Key to Greatness is Working Memory, Not Practice
By Rick Nauert PhD Senior News Editor
Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on October 6, 2011
Even the most neophyte computer user knows that the more RAM a system has, the better its performance. A new research study uses a similar comparison as one expert believes that an individual’s working memory capacity is the deciding factor in determining whether a person is good or great.
Dr. Zach Hambrick, a Michigan State scientist, has found that people with higher levels of working memory capacity outperformed those with lower levels — and even in individuals with extensive experience and knowledge of the task at hand.
Hambrick’s opinion is contrary to a popular viewpoint that practice, and more practice, is the “x quotient” — an opinion expressed in best-selling books by authors David Brooks and Malcolm Gladwell.
Hambrick suggests working memory capacity — which is closely related to general intelligence — is the deciding factor between good and great. Working memory refers to the brain’s temporary storage and manipulation of information for complex cognitive tasks like language comprehension, learning and reasoning.
In a series of studies, Hambrick and colleagues found that people with higher levels of working memory capacity outperformed those with lower levels — and even in individuals with extensive experience and knowledge of the task at hand. The studies analyzed complex tasks such as piano sight reading.
“While the specialized knowledge that accumulates through practice is the most important ingredient to reach a very high level of skill, it’s not always sufficient,” said Hambrick, associate professor of psychology.
“Working memory capacity can still predict performance in complex domains such as music, chess, science, and maybe even in sports that have a substantial mental component such as golf.”
In the paper, which appears in the research journal Current Directions in Psychological Science, Hambrick noted that both Gladwell and Brooks argued that intelligence only goes so far.
“A person with a 150 IQ is in theory much smarter than a person with a 120 IQ, but those additional 30 points produce little measurable benefit when it comes to lifetime success,” Brooks writes in “The Social Animal.”
Hambrick’s response: “David Brooks and Malcolm Gladwell are simply wrong. The evidence is quite clear: A high level of intellectual ability puts a person at a measurable advantage — and the higher the better.”
Research has shown that intelligence has both genetic and environmental origins, Hambrick said, yet “for a very long time we have tried and failed to come up with ways to boost people’s intelligence.”
Hambrick and his fellow researchers continue to study the issue. “The jury’s still out on whether you can improve your general intelligence,” he said.
“We hold out hope that cognitive training of some sort may produce these benefits. But we have yet to find the magic bullet.”
Source: Michigan State University
I haven’t had time to write Susan and Mig directly about this—totally busy—but here is a relevant query/opinion by a distinguished computer scientist whose blog I assist. I wrote the first paragraph and the “Chess Again” section, but the rest is his. My mention of “My Brilliant Brain” already fit in with what he was trying to say.
Hi Susan Polgar,
With all due respect to everybody involved in this article. [ Dr.Zach Hambrick,Mr.David Brooks,Mr.Malcolm Gladwell and this article’s author Dr.Rick Nauert and the reviewer Mr.John M.Grohol ]
Interesting article.
I take pleasure to express my introspection about this article,if I am wrong anywhere,kindly brush aside those.
Now,to my introspection,there isn’t any greater difference between the views of “Dr.Zach Hambrick and Mr.David Brooks & Mr.Malcolm Gladwell ” – All three converge,at a meaningful exploration of Greater human intelligence.
Let me now add few words to justify my inference drawn after reading this article.
==========
Predominant views of the three great authors are.
1.Dr.Zach Hambrick – Emphasize “Memory” for greater intelligence.
2.Mr.David Brook & Malcolm Gladwell – Emphasize “Practice” for greater intelligence.
=======
Now,let me exhibit the existence of correlation between these three authors.
To do that,few questions may sound essential.
1.Does,those who own immense “Memory” has bigger brain [ Both in size and weight ] ?
To my understanding : No,so Human beings memory,needs no additional space than the usual,to own immense memory.
This mere fact,that there needs no additional space in human brain for greater memory,emphasis a point,that greater memory can be made to reside in same brain,where memory is comparatively less currently.
2.So now the question is,how can greater memory be made to reside & retrieved in & from brain ?
To my understanding : Through “Practice”,which involves different techniques for better storage and retrieval.
Now comes the correlation between the three authors :
Immense Memory aids greater intelligence and immense memory can be developed “By Practicing the techniques to store & retrieve information in brain”which can be used with intelligence to shape out has greater intellectual.
Conclusively,intelligence exponentially increase,if aided with greater memory.
So,memory by itself will not shape as intelligence and just intelligence by itself can not turn up as greater intelligence.
By
Venky [ India – Chennai ]
We have had chess masters whose working memory must have been outstanding: Pillsbury (with all his memory exhibitions), and Najdorf (with his record of simultaneous blindfold chess). They, however great, were not the very top masters of their time.
Let’s hope that someday science can come out with some reliable ways to boost human intelligence, and not by some types of easy shortcuts, like ingesting some chemical substances 🙂
Another important and very relevant issue is how to have people fully develop their talents. We all see many talented people, in different fields, that somehow don’t get to develop their full potential. And it happens not only because of economic or social handicaps in the third world, but also happens in wealthy developed countries. The whole human society would be far better if we could minimize the undeveloped and wasted talent. Here is an article that touches on this subject:
http://highability.org/603/higher-iq-than-hawking-but-what-challenges-may-victoria-cowie-face/.