@article{Gray2016,
title = {Plateaus, Dips, and Leaps: Where to Look for Inventions and Discoveries during Skilled Performance},
author = {Wayne D. Gray and John K. Lindstedt},
doi = {10.1111/cogs.12412},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-10-18},
journal = {Cognitive Science},
abstract = {120 years ago the emergent field of experimental psychology became embroiled in debates as to whether plateaus in performance are real (or not) and if so whether they were due to periods in which league-stepping methods originally defined by Bryan & Harter, 1897, 1899, as a hierarchy of habits that enabled experts to step leagues while novices were ``bustling over furlongs or inches'') were being acquired (or not). 20 years ago both the human-computer interaction (HCI) and cognitive science (CogSci) communities were seized with concerns over performance plateaus (i.e., extended periods of stable suboptimal performance) from experts. For HCI this was viewed as a systems problem and referred to as the Paradox of the Active User. CogSci diagnosed this as a training problem and embraced Deliberate Practice. We review this history and clarify the distinction between performance plateaus and asymptotes, suggesting that the former may be remediated by Deliberate Practice whereas the latter cannot. We then present a modest revision to the concept of Deliberate Practice which focuses on methods (i.e., patterns of cognitive, perceptual, and motor activities) that produce league-stepping jumps in performance and which questions whether all hard practice should be considered Deliberate Practice.},
keywords = {BreakOut, changepoint detection, digit span, dips, expertise, extreme expertise, leaps, performance, plateaus, Space Fortress},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
120 years ago the emergent field of experimental psychology became embroiled in debates as to whether plateaus in performance are real (or not) and if so whether they were due to periods in which league-stepping methods originally defined by Bryan & Harter, 1897, 1899, as a hierarchy of habits that enabled experts to step leagues while novices were ``bustling over furlongs or inches'') were being acquired (or not). 20 years ago both the human-computer interaction (HCI) and cognitive science (CogSci) communities were seized with concerns over performance plateaus (i.e., extended periods of stable suboptimal performance) from experts. For HCI this was viewed as a systems problem and referred to as the Paradox of the Active User. CogSci diagnosed this as a training problem and embraced Deliberate Practice. We review this history and clarify the distinction between performance plateaus and asymptotes, suggesting that the former may be remediated by Deliberate Practice whereas the latter cannot. We then present a modest revision to the concept of Deliberate Practice which focuses on methods (i.e., patterns of cognitive, perceptual, and motor activities) that produce league-stepping jumps in performance and which questions whether all hard practice should be considered Deliberate Practice.
Use of complementary actions decreases with expertise Incollection
Carlson, Laura ; H"olscher, Christoph ; Shipley, Thomas (Ed.): Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 2709-2014, Cognitive Science Society, Austin, TX, 2011.
@incollection{marc11csc,
title = {Use of complementary actions decreases with expertise},
author = { Marc Destefano and John K. Lindstedt and Wayne D. Gray},
editor = {Carlson, Laura and H"olscher, Christoph and Shipley, Thomas},
year = {2011},
date = {2011-01-01},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society},
pages = {2709-2014},
publisher = {Cognitive Science Society},
address = {Austin, TX},
abstract = {Evidence that the use of complementary (or epistemic) actions increases with expertise in the fast-paced interactive video game of Tetris has been previously reported (Kirsh, 1995; Kirsh & Maglio, 1994; Maglio & Kirsh, 1996). However, the range of expertise considered was small and classifying such actions can be difficult. We sample across a wide range of Tetris expertise and define complementary actions across multiple criterion of varying strictness. Contrary to prior work, our data suggest that complementary actions decrease with expertise, regardless of the criteria used. These findings cast into doubt the accepted wisdom on the role of complementary actions in expertise.},
keywords = {complementary action, embodied cognition, epistemic action, expertise, games, pragmatic action, soft constraints hypothesis, Tetris},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {incollection}
}
Evidence that the use of complementary (or epistemic) actions increases with expertise in the fast-paced interactive video game of Tetris has been previously reported (Kirsh, 1995; Kirsh & Maglio, 1994; Maglio & Kirsh, 1996). However, the range of expertise considered was small and classifying such actions can be difficult. We sample across a wide range of Tetris expertise and define complementary actions across multiple criterion of varying strictness. Contrary to prior work, our data suggest that complementary actions decrease with expertise, regardless of the criteria used. These findings cast into doubt the accepted wisdom on the role of complementary actions in expertise.
