Can’t speak definitively about the relation of the 3 types of memory to the differences in intelligence.
But IQ research in general doesn’t map well to individual outcomes. It’s a population level statistical predictor. Not useful to pay attention to it as a practitioner.
Conversation
So as a practitioner, you look at memory research. What criteria you use to look at fields useful for practitioner? From the above, I can only form 1 criteria which is don’t look at population level statistical predictors
1
Actually, look at learning research. Memory research can be very very distracting.
What I've learnt is that you *shouldn't* read neuroscience. You want the right level of abstraction. So: neuroscience is too low level, whereas brain function is often useful.
2
1
“The right level of abstraction” is *great* advice.
On my own I did find the chunking model via Barbara Oakley work. Which I believe u covered somewhere.
Any other examples of brain function research?
2
hmm I thought u're already aware of chunking since u cited the magical number 7+-2 and 4+-1 research in ur article on memory.
I'm still figuring out the practical aspects tho as a explanatory model, I find it interesting. /1
1
Here's a link journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/a where there are *even* more links in the "Introduction" section pointing to chunking in language processing, visual perception, habit learning, & motor skills.
/2
1
1
My own highly *unscientific* usage of this idea is that
1. chunks are 3D where the surface are what we remember consciously and the content inside are stored away in long term memory. Then, we use the surface area like an API to trigger recall/recognition on content within.
/3
2
Ahh, alright then, nothing special. I was curious if Oakley had other things that are practical. It seems to me that the limits of short term memory thing is not very useful — the takeaway is simply “stagger your study sessions”.
1
>if Oakley had other things that are practical.
Directly? I would say no. Though I learn that concept from her first.
Question: would you find chunking applied to skill acquisition to be practical?
1
Yeah I’ve got mixed feelings about this. There seems to be consensus that chunking is how we learn skills ‘under the hood’. But it’s not clear to me how this is instrumentally useful.
Totally spitballing here
What if the people who perform better simply have optimal groupings of info?
Instead of letting chunking happen by chance, would there be improvement simply by making chunks explicit? And then debug suboptimal chunks by comparing against expert version?
1
1