Scientists have shown why a person can see an object every day, but not understand how an object is arranged.
It seems that the Apple logo can not be forgotten: a bitten apple is found on laptops, phones, showcases and packages. But it is worth asking people to draw a sign from memory, confidence quickly crumbles. In one study involving 85 people, only about half was able to choose the correct logo among similar variants, and only one participant accurately drew the sign. The study shows a strange feature of human memory well: a frequent encounter with the subject does not mean that the brain keeps an exact copy.
Scientists received a similar result long before smartphones and laptops. The classic work of 1979 showed that people do not remember the appearance of the coin in one cent: participants could not accurately draw pennies and hardly choose the right option among erroneous images.
The problem is not limited to the appearance of familiar things. People often believe that they understand the device of objects from everyday life, but get lost when you need to explain the mechanism. In a 2006 study, many participants made serious mistakes in drawing a bicycle: for example, they ran a chain at the same time around the front and rear wheel. Such a mistake no longer speaks of a forgotten cog, but about the misunderstanding of the principle of work, because a bicycle with such a chain could not turn normally.
Cognitive science describes a similar effect as the illusion of the depth of explanation. Knowledge of the world often consists of scraps, and the brain draws confidence over the gaps. People tend to overestimate the understanding of household devices and natural phenomena. While a person evaluates his knowledge as a whole, the assessment is high. When the researcher asks to explain exactly how lightning works, lock, bicycle or brakes of the car, confidence noticeably falls.
A similar failure concerns not only knowledge about objects, but also knowledge of one’s own knowledge. In the scientific literature, this area is called метазнаниемmetasination. The author of the source material, a researcher from the field of cognitive science, recalls that scientists have found gaps between what a person thinks about his own understanding and what a person is really able to explain.
One reason for re-evaluation is simple: people confuse the availability of information with understanding. The details of the bicycle, zipper or lock are in front of the eyes, so the brain takes the appearance of the device for internal knowledge. But until a person tries to describe how the details interact, the gap remains imperceptible.
The second reason is related to different levels of explanation. A person can correctly say that the engine causes the car to drive, and the brakes slow down the car. Such a general explanation creates a sense of control over the topic, although the arrangement of pistons, pads and hydraulic system remains incomprehensible. The general scheme replaces the exact mechanism.
Another source of error arises when your own knowledge changes perception. In one study, participants tapped the rhythm of the famous song and believed that listeners would guess the melody in about half the time. In fact, listeners learned the song in only 2.5% of the attempts. The one who knocks the rhythm hears the melody in his head, and the listener receives only dry blows to the table.
Such a gap is important not only for games with melodies. In training, a similar error is known as a blind spot by an expert. It is difficult for a specialist to notice the difficulties of a beginner, because part of the knowledge has become automatic and almost invisible to the specialist himself. The expert uses terms, abbreviations and hidden steps, and the student loses the thread of the explanation. Many students faced a similar problem: the teacher knows the subject, but does not always understand where exactly the novice person has ceased to understand.
The researchers believe that the failures of the metabolism work in two directions. A person can think that he knows more than he really knows. A person may also not notice how much it relies on the knowledge that has already been learned. For the first problem, a simple check helps: try to explain the mechanism step by step. The attempt quickly shows the real boundaries of understanding and reduces unnecessary confidence.
The second problem is more complicated. You can not just forget the mastered skill and again look at the topic of the navy. Therefore, the knowledge of the subject and the ability to teach the subject remain different skills. Studies of learning have long shown that expertise and teaching do not coincide automatically. A good teacher not only knows the material, but also knows how to see the hidden steps that the beginner has yet to go through.
The main practical conclusion from such works is quite sober: confidence in your own understanding often cheats. You can check knowledge only by action - to explain, draw, collect a scheme, go through the whole mechanism without clues. Until knowledge had to be applied, the brain easily accepts acquaintance for understanding.
It seems that the Apple logo can not be forgotten: a bitten apple is found on laptops, phones, showcases and packages. But it is worth asking people to draw a sign from memory, confidence quickly crumbles. In one study involving 85 people, only about half was able to choose the correct logo among similar variants, and only one participant accurately drew the sign. The study shows a strange feature of human memory well: a frequent encounter with the subject does not mean that the brain keeps an exact copy.
Scientists received a similar result long before smartphones and laptops. The classic work of 1979 showed that people do not remember the appearance of the coin in one cent: participants could not accurately draw pennies and hardly choose the right option among erroneous images.
The problem is not limited to the appearance of familiar things. People often believe that they understand the device of objects from everyday life, but get lost when you need to explain the mechanism. In a 2006 study, many participants made serious mistakes in drawing a bicycle: for example, they ran a chain at the same time around the front and rear wheel. Such a mistake no longer speaks of a forgotten cog, but about the misunderstanding of the principle of work, because a bicycle with such a chain could not turn normally.
Cognitive science describes a similar effect as the illusion of the depth of explanation. Knowledge of the world often consists of scraps, and the brain draws confidence over the gaps. People tend to overestimate the understanding of household devices and natural phenomena. While a person evaluates his knowledge as a whole, the assessment is high. When the researcher asks to explain exactly how lightning works, lock, bicycle or brakes of the car, confidence noticeably falls.
A similar failure concerns not only knowledge about objects, but also knowledge of one’s own knowledge. In the scientific literature, this area is called метазнаниемmetasination. The author of the source material, a researcher from the field of cognitive science, recalls that scientists have found gaps between what a person thinks about his own understanding and what a person is really able to explain.
One reason for re-evaluation is simple: people confuse the availability of information with understanding. The details of the bicycle, zipper or lock are in front of the eyes, so the brain takes the appearance of the device for internal knowledge. But until a person tries to describe how the details interact, the gap remains imperceptible.
The second reason is related to different levels of explanation. A person can correctly say that the engine causes the car to drive, and the brakes slow down the car. Such a general explanation creates a sense of control over the topic, although the arrangement of pistons, pads and hydraulic system remains incomprehensible. The general scheme replaces the exact mechanism.
Another source of error arises when your own knowledge changes perception. In one study, participants tapped the rhythm of the famous song and believed that listeners would guess the melody in about half the time. In fact, listeners learned the song in only 2.5% of the attempts. The one who knocks the rhythm hears the melody in his head, and the listener receives only dry blows to the table.
Such a gap is important not only for games with melodies. In training, a similar error is known as a blind spot by an expert. It is difficult for a specialist to notice the difficulties of a beginner, because part of the knowledge has become automatic and almost invisible to the specialist himself. The expert uses terms, abbreviations and hidden steps, and the student loses the thread of the explanation. Many students faced a similar problem: the teacher knows the subject, but does not always understand where exactly the novice person has ceased to understand.
The researchers believe that the failures of the metabolism work in two directions. A person can think that he knows more than he really knows. A person may also not notice how much it relies on the knowledge that has already been learned. For the first problem, a simple check helps: try to explain the mechanism step by step. The attempt quickly shows the real boundaries of understanding and reduces unnecessary confidence.
The second problem is more complicated. You can not just forget the mastered skill and again look at the topic of the navy. Therefore, the knowledge of the subject and the ability to teach the subject remain different skills. Studies of learning have long shown that expertise and teaching do not coincide automatically. A good teacher not only knows the material, but also knows how to see the hidden steps that the beginner has yet to go through.
The main practical conclusion from such works is quite sober: confidence in your own understanding often cheats. You can check knowledge only by action - to explain, draw, collect a scheme, go through the whole mechanism without clues. Until knowledge had to be applied, the brain easily accepts acquaintance for understanding.
