Consummate dilettantism!

Showing posts with label Intelligence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Intelligence. Show all posts

Monday, March 9, 2009

Mensa? Pshaw.

Mensa? LOL. 1 person in 50 qualifies. That's easy pickings: There are six million people in this country alone who can join. But you still think you're smart, eh? Try qualifying for Mega Society membership, for which only being in the 99.9999th IQ percentile suffices. That's one in a million.

Take it with a grain of salt, especially when their fancy schmancy journal includes garbage like this. Also see this partial refutation. This too (third item down). Oh, and this (scroll down).

Friday, December 19, 2008

How Does He Do It?

A commenter asks:
Wow 7 back , thats some serious dedication. Question, do you just let it happen, or do you use active attention? I have heard that keeping a mental image doesn't work well.
I have also heard it said that doing dual n-back intuitively is the best way to do it. But I can't imagine that it's possible to let your unconscious mind take over entirely. As I said here:
I'm finding the task too easy. (By "easy" I mean that I can and know how to do it, not that it comes effortlessly. In fact, it requires a lot of effort on my part.) At first it was ferociously difficult, but now I'm just memorizing sequences of letters and visualizing them on the grid. (I'm not repeating them aloud, but I am rehearsing the letters and their places in my mind during the interludes.) To jump from 6 to 7 required only a little more concentration, not a shift in thought. [...] I've read what everyone has had to say on doing the task "intuitively," but I can't imagine how one can do 7 n-back [sic -- should be dual 7-back] like this. Without intense concentration and memorization, is it even possible? Is anyone able to do, say, 6 or 7 n-back without really trying?
I don't think so. I am presently able to do dual 3-back with a bare minimum of effort, and I consistently score 100% while paying only a little attention. But I don't do it intuitively; my mind has simply become accustomed to doing the task, and so memorizing the a sequence of 3 has become incredibly easy for me. I "chunk" the sequence -- I compare the current 3 blocks with the 3 blocks in memory while simultaneously memorizing the current 3 blocks. Not attempting to memorize anything is, I think, unrealistic. (But I do sometimes find my fingers being correctly compelled to press "A" or "L" when my conscious mind isn't sure of the answer. I find this fascinating.) I don't, however, make a mental image; I really just visualize the position of the blocks and memorize the sequence of letters. Intuitively, I guess, my mind knows the order of the positions; either that or I memorize the "line" of position progression, which I think is an excellent technique.

Interestingly enough, I find dual 3-back easier than dual 2-back. I'm not really sure why -- perhaps it's because I'm not actually memorizing a sequence in dual 2-back, and so it's easier to lose track of whether the present is really the present or not. It's hard to explain. Has anyone noticed anything similar?

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Can't Do It [NSFW!]

Fuck you, internet!

I can't do it. I give up. Jesus Christ, dual n-back is boring and hard as fuck. Doing it for 20 minutes a day for the past few weeks has been utterly killer. I dread it more than anything in the world. But let me tell you something -- I've gotten up to dual 7-back the past few days. Let me repeat that: dual 7-back. Yeah, I thought it was impossible; it is assuredly not. Think dual 7-back is your grandma's game?

Think again, bitch.

Go ahead. Download the game and try it yourself. You'll probably fail at dual 2-back. But keep practicing and you'll get better.

As for that report I promised you on December 24th, well, it's not coming. [Yeah, fuck you too. -Ed.] I can't exercise like that, I just can't. Even dual n-back isn't sustainable.

But this is all in the spirit of experimentation, right? How do I feel? Has any of this worked? I can say that dual n-back has given me a boost of confidence (and possibly intelligence) -- I think mental math comes more easily, although this could of course be placebo. Whether it is or isn't, however, it's certainly welcome; if it is, then placebo is totally awesome and not to be underestimated. (You really do feel smarter when you do well in the game.) But fluid intelligence isn't necessary for any of my current classes; I'll be taking computer science next year, and may decide to take it up again then.

In the meantime, I'll be attempting to experiment on my own intelligence a little more with Rise of Nations and nootropics/assorted things. Will either work? Dunno -- check back right here in a month or two for results!

Now get me a Brompton cocktail or something. Goodnight!

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Day 1 of MIG

(Scroll down for a grueling, free, self-devised, completely safe, scientifically valid training regimen called MIG [Multiphasic Intelligence Growth] that will probably increase your intelligence*. No, I'm not kidding. I put a lot of time into writing this post and doing the necessary research and fact-checking, and I do hope you at least read it.)

My interest in increasing intelligence was sparked by a recent, groundbreaking study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that purports to show that increasing fluid intelligence (Gf) is possible. (Fluid intelligence, or Gf, is a component of general intelligence (g) that is related to problem-solving ability and working memory.) The study is the first to show that training can actually improve fluid intelligence (Gf) as measured by a standard test entirely unrelated to the training test. (Individuals' scores on IQ tests have been raised with practice, but only by practicing IQ tests. This study suggests that fluid intelligence itself can actually be raised with a few, albeit extremely cognitively demanding, hours of training.) It suggests, remarkably, that unlike other intensive tasks the Dual N-Back game actually, well, makes you smarter -- this has never been conclusively demonstrated before. Of course, certain caveats apply, but in the words of Yale's Robert Sternberg, "[n]one of these criticisms detracts from the central importance of the results of Jaeggi et al.'s study. On the contrary, they suggest that their study should and probably will be the first in a long series instigated by this pioneering research." Indeed, his most incisive suggestions are addressed by several studies that demonstrate that working memory can be improved dramatically with training, and that this improvement is largely attributable to long-lasting brain changes. These other studies did not measure Gf; perhaps if they had, they would have found similar results.

I began canvassing the literature and seeking other well-established methods that also claim to raise intelligence. I have come to the conclusion that there are two others that when used in concern with the N-Back game will likely do so:

1. Aerobic exercise. One study shows that aerobic exercise improves the cognitive abilities of the elderly, while another suggests that it improves creative potential. A very nice summary of the research to date provides additional evidence that aerobic exercise is indeed causally linked to increases in intelligence. And a dissertation titled "The effect of aerobic exercise on fluid intelligence" may show the same; unfortunately, it is not accessible on the internet. Mens sana in corpore sano!

2. Diet. A veritable battery of studies proves that what you eat and drink can improve cognition. In the article linked to above, evidence is presented that certain foods can increase certain types of intelligence. Moderate consumption of alcohol and possibly marijuana may increase neurogenesis, or the generation of neurons, while fat and sugar intake is detrimental thereto. Chocolate, or more precisely epicatechin, has been "shown to improve spatial memory in mice, especially among those that exercised." A study published in Nature outlines the role of food in brain function. A summary in The Economist will tell you what you need to know: Antioxidants (found in berries), omega-3 fatty acids (found in fish), folic acid (found in high concentrations in spinach, orange juice, and marmite!) and vitamin E (found in green, leafy vegetables) all improve cognitive abilities to some extent. But there is little evidence that taking supplements of these as a healthy adult will increase intelligence; be sure, however, that you do not lack any in your diet.

Meditation initially looked promising, but many of the studies that find benefits, however, are somewhat esoteric. Additionally, almost all of the studies that do report positive results tend to do so over months and years. The most promising of all is one study, published in the journal Intelligence, that finds that "[transcendental meditation] practice produced significant effects on all variables [including IQ] compared to no-treatment controls." "Transcendental meditation," however, is a proprietary technique that costs about $2,500. It is somewhat controversial, and there may be serious problems with the research, which is usually conducted (as here) by members of TM-affiliated organizations and universities. It is also somewhat time consuming; to realize the apparent effect you must meditate anywhere from 30 to 45 minutes per day for up to a year.

This is the routine that I have developed and will follow for a month, after which time I will report on my subjective mental state:

1. I will complete 25 minutes' worth of n-back sessions per day for 4 or 5 days per week with a free, open-source n-back program that closely imitates the conditions of the original study.
2. I will perform a vigorous aerobic activity (jogging) for 30 minutes per day, as recommended by the United States federal government.
3. I will endeavor to reduce my consumption of saturated fats and sugars and to increase my consumption of vegetables and complex starches. This is facilitated by the abundance of such foods, which would ordinarily be more expensive to consume, in the dining halls of my university.

I will not be taking any intelligence tests either before or after, but will instead choose to "report on my subjective mental state." Obviously there is some danger of succumbing to placebo, but I have become quite adept at avoiding this trap.

Doubt I can follow it? Return to this blog in a month for my full report. I do not lie and I do not cheat, and when I pledge to the world my allegiance to MIG, I mean it.

*If followed properly, of course. Whether the increase will be permanent is another matter, but the evidences presented here suggest that it will be long-lasting.

Monday, November 17, 2008

Video Games Are Good For You

From the ever-compelling Gladwell:
Reading books chronically understimulates the senses. Unlike the longstanding tradition of gameplaying—which engages the child in a vivid, three-dimensional world filled with moving images and musical sound-scapes, navigated and controlled with complex muscular movements—books are simply a barren string of words on the page. . . .
Books are also tragically isolating. While games have for many years engaged the young in complex social relationships with their peers, building and exploring worlds together, books force the child to sequester him or herself in a quiet space, shut off from interaction with other children. . . .
But perhaps the most dangerous property of these books is the fact that they follow a fixed linear path. You can't control their narratives in any fashion—you simply sit back and have the story dictated to you. . . . This risks instilling a general passivity in our children, making them feel as though they're powerless to change their circumstances. Reading is not an active, participatory process; it's a submissive one.

Thursday, April 10, 2008

I Knew It

What follows is the best explanation I have yet seen for intelligence. Come to my school on any given day and you will see its truth. I have thought along the same lines myself for a long time, and I have no doubt that it is correct.
The study also lends support to the emerging view that intelligence has both multiple discrete components -- such as, for example, the independent verbal and visuospatial domains -- and an overarching general aspect, which the researchers believe may be "executive function," tapped when the domains undertake more complex or novel tasks. Executive function may also coordinate and modulate the domains' various lower-level processes.
Read the whole thing.

The only question that remains in my mind regards the genetic component of intelligence. In other words, how are these separate intelligences inherited genetically, and how are they environmentally determined? The answer to this question is perhaps one of the greatest hitherto unsolved in all of science.