Dual N-Back Strategies redux
crikey... not a bit sure which way i've been playing! just went back to 2, 3, 4 and 5-back and while i didn't need to consciously strategise to do well, it was difficult to suppress thoughts of what the next presentation would have to contain for me to press an arrow button- is that strategising? at the moment i'm on 6 and 7, and certainly i find it's necessary to memorise for these longer ones if i want to have any success.
? | 3 years ago
Reply
A very
small number of autistic savants can actually articulate what's going on in
their minds when they perform their impossible feats such as multiplying
extremely large numbers. They describe just being able to SEE the answer,
with very little 'thought' involved.
small number of autistic savants can actually articulate what's going on in
their minds when they perform their impossible feats such as multiplying
extremely large numbers. They describe just being able to SEE the answer,
with very little 'thought' involved.
? | 3 years ago
Reply
Dual N-Back Strategies redux
IMHO it's high time this subject come up again.
Brainworkshop quotes Jaeggi (I think she originally posted her views on a mailing list) to the effect that any kind of strategising is verboten - that only intuition should serve as a guide when playing the game: "They may try to hold the images in their head mentally and review them every time a new image is added and say the sounds out loud and review the sounds every time a new sound is added. This is NOT what we want."
I assume that, like me, this is what many (most?) people do.
Considering that Jaeggi appears to see this as being important, one would imagine that the guinea pigs in the original experiment were similarly informed and that here, without following a like procedure, people here will not get comparable results.
Am I right in highlighting this, or is there no reason to worry about using strategies?
Brainworkshop quotes Jaeggi (I think she originally posted her views on a mailing list) to the effect that any kind of strategising is verboten - that only intuition should serve as a guide when playing the game: "They may try to hold the images in their head mentally and review them every time a new image is added and say the sounds out loud and review the sounds every time a new sound is added. This is NOT what we want."
I assume that, like me, this is what many (most?) people do.
Considering that Jaeggi appears to see this as being important, one would imagine that the guinea pigs in the original experiment were similarly informed and that here, without following a like procedure, people here will not get comparable results.
Am I right in highlighting this, or is there no reason to worry about using strategies?
cevapcici | 3 years ago
Reply
The idea behind intuition is that one is not relying on long-term memory anchors when moving through the process. For me, when I'm doing this, the answer comes to me without review of the previous stimuli, which is an intuitive, looking-around-the-corner way of going about it. This is just my characterization of the situation.
Perhaps you ought consider that when one is doing these processes intuitively, one is relying on subconscious faculties, rather than conscious faculties.
Perhaps you ought consider that when one is doing these processes intuitively, one is relying on subconscious faculties, rather than conscious faculties.
? | 3 years ago
Reply
Interesting correlation with Jacob Boehme's statement:
"What hinders men from seeing and hearing God, is their own hearing, seeing and willing; by their own wills they separate themselves from the will of God. They see and hear within their own desires, which obstructs them from seeing and hearing God. Terrestrial and material things overshadow them, and they cannot see beyond their own human nature. If they would be still, desist from thinking and feeling with their own self-hood, subdue the self-will, enter into a state of resignation, into a divine union with Christ, who sees God, and hears God, and speaks with him, who knows the word and will of God; then would the eternal hearing seeing and speaking become revealed to them. "
Forgive the unsavory injection of "god" into the topic. Just replace it with "increased intelligence" or something and "Christ" with whatever you can imagine.
"What hinders men from seeing and hearing God, is their own hearing, seeing and willing; by their own wills they separate themselves from the will of God. They see and hear within their own desires, which obstructs them from seeing and hearing God. Terrestrial and material things overshadow them, and they cannot see beyond their own human nature. If they would be still, desist from thinking and feeling with their own self-hood, subdue the self-will, enter into a state of resignation, into a divine union with Christ, who sees God, and hears God, and speaks with him, who knows the word and will of God; then would the eternal hearing seeing and speaking become revealed to them. "
Forgive the unsavory injection of "god" into the topic. Just replace it with "increased intelligence" or something and "Christ" with whatever you can imagine.
? | 3 years ago
Reply
Hmm yes, I need to enter a state of Zenlike 'no-mind.'
I had managed to get up to 9-back using subvocal rehearsal and visual chunking into groups of three but, on playing 'intuitively' now, am down to 4-back - joy!
I had managed to get up to 9-back using subvocal rehearsal and visual chunking into groups of three but, on playing 'intuitively' now, am down to 4-back - joy!
cevapcici | 3 years ago
Reply
*glarb glarb gibber gibber* I can't get the hang of this intuitive lark - the only way I can get my brain to stop thinking is by playing very loud music whilst playing and swearing at myself whenever my mental landscape starts moving back in time (ie. most of the time).
I think I'll resign myself to letting intuition fill in the gaps when either my strategising reaches its limits or fails.
btw I had noticed after a few days of slaving away at 9-back that my *rehearsal processes* had got quicker (that is, I could subvocalise the 9 auditory stimuli without immediate error).
I think I'll resign myself to letting intuition fill in the gaps when either my strategising reaches its limits or fails.
btw I had noticed after a few days of slaving away at 9-back that my *rehearsal processes* had got quicker (that is, I could subvocalise the 9 auditory stimuli without immediate error).
cevapcici | 3 years ago
Reply
Turning off my thoughts and going through it intuitively, I suppose, is easier for me because I am a visuo-spatial brand of thinker, which means vocalisations are secondary, if relevant to my style at all. I'm currently at 5-back with the intuitive gambit—the only question that remains: who has sowed greater benefit from their own grime and sweat? As I recall, it isn't how high one's n-back is, but rather the degree to which one puts worthwhile effort into it that increases gF.
? | 3 years ago
Reply
Well, I subvocalise because I find it harder to remember the auditory stimuli (I get lower %s on them).
The thing I can't get the hang of (tho' I haven't been trying to convert to the intuitive style for long) is the 'distracted' concentration style, which, I presume, involves avoiding any kind of pattern-spotting between previous stimuli, like thinking 'Ooh, there's just been three of them in the top left hand corner.'
As for gF, well, who knows - I presume that not all subjects mastered the meditative intuitive style in previous studies (such as ADHD the children in Klingberg's studies or the students in Jaeggi's work(s)), yet all appeared to have shown some benefits (?).
The thing I can't get the hang of (tho' I haven't been trying to convert to the intuitive style for long) is the 'distracted' concentration style, which, I presume, involves avoiding any kind of pattern-spotting between previous stimuli, like thinking 'Ooh, there's just been three of them in the top left hand corner.'
As for gF, well, who knows - I presume that not all subjects mastered the meditative intuitive style in previous studies (such as ADHD the children in Klingberg's studies or the students in Jaeggi's work(s)), yet all appeared to have shown some benefits (?).
cevapcici | 3 years ago
Reply
My weakness in the dual n-back, like you, is the auditory half.
When listening to the auditory, you might want to try converting them into images emblazoned on the squares that appear -- a kind of compensatory skill rather than subvocalisation -- which would perhaps be more amenable to an intuitive attack on dual n-back. As you may have guessed, I do this myself.
When listening to the auditory, you might want to try converting them into images emblazoned on the squares that appear -- a kind of compensatory skill rather than subvocalisation -- which would perhaps be more amenable to an intuitive attack on dual n-back. As you may have guessed, I do this myself.
? | 3 years ago
Reply
Hmm the thing is that sounds like an effortful strategy - and one that may lessen whatever benefits may issue from otherwise having to deal with two different modalities (visual/auditory).
cevapcici | 3 years ago
Reply
As you yourself remark, this tactic could become purely subconscious with time (as it has for me). At any rate, its estimated difficulty is relative (and therefore a mere suggestion on my part -- where I had no intention of declaring by fiat its usefulness).
Regarding the whole conscious-subconscious issue: it is difficult for me to explain my experience of doing the n-back process, but I would have to say it is eminently intuitive in nature (it is a concentrated intuitive process, but not chock full of rehearsals and evaluations). And this hinges on the question to what degree (I admit) is dual n-back skill-laden as apposed to gF-demanding. It is interesting to pose the question insofar as how one wishes to characterise the process of an "increase" to gF -- is it all essentially a kind of skill? an other form to gC? But this is relatively speculative.
Regarding the whole conscious-subconscious issue: it is difficult for me to explain my experience of doing the n-back process, but I would have to say it is eminently intuitive in nature (it is a concentrated intuitive process, but not chock full of rehearsals and evaluations). And this hinges on the question to what degree (I admit) is dual n-back skill-laden as apposed to gF-demanding. It is interesting to pose the question insofar as how one wishes to characterise the process of an "increase" to gF -- is it all essentially a kind of skill? an other form to gC? But this is relatively speculative.
? | 3 years ago
Reply
cevapcici | 3 years ago
Reply
I might add, having the answers "come without effort", that is, subconscious-->conscious, seems much more attractive than rehearsing conscious elements over and over again (conscious-->conscious). Think about it: consciousness is such a small portion of the interaction of neural substrates. And a defining characteristic of mastery is its reflex-like quality.
But this is all my opinion, an opinion in full agreement with Jaeggi's.
But this is all my opinion, an opinion in full agreement with Jaeggi's.
? | 3 years ago
Reply
Tee-hee :-P
Yes, but presumably in most pursuits conscious processes (think deliberative practice) become subconscious as they are mastered.
After all, the basic rehearsal strategies I have used have not changed in kind, nor in felt intensity, through the n-back levels. Rehearsal and recall have become more efficient and effective over time, but this is not because I am *choosing to rehearse in a different way.*
Yes, but presumably in most pursuits conscious processes (think deliberative practice) become subconscious as they are mastered.
After all, the basic rehearsal strategies I have used have not changed in kind, nor in felt intensity, through the n-back levels. Rehearsal and recall have become more efficient and effective over time, but this is not because I am *choosing to rehearse in a different way.*
cevapcici | 3 years ago
Reply
"Yes, but presumably in most pursuits conscious processes (think deliberative practice) become subconscious as they are mastered."
Yes! I think this should be plastered on the walls of every place of learning. Practice is given far too little attention.
cognitivefun | 3 years ago
Reply
Rote is not an entirely beneficial form of learning. Consider repeating things over and over; this does not form intricate and detailed understanding. In fact, this form of teaching is largely used in the US, where my contempt finds no resolution.
? | 3 years ago
Reply
Well, there's a difference between mindless repetition of isolated material and repetition of something that is related explicitly to something greater, with this relation being enlarged upon variously and often.
With regard to understanding, rote learning of material may help free mental resources that may be then dedicated to apprehending the detail rather than having to recalculate (perhaps literally) the obvious but forgettable (eg. not knowing 7 x 8 = 56 would greatly reduce the chances of being able correctly to calculate 7 x 88 mentally, let alone 77 x 88).
Where I think there may be a shortfall is in teachers failing to capitalise on knowledge and skills learnt by rote after the job has been done. For instance, a few elementary school-level maths rules, learnt by rote, can often then be combined to create an infinity of cunning puzzles to educe greater understanding. Unfortunately, activities like this are time-consuming to source/create and pitch at the correct level, unlike discrete exercises.
With regard to understanding, rote learning of material may help free mental resources that may be then dedicated to apprehending the detail rather than having to recalculate (perhaps literally) the obvious but forgettable (eg. not knowing 7 x 8 = 56 would greatly reduce the chances of being able correctly to calculate 7 x 88 mentally, let alone 77 x 88).
Where I think there may be a shortfall is in teachers failing to capitalise on knowledge and skills learnt by rote after the job has been done. For instance, a few elementary school-level maths rules, learnt by rote, can often then be combined to create an infinity of cunning puzzles to educe greater understanding. Unfortunately, activities like this are time-consuming to source/create and pitch at the correct level, unlike discrete exercises.
cevapcici | 3 years ago
Reply
? | 3 years ago
Reply
cevapcici | 3 years ago
Reply
Here is a direct Jaeggi quote:
==============================
thank you for your interest in our work.
just curious - are you training on one of our programs...(
www.braintwister.unibe.ch) or are you training on one of the versions that
are available online? i assume you are, since you practice the modalities
separately... i would not recommend you to do this if you want to train the
dual-task (the one we used in our study). the reason is that the combination
of both modalities is an entirely different task than doing both separately!
if you do the task separately, i assume you use some "rehearsal strategies",
e.g. you repeat the letters or positions for yourself. in the dual-task
version however, this strategies might be more difficult to apply (since you
have to do 2 things simultaneously...). and that is exactly what we want...
we don't want to train strategies, we want to train processes. processes
that then might help you in the performance of other, non-trained tasks (and
that is our ultimate goal). so, it is not important to reach a 7- or
8-back... it is important to fully focus your attention on the task as well
as possible.
i can assure you, it is a very tough training regimen.... you can't divert
your attention even 1 second (i am sure you have noticed...). but
eventually, you will see that you get better at it and maybe you notice that
you are better able to concentrate on certain things, to remember things
more easily, etc. (hopefully).
i don't know of anyone at UCLA telling us that they are working on this
now....
hope this helps.
susanne
==============================
thank you for your interest in our work.
just curious - are you training on one of our programs...(
www.braintwister.unibe.ch) or are you training on one of the versions that
are available online? i assume you are, since you practice the modalities
separately... i would not recommend you to do this if you want to train the
dual-task (the one we used in our study). the reason is that the combination
of both modalities is an entirely different task than doing both separately!
if you do the task separately, i assume you use some "rehearsal strategies",
e.g. you repeat the letters or positions for yourself. in the dual-task
version however, this strategies might be more difficult to apply (since you
have to do 2 things simultaneously...). and that is exactly what we want...
we don't want to train strategies, we want to train processes. processes
that then might help you in the performance of other, non-trained tasks (and
that is our ultimate goal). so, it is not important to reach a 7- or
8-back... it is important to fully focus your attention on the task as well
as possible.
i can assure you, it is a very tough training regimen.... you can't divert
your attention even 1 second (i am sure you have noticed...). but
eventually, you will see that you get better at it and maybe you notice that
you are better able to concentrate on certain things, to remember things
more easily, etc. (hopefully).
i don't know of anyone at UCLA telling us that they are working on this
now....
hope this helps.
susanne
? | 3 years ago
Reply
"are you training on one of our programs...(www.braintwister.unibe.ch) or are you training on one of the versions that
are available online? i assume you are, since you practice the modalities separately... i would not recommend you to do this if you want to train the dual-task (the one we used in our study). the reason is that the combination
of both modalities is an entirely different task than doing both separately!"
Just to clarify: At this site we are training with the dual-task and not separately, right? The task here strikes me as very much a "dual task" with auditory and visual stimuli hitting at once. Jaeggi is right -- a tough training regimen it is.
I now at 4 back and what I notice myself doing now, that I didn't do before at 2 or 3 back is imagining -- visually projecting -- patterns in the box to help me remember the sequence. This get a bit confounded at 5 back where I do seem to lose track at that level. Perhaps I'll evolve ability to hit 5 and higher, but I have no desire to master high level of N back's by way of strategy since my goal isn't to conquer the game but rather to feel the "far transfer" effects.
are available online? i assume you are, since you practice the modalities separately... i would not recommend you to do this if you want to train the dual-task (the one we used in our study). the reason is that the combination
of both modalities is an entirely different task than doing both separately!"
Just to clarify: At this site we are training with the dual-task and not separately, right? The task here strikes me as very much a "dual task" with auditory and visual stimuli hitting at once. Jaeggi is right -- a tough training regimen it is.
I now at 4 back and what I notice myself doing now, that I didn't do before at 2 or 3 back is imagining -- visually projecting -- patterns in the box to help me remember the sequence. This get a bit confounded at 5 back where I do seem to lose track at that level. Perhaps I'll evolve ability to hit 5 and higher, but I have no desire to master high level of N back's by way of strategy since my goal isn't to conquer the game but rather to feel the "far transfer" effects.
milestones | 3 years ago
Reply
To answer your question: as the name "dual n-back" implies, we are engaged in dual modalities: aural and visual, meaning that your assumption is correct.
Anyway, it is a fun thing to see oneself grow with progressive challenge, even if having a higher n-value isn't all that brilliant.
Anyway, it is a fun thing to see oneself grow with progressive challenge, even if having a higher n-value isn't all that brilliant.
? | 3 years ago
Reply
? | 3 years ago
Reply
no strategy?
what sense does this make? does the brain work this way?
by constantly changing and maintaining the focus of attention, simultaneously processing both auditory and spatial information, retrieving the contents of working memory, and updating the contents of working memory... the brain will adapt to make these processes easier, apparently by modifying/expanding/strengthening the cortical/(subcortical(?)) map utilized for these tasks
somehow, the adaptation of brain circuitry called upon to perform these subprocesses overlaps with the circuitry needed to 'reason and solve problems independently of previously acquired knowledge'
...when J-B said "a wide range of applications"... they were at the tip of a very large iceberg
what sense does this make? does the brain work this way?
by constantly changing and maintaining the focus of attention, simultaneously processing both auditory and spatial information, retrieving the contents of working memory, and updating the contents of working memory... the brain will adapt to make these processes easier, apparently by modifying/expanding/strengthening the cortical/(subcortical(?)) map utilized for these tasks
somehow, the adaptation of brain circuitry called upon to perform these subprocesses overlaps with the circuitry needed to 'reason and solve problems independently of previously acquired knowledge'
...when J-B said "a wide range of applications"... they were at the tip of a very large iceberg
medicalstudent | 3 years ago
Reply
medicalstudent | 3 years ago
Reply
Jaeggi argues that it is not how much one remembers or "retrieve and update", but the point of dual n-back is to learn a new process. In theory this new process translates into better working memory. Jaeggi's argument seems very abstract and hard to understand, but perhaps she is correct... as we don't really know the extent to which our experiences effect our subconscious mind.
? | 3 years ago
Reply
right, somehow I still don't understand.
so to fully gain from dual n-back I shouldn't be rehearsing? just use "intuition"?
on the other hand when I use rehearsal "strategies" I also have to focus on the task, so gains should be similar.
so to fully gain from dual n-back I shouldn't be rehearsing? just use "intuition"?
on the other hand when I use rehearsal "strategies" I also have to focus on the task, so gains should be similar.
unnormal | 3 years ago
Reply
intuition is an obscure word, obfuscating things
rehearse... rehearse and your brain will get better at seeing what was once before
rehearse... rehearse and your brain will get better at seeing what was once before
? | 3 years ago
Reply
if this "process" is not elucidated, it is meaningless.
"...as we don't really know the extent to which our experiences effect our subconscious mind"
this is true, mysterious
set up two groups. one uses 'strategies', one uses 'feel', see who has more transfer
then some light will seep into black box
"...as we don't really know the extent to which our experiences effect our subconscious mind"
this is true, mysterious
set up two groups. one uses 'strategies', one uses 'feel', see who has more transfer
then some light will seep into black box
medicalstudent | 3 years ago
Reply
medicalstudent | 3 years ago
Reply
I think you hit the nail on its head. The aim of the program is to refine the supposed neural correlates of working memory, which in turn seem to improve gF. While this may be a neurological strategy, it is not necessarily a psycho-phenomenological strategy. (Boy, that'll make your tongue go numb.)
? | 3 years ago
Reply
'K. Here is what I've gathered so far. You *want* to develop an *intuitive
feel* for when an item is 3 back or 4 back or whatever. You *don't* want to
work on actively memorizing the stimuli--learn a strategy. I battled with
this in the beginning. I even talked to Susanne, one of the authors of the
study and she corrected me. You want to focus your attention on what's
going on on the screen and get your brain to intuitively feel if your
current stimuli was also shown n-back. I compare it to being fluent at a
foreign language. Initially, you have to translate in your head. (Learn a
strategy) Then eventually, your brain develops a new process. A new set of
cells are wired in your brain and eventually, your brain has developed a new
process to speak in that language without translating. I think it's
better to start out forcing your brain to "think in dual n-back" instead of
focusing on memorizing. This isn't a memory exercise. It's a connection
exercise --disguised as a memory exercise. (However, in order to make the
connections, your working memory is forced to improve) I think dual-n-back
is using the brains plasticity to develop new processes that can be used for
a wide array of tasks.
The fact that this new process is developed in your brain is what the
authors theorize makes the results transferable to other mental tasks.
So my opinion, is that you may need to refocus on allowing your brain to
become "fluent" at dual n back and not focus on remembering what was last
etc. Now initially, this may dull your scores ( you may move from being
proficient at 4 back to only being able to hold it together at 3 back),
however, once the process is learned your brain will apply it to other
mental tasks. Your brain is learning to get better at making connections.
It's connecting a current stimuli with a past stimuli The better and faster
we can make these connections the better we can debate, or learn new math
concepts, or make other abstract connections. '
-BorkBork Chef
feel* for when an item is 3 back or 4 back or whatever. You *don't* want to
work on actively memorizing the stimuli--learn a strategy. I battled with
this in the beginning. I even talked to Susanne, one of the authors of the
study and she corrected me. You want to focus your attention on what's
going on on the screen and get your brain to intuitively feel if your
current stimuli was also shown n-back. I compare it to being fluent at a
foreign language. Initially, you have to translate in your head. (Learn a
strategy) Then eventually, your brain develops a new process. A new set of
cells are wired in your brain and eventually, your brain has developed a new
process to speak in that language without translating. I think it's
better to start out forcing your brain to "think in dual n-back" instead of
focusing on memorizing. This isn't a memory exercise. It's a connection
exercise --disguised as a memory exercise. (However, in order to make the
connections, your working memory is forced to improve) I think dual-n-back
is using the brains plasticity to develop new processes that can be used for
a wide array of tasks.
The fact that this new process is developed in your brain is what the
authors theorize makes the results transferable to other mental tasks.
So my opinion, is that you may need to refocus on allowing your brain to
become "fluent" at dual n back and not focus on remembering what was last
etc. Now initially, this may dull your scores ( you may move from being
proficient at 4 back to only being able to hold it together at 3 back),
however, once the process is learned your brain will apply it to other
mental tasks. Your brain is learning to get better at making connections.
It's connecting a current stimuli with a past stimuli The better and faster
we can make these connections the better we can debate, or learn new math
concepts, or make other abstract connections. '
-BorkBork Chef
? | 3 years ago
Reply
http://www.apn.psy.unibe.ch/lenya/apn/live/Lehre/alteveranstaltungen/SS07/masterSS07/trainingSS07/09_Sind_Strategien_hilfreich_MK.pdf
A small study on whether using strategies made any difference to performance on 3-back. Apparently, not much.
A small study on whether using strategies made any difference to performance on 3-back. Apparently, not much.
cevapcici | 3 years ago
Reply
medicalstudent | 3 years ago
Reply
borkbork - I guess your example with foreign language was really good. the thing is that with rehearsing I'm now at 4 back. when I try to go intuitive I end up on 3- or 2-back. However I have no problem with 2-back, I don't have to reaherse anything. when I started playing the game I struggled even on 2-back level with rehearse. so I guess I learned the process anyway. does anyone have similar observations?
unnormal | 3 years ago
Reply
