimaging study that shows tricks like these are not due to difference in brains but difference in strategies.

The majority use a visual memory trick called the loci method, which dates back to the Greek poet Simonides of Ceos. You may have heard of it. Simonides was at a banquet when the roof collapsed. Many of the people were crushed beyond recognition and he was able to recall who was there by imagining the positions of people seated at their tables. I suggest having a brief read of this short review from TICS for the scientific account.

Whatever's going on beneath the brain's bonnet, one thing I am confident of is that this method works. As the author of the paper says, "Mnemonic methods are effective in generating associations between otherwise ‘meaningless’ or unrelated information, such as dates and names" (which precisely characterises a reference). There are stats somewhere that I can't find right now but which show big memories gains from using this method over the slog-it-out-write-'em-down-ten-times approach.

I did this for both references and essay arguments. Take the paper I mentioned a sec ago, for which the references is Ericsson (2003). Translate this into something memorable as you revise. How about it's 20:03 and Eric has forgotten (the paper is about memory) to pick his son up from school? Draw a little sketch of a panicked parent, the forlorn child and the clock on the wall.

For extended arguments you have built, you can do the same. I can still remember lots of the little stories I made up to mirror the arguments. Not only is this helpful to your learning but it injects some fun into the learning process (which probably makes your learning more effective).

One thing I like doing and which gives you a nice entry point to the loci method is to find a photo or make a sketch and then add details of the experiment in pithy form to the pic. I have uploaded a few for you all on my Flickr account, in the Mind Bites set (click here for the slideshow). If you fancy doing something like this yourself, you can use free Photoshop alternatives like the newly launched Photoshop Express, good old GIMP or easy-as-pie Flauntr.

You might scoff at this method as adding extra work to your already busy desk. Well, yes, but that information is more suited to the natural channels through which memories flow. So, it's a weird case of adding more information to do less work.

Other things might work for you, but this worked for me. Think in pictures and you'll think more clearly, remember better and enjoy the work more.

Here are a few I made earlier...

Split brain - the axe is attacking the posterior corpus callosum, which is the major information highway between the hemispheres.

Prosopagnosia, obviously. Less obviously, The F & G in the eyes stand for Fusiform Gyrus which is thought to be the associated dysfunctional area

A symbol worn on the arm with connotations of hatred and being on the political 'right'. Useful for remembering misoplegia, which is hatred of a limb (e.g., an arm) due to right hemisphere damage.

Good one for neuropsychiatry: everything comes down to the brain (if its attended to) even distant cultural things, like The Simpsons.

The male cast of Friends for male sexual strategies. Joey, the high-genetic quality/high-masculinity/low-investing male who is massively polygamous ("How you doin' ?") vs Chandler the lower genetic quality/low masculinity/high investment male who is relatively monogamous. Ross appears to operate both strategies, which is a useful way of capturing context-dependent sexual strategies.

Another good one for the male polygamous strategy would be this Lynx ad which taps into this desire for many partners and portrays it in absurdly epic proportions.

This one is for optimal female sexual strategy. Here females are particularly attracted to high developmentally stable (masculine) males (cues to high genetic quality) around ovulation (hence the egg) meaning they can get all best resource investment off Mr Lovey and the best genetic investment off Mr Hottie.

Looking time/violation of expectancy paradigms can be remembered by the surprised baby.

Two clips for alien hand syndrome. The first from Red Dwarf

and the second from the combined genius of Sellers and Kubrick in Dr Strangelove

Topically, John Prescott, has today admitted to suffering from bulimia nervosa (purging type). His case is useful for neuropsychiatry because it shows this is not just a disorder that affects Western females, as the popular impression goes. Secondly, it smashes another popular myth: that eating disorders are merely the product of the media portraying skinny girls. I can't really see Prescott leafing through Vogue. That is not to say psychological factors are irrelevant; he says one of the causes of the disorder was stress - a known risk factor. There are lots of neurobiological correlates that are emerging (see Kaye, 2008, for a good review) but one Prescott might be useful for remembering is that the disorder has been associated with a 'crap' right temporal lobe (e.g. Levine et al., 2003). This is because Prescott is left-wing and considers the right 'crap'.

And finally, it's not a photo but it's barking up the same tree:

"In this country, you gotta make the money first. Then when you get the money, you get the power. Then when you get the power, then you get the women."

- Tony Montana in Scarface.

The idea nested here is one the evolutionary psychology literature on risk-taking, aggression and homicide knocks about, namely, that access to females is the end goal, in the strict Darwinian sense. Power and wealth are means by which to get there and if you don't have these things it's worth taking risks for them.

Anyway, you get the idea. Go and be creative with your revision: it will sink in better...

Genius memory

benadamson @ Flickr

This one's for Mac users only. It's called Genius. It helps you learn; might be useful for getting those references in. Find out more here. Download here.

Preventing stress

Naboo beats all the stress management techniques out there with the kitten in a barrel routine

It's highly likely that you're going to feel some stress in the coming weeks. A little is good: it sharpens your thinking and fuels your motivation; but too much is bad.

Not is it only bad for all the malaise it causes but it damages your working memory (e.g., Morgan et al., 2006), which you need to think and solve problems with, and your ability to solidify long-term memories (e.g., Chen et al., 2008), which you obviously need to remember course content. Also, "[y]our IQ plummets. Your creativity, your sense of humor — all of that disappears. You're stupid." according to psychiatrist Edward Hallowell author of CrazyBusy. You may not need a sense of humour to write psychology essays (but it's probably a good thing to have to get through the revision process) but you'll want your creativity firing otherwise those top marks are out of reach.

Now there's lots out there on ameliorating stress. I might do a series of posts on a couple of things later. But for now I think it's better to think about what causes it. When it comes to exams, stress is the distance between where you are and where you want to be.

If you want a First, there are three weeks to exams and you haven't done a drop of revision, your stress level is going to be monstrous. If you don't care what you get, there are three weeks to exams and you haven't done a drop of revision, your stress level is going to fairly low.

Unfortunately, once the gap gets wide enough it'll start growing all by itself because stress deleteriously (ooh get me!) affects thinking and memory, precisely those things you need to narrow the gap. It's a nasty place to be.

To keep this distance to a minimum, you could always cut what you want your degree classification to be - but this is only a strategy for loafers. The alternative is to i) give yourself loads of time (i.e. start now), ii) draw up a good timetable so you can monitor and manage the 'stress distance' and iii) share out some of the immense requisite research.

This may sound achingly obvious but the obvious remains in the theoretical realm for some people until it is too late. There will be people (re)reading this post in a month's time and kicking themselves. Don't be one of them.

How to Work - Three

Quarta-Feira de Cinzas/Epilogue by filmmaker Cao Guimaraes and artist Rivane Neuenschwander. Following the Carnival, the colourful confetti become the ants' treasure and we can watch them as they go about their collective labour (a little help was needed to get them excited by soaking the paper in either pork-fat or honey). There is also some nice tinkling added to the soundtrack. Currently at the Tate Modern.

If an alien arrived on earth one of the first things it would note about our species was how much time we spent with each other. 'Humans are social creatures' it might jot down. Perhaps if our alien had been observing the majority of students doing their revision it would have added to that, "...except when revising."

But it shouldn't have to be this way.

Of course, you get the degree from your own work, you sit the exams by yourself and you need to do the thinking for yourself. I am not trampling on this idea. What's silly is when there is much to be gained, academically and emotionally, from including within your revision a perfectly legitimate social element.

What does this mean? It means chatting. It means spending lots of your revision hours chewing over the academic cud with other people. You'll be surprised at how digestible material is afterwards.

However, to do this, a lot of you will need to shake off the intense privacy with which you guard your ideas. Generally speaking, there is more to be gained from discussion than there is to be lost. And besides, you can keep the really original and creative cards close to your chest. But, I'd bet you'll find yourself with way more of those type of cards if you discuss material frequently and fervently with course mates.

I didn't do this in second year very much. Revision was lonely and painful. I did it in third year with the co-authors of the 'revision bible' and other lots of people on the course and revision suddenly got a whole lot better, and, dare I say it, at times enjoyable. Yeah, enjoyable.

I estimate that I reduced my 'sit-down revision time' by 30% by ironing out the creases in understanding over a beer, meal or walk on the Downs. What can take you 20 minutes in the library, takes you 20 seconds in a group to understand. Also, things seems to stick to memory more easily when they are spoken compared to when they are read. So, there are academic reasons for doing this.

Rather nicely, this idea has very recently been supported in the literature. In February, a paper published in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin found that social interaction (as little as 10 minutes) improved intellectual performance.

In related stuff, more social contact is correlated with well-being (Sinha & Verma, 1990; Triandis et al., 1986); its absence is marked by depression (Gladstone, Parker, Malhi, & Wilhelm, 2007). Doing stuff together is better for the psyche.

In groups of friends, discussing things will probably occur organically. This post isn't really for that group. However, there will be lots of you who are doing this alone. This is for you then: You'll understand and remember more - and be happier, which counts for a lot - when you exploit your brain's natural affinity with social intercourse. Go and chat a psychologist up...

How to Work - Two

margolove @ Flickr

In How to Work - One we cleaned the road of distractions. In this post, I'll talk about getting the best mileage.

I tried to have a look around to find something in the literature on concentration span, an optimal time, something like that. I cant find anything. Sorry. Then again there probably isn't an optimal one because it's gonna depend on you and the task at hand.

But I do have some advice on concentration. Instead of working to a time, work to a goal. Set yourself the task of doing 'up to this point in this topic', then take your break.

The advantages of doing this over heading out of the library for a break constantly are twofold. First, you will get more done. Continuous breaks can be unnecessary and costly in terms of time.

Secondly, you can make your dopamine system do its funky dance by setting it up to expect the reward of a break and then giving it that reward after you have achieved your goals. You can be both Pavlov and the dog.

When you do this you will flood yourself with a satisfying little boost as opposed to being in that constant state of unfinished business, which comes with taking timed breaks. I think this is vital for keeping the spirits up during tough times, as well as reinforcing you to keep on working.

In a geekier moment, I did test this out. I spent two days working in 45 minute slots, taking 15 minute breaks, and two days just working to goals. Of course my quasi-experiment is horribly subjective and open to expectancy effects, but I did feel I got more done and enjoyed things more when working to goal.

If your concentration is still dragging:

• drink water;
• have peppermint;
• cool down (e.g., Fine & Kobrick, 1978; Gafafer, 1974), for complex tasks especially heat seems to have a bad effect, (e.g., Carlson, 1961);
• get some more sleep (I'll probably do a whole post on sleep at some point);
• keep your blood sugar levels up with complex carbs (Scholey et al, 2001; Hoyland et al, 2008) not short-lived rubbish (I'll probably do a whole post on eating at some point);
• cut out crap (stuff with additives) from your diet (Although this study is with children, additives in their diet did concentration a big disservice);
• add stuff into your diet, including magnesium, B-complex vitamins (folic acid and choline), omega 3 fatty acids and zinc, all of which have been shown to maintain a good attention span;
  
• meditate - work at the University of Kentucky has shown there are psychomotor benefits to dabbling in a bit of brief meditation;
• if you know of any more add them in as comments below...
  

How to Work - One

A few of you have asked questions about effective ways to work. So I am starting a series of posts on that subject.

We start with the Milk Desk (pictured), which takes the increasingly ubiquitous Jonathan Ive approach to design and deploys it in a desk. Quite a beauty isn't it? See the slick website here.

The thing about the desk is that it is totally devoid of distractions and this is the first rule of how to work.

Turn the phone off and close Facebook. Put away your magazines and gadgets. Hide the biscuits and finish the tea. Be ruthlessly brutal in dispensing with things you know might distract you.

If your need for Internet distractions is close to pathological (like mine), try blocking web pages you know you might want to visit (Facebook, Gmail, BBC News, etc) using this.

Do what needs to be done to achieve minimalist basics. This is because distractions mean interruption. And interruption is a kick in the cognitive nuts. Interruptions mean you’ll take longer to get back to where you were and you’ll also make more mistakes doing so. (See my other blog for a more extensive article on interruption or have fun with this beast.)

Not only is interruption the hand that knocks all your papers out your hand, it is also is bad for memory formation, which is clearly bad news during revision. In Modulation of competing memory systems by distraction, a paper in PNAS, the authors report that multi-tasking adversely affects how you learn. The more complex the topic, the more attention it needs and the more memory suffers if you split your attention doing other things. See this article for a summary of the paper.

You might think distractions lubricate the painful and unnatural process of revision, but in reality they are just diluting its potency and augmenting it duration. Be strict with yourself; work more intensely and you'll work less.

Get excited!

It's an annoying fact of evolutionary carpentry that human memory is so resistant to academic learning and yet so happy to soak up other things, like the plot of a film. We feel this difference intimately. Extracting a paper's details is hard. Absorbing a film's plot is easy.

Yet, when stripped down to their essentials, the amount of naked, quivering data in a paper and in a film are comparable. Both have antecedents, names, dates, a logical sequence and conclusions. Nevertheless, we pick up the film's details collaterally, whilst the paper takes a bit of cognitive mastication. Wouldn't it be nice if we could learn papers like we acquire the minutiae of a movie?

I think you can get close. Whilst a film undoubtedly unfurls more easily into the channels of memory than a paper - exploiting all those things our minds are very good at (face recognition, mapping social relationships, organising narratives of events etc) - there is another ingredient: excitement. When you watch a film you are stimulated and interested; a paper may seem like an ordeal. The latter has to change.

Getting interested

I am fully cognizant that excitement and interest can't just be turned on and off when you feel like it. However, the renaissance of research into that curious emotion, interest, has told that things are interesting when they are:

1. high in "novelty–complexity...which refers to evaluating an event as new, unexpected, complex, hard to process, surprising, mysterious, or obscure" (Silvia's 2008 CDIPS paper, p.58)
2. accessible enough that "[P]eople feel able to comprehend them and master the challenges that they [the novelty-complexity] pose (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990)." (Silvia's 2008 CDIPS paper, p.58)

New papers and the ideas they house are likely to be new to you in the research stages of your revision and some are undoubtedly going to be complex. The first ingredient of interest is there.

This second point means that experts can be interested in things that cause novices to turn off because they have the knowledge to comprehend them.

This is important because the major reason I think people give up and get bored with experimental psychology is because they haven't put the groundwork in. If you enter new, complex stuff without the ability to understand it you will get bored.

The way to understand and get interested in this stuff is to understand the story leading up to it. This can only be done by voracious reading to acquire the 'big picture', which ironically may be rather dull.

However, once you master understanding you arrive at a lovely self-fulfilling cycle: the more you are interested by new, complex material, the more you learn about it, the more you are interested by new, complex material.

Bottom line: for interest to grow you need to feed it with a bit of boredom. In the vast majority of cases it will arise after hard, unexciting work when all confusion peals away and the elegant beauty of an area is revealed and it becomes interesting.

Extinguishing dislike

On the other hand, negativity towards your subject can be quashed and should be whenever you feel it creeping in. Remind yourself of what a fascinating subject yours is, both per se and relative to most other degrees. You are lucky to be studying it. If ever you forget this, peer over the partition in the library and see what your neighbour is working on.

Modern psychology or cognitive neuroscience is providing answers to all sorts of questions that have had philosophers scratching and pacing for millennia. Star Trek was wrong: space isn't the final frontier, we are. Our fantastically complex brains and behaviour are the most interesting bit of the unknown.

In an article in TIME, Pinker said "Overcoming naive impressions to figure out how things really work is one of humanity’s highest callings." He was talking about evolution, but the point still stands. The mind has a lot of naïve impressions about itself. Overcoming them to find out how we humans tick is one of the most important and interesting pursuits of modern intellectual inquiry.

As you enter this revision and examination period you'll need to shrug off the 'Erg work. Isn't it shit' attitude and take on the spirit of the badges at the top of this blog. Get really excited about this subject, all the gems its has to offer and the possibility to be really knowledgeable in it. If you don't it's just going to be academic self-laceration over the next few months.

At worst, with all that knowledge you'll have interesting things to say and the cool blade of science with which to cut down others' naïve ideas about the human mind. At best, your interest will pay dividends in extra marks because you'll spend longer learning, studying and reading (and doing so more deeply) and lay down better memories (see Silvia, 2006). Either way, you improve something.

What I can be certain of though is that if you are intrigued by your degree, you'll start to feel that the effort required for all that learning ahead of you is magically lifted away. Suddenly references will start appearing in your mind without having to sit down and write them out twenty times, methodologies will etch themselves into you memory, and arguments will unfold themselves effortlessly.

This is both experience and fact talking. There is a thick wadge of evidence that shows if you are emotionally invested in material you'll learn it more easily and it will stick for longer (e.g. LeDoux, 2002; or for a fairly recent review see Labar and Cabeza, 2006). And, if you are positive about learning you'll out-perform those just huffing along (Dweck, 2006).

Instead of mediocrity, seek excellence in psychology. Instead of feeling duty-bound, be excited to be learning about the newest stuff in the sexiest science. It will make everything a lot easier.