ARE WE BORN OR MADE SMART
Condensed from The Economist
Thomas Edison gave his famous formula for genius as 1 percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration. Modern-day students of geniuses and prodigies, though, argue over the relative contributions of more tangible factors - of genetics, of physiology, of hours spent in training. Most believe that geniuses have special genes.
Anders Ericsson, a psychologist at Florida State University, falls into the minority camp. Given 10 years of deliberate practice, Dr Ericsson says, anyone should be able to attain prodigy-level performance in his discipline. The intuitive objection to this idea is the "Mozart argument," as it is called by Brian Butterworth, a neuroscientist at University College London. This argument is that not everyone can become a Mozart merely by dint of hard work. Dr Ericsson wonders why not. After all, he argues, did not Mozart become Mozart by dint of hard work?
Dr Ericsson explains that such people have developed powerful memories for storing information.
Psychologists recognise a distinction between short-term "working"
memory and long-term memory. Dr Ericsson believes that prodigies
get mileage out of their working memories by placing important
information into their long-term memories in a way that makes
them accessible to working-memory processes.
He says this "long-term working memory" is essential
for expert performance in any field, from chess to typing to
golf, and can be developed at will.
Recently, some neuroscientists tried to observe long-term working
memory in action. Nathalie Tzourio-Mazoyer at the University
of Caen, in France, and her colleagues measured the brain activity
of a math prodigy as he performed arithmetical acrobatics.
Their subject, Rüdiger Gamm, can calculate the fifth root of a ten-digit numeral within seconds, and as quickly raise a two-digit number to its ninth power.
Dr Tzourio-Mazoyer's team said Mr Gamm appeared to be using his long-term memory to store the working results that he needed to complete his calculations. His use of this extra memory space meant that he could circumvent that perennial pitfall of mental arithmetic, losing one's place. Mr Gamm, who is now 26, developed his skills, through four hours of practising memorisation daily, only after he had passed the ripe old age of 20.
This study seems to provide evidence for Dr Ericsson's idea
that long-term working memory underpins prodigy-level performance.
So far, so plausible. But Dr Ericsson also maintains that such
memory function, and the superlative performance that goes with
it, can be attained by anyone - biology no bar - given enough
perseverance.
This is a much more contentious point. Twenty years ago, Dr Ericsson
tried to prove it by training ordinary laboratory volunteers
in a number-memory task. Average people tend to have a "digit-span"
of seven - they can recall seven digits after hearing it read
out once. But after a year's practice, two of his subjects increased
their digit-spans to lengths of 80 and 100.
Ellen Winner, a psychologist at Boston College, argues that only children with the "rage to master" a skill could make it through the gruelling years of training needed to achieve expert ability. Even Dr Ericsson concedes that there might be a genetic component separating the child willing to persevere with a rigorous schedule from the child who would rather play video games.
Even if there are no born mathematicians or musicians, there may be "born achievers."
But Dean Simonton of the University of California, San Diego, has dubbed it the "drudge theory" of genius. Dr Simonton has written about psychologists who were geniuses.
Dr Ericsson is not on his list, but in 10 years he doubtless will be - if he wants it enough.
APRIL/MAY 2001
|
ContentsCharlie BarnesNews NotesCompressionIn MemoriamFavorite Prof |
