Anders Ericsson: Dismantling the 10,000 Hour Rule

安德斯·爱立信:废除10,000小时规则

Good Life Project

自我完善

2016-05-16

1 小时 4 分钟
PDF

单集简介 ...

Ever hear of the 10,000 rule? The idea that it takes 10,000 hours to become world-class at anything? Well, what if it wasn't true? And, what if the research it was based on actually said something very different? Something that somehow got "lost in translation" when the data went mainstream. In today's conversation, we sit down with K. Anders Ericsson, PhD, Professor of Psychology at Florida State University. He studies what it takes to be the best in the world in domains such as music, chess, medicine, and sports. And it was his research that served of the basis for the now wildly popular 10,000 hour rule that's been cited in some of the biggest books of the last 10 years.. Problem is, as you're about to discover, it's a lie. There never was a 10,000 rule. That number, along with the idea of a "rule," is based on a series of misinterpretations of his work. In this new book, Peak: Secrets from the New Science of Expertise, and in today's conversation, Ericsson finally sets the record straight. He distills three decades of myth-shattering research into a powerful learning strategy that is fundamentally different from the way people traditionally think about acquiring new abilities. EIn This Episode You’ll Learn: The difference between "traditional" practice, "purposeful" practice and "deliberate" practice.How Malcolm Gladwell may have misinterpreted Ericsson's research on the 10,000 hour rule.How Ericsson sees the importance of the role of a teacher in accelerating the path to expertise.What actually motivates someone to do the often grueling work for the years it takes to become great.How he's studied people who have learned and developed systems to memorize long strings of numbers. Mentioned In This Episode: Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcolm GladwellWhiplash Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
更多

单集文稿 ...

  • So imagine stepping out of your day to day life and just dropping yourself into a gorgeous 130 acre natural playground for three and a half days of learning and laughing and moving your body and calming your brain and just reconnecting with people who see the world the same way that you do and just accept you as you are.

  • So that's what we've actually created with our camp GLP experience.

  • We've brought together this line of inspiring teachers, from art to entrepreneurship and writing to meditation, pretty much everything in between.

  • And it's this beautiful way to fill your noggin with ideas to live and work better and to fill your heart.

  • And with this rare opportunity to create the type of friendships and stories you thought you pretty much left behind decades ago.

  • And it's all happening at the end of August, just 90 minutes from New York City.

  • And more than half actually, well, more than half the spots are already gone at this point.

  • Be sure to grab your spot quickly because our final $100 early bird discount ends June 15, 2016.

  • After that, it goes up to full price.

  • So you can learn more@goodlifeproject.com camp or just click the link in the show notes.

  • Now.

  • If you feel it's futile to put in the effort, then obviously there's a motivational problem.

  • But once you basically see this as instrumental in you becoming something that you're currently not able to do, that I think is invigorating and motivating.

  • Have you ever wondered how to become extraordinary at pretty much anything?

  • Well, there are a lot of promises out there in the world.

  • There's a lot of mythology.

  • There are a lot of techniques and strategies.

  • Today's guest, Anders Eriksen, is actually one of the foremost researchers in the world on expert performance on becoming a extraordinary at nearly anything.

  • In fact, it was his research that Malcolm Gladwell originally was quoting when he sort of popularized the idea of the 10,000 hours rule.

  • And we talk about that and also how that attribution or that interpretation really wasn't quite what the original research showed.