Really interesting stuff, I was surprised and disturbed that practicing a skill when tired can lead to deterioration. I used to think all practice was good practice, that drawing for hours would eventually lead to skill growth, but it explains why it can just result in bad habits.
The trick is a lot of this is so personal. I imagine it's different from art, but having played an instrument, I think we all recognise that feeling of 'I'm tired and I'm beginning to hate this.'
I think it's always good to end a session on a positive note - stop while you still feel good about it.
That's true, and I suppose the study might be limited in that they looked at sports and music specifically, that often have clearer defined goals than art.
A bad drawing can contain the seeds of a good idea, and I have a feeling that drawing something badly can teach us what is off and we make gradual improvements to get closer to it - a bit like not having sheet music for a song and trying to work out the notes by ear. (Young birds learn their species particular calls that way, they aren't born with the “right” tune.)
But there is something in stopping when it becomes a case of going through the motions and no longer concentrating on solving the problem at hand.
I wonder how this would apply to scanning a large amount of information sources for meaning, context, and relationship. I read and gather information from a lot of sources and at the time I don't necessarily know if it's important to me or not. The problem for me occurs when I think, "Aha, something I read recently said something really important about this thing I'm reading right now, but I can't for the life of me remember where I saw it"
I always categorise information by ‘retrieval’ rather than by category.
I try to think about which situations i’m in and when I feel i’ll need that information. So for example if I find a paper I wouldn’t put it in a “Academic Paper”.
I’d think is this more useful for my professional life or for my ‘Substack life’ and then categorise it according to that meaning I have two folders “Professional” and “Substack”.
This may be way off base; I haven't used it yet for my writing, and may not--but I can't help noticeing a connection between this thread and the book I got from Scott P. Scheper: "ANTINET ZETTELKASTEN, A knowledge system that will turn you into a prolific reader, researcher and writer," 2022, Greenlamp LLC. From what I have read in it, the analog system he describes (which uses filing hand-written note cards, to build a knowledge tree) seems superior to digital systems (even ai?), because it automatically categorizes and connects information, and has built-in bibliographical data so that one can immediately access original sources. I see so many correlations between his work and Dr. Ng's as it relates to information retrieval and use. I don't know if either of you will comment or look into this rabbit-hole, but down the road I'd be happy to compare notes again, if that should work out...Cheers!
I’m glad you found it useful! A lot of this is also having gone through medical school, a PhD, and continuing professional exams and finding what works vs what doesn’t.
Digestion, you've nailed it in one word alone. The other day I sat down in a workshop about InDesign that was completely undigestable. Maybe it me was me, maybe it was the teaching style. Who knows. The point is I left halfway through because there is absolutely zero value in education when the knowledge is not sinking in.
Do you see no value in scheduling for repetition the processing of concepts? Wouldn’t one end up forgetting it if they only “process” the concept once?
Love how you broke this down! As a fourth year medical student I’ve been finding it quite difficult to consolidate the breadth of knowledge but this is brilliant! Should have linked this to my medical knowledge earlier 😂!
Super interesting post! I'm curious, do you know how this changes with ADHD? I've found that my working memory is trash but the moment I lock it into my long term memory I'll remember the most obscure of details for 10+ years.
the ancient practice of lectio divina knew this. true memory is not retrieval, it is transformation. what you return to again and again reshapes who you are.
You’re pointing to a systems failure: learning requires selective pressure. Not everything should stick—only what survives rest, reuse, and constraint. Without that, input never becomes structure. Constraint isn’t the enemy. It’s the filter.
Interesting point on "top-down plausibility-driven processing" where the brain uses what it already knows to make sense of new information. Some people, however, build understanding from the bottom-up, learning from raw examples and patterns before connecting them to prior knowledge.
Saving this for later. After skimming through I know I’d love it
I’m glad you liked it!
Take some time to process it so you don’t forget you saved it!
Really interesting stuff, I was surprised and disturbed that practicing a skill when tired can lead to deterioration. I used to think all practice was good practice, that drawing for hours would eventually lead to skill growth, but it explains why it can just result in bad habits.
The trick is a lot of this is so personal. I imagine it's different from art, but having played an instrument, I think we all recognise that feeling of 'I'm tired and I'm beginning to hate this.'
I think it's always good to end a session on a positive note - stop while you still feel good about it.
That's true, and I suppose the study might be limited in that they looked at sports and music specifically, that often have clearer defined goals than art.
A bad drawing can contain the seeds of a good idea, and I have a feeling that drawing something badly can teach us what is off and we make gradual improvements to get closer to it - a bit like not having sheet music for a song and trying to work out the notes by ear. (Young birds learn their species particular calls that way, they aren't born with the “right” tune.)
But there is something in stopping when it becomes a case of going through the motions and no longer concentrating on solving the problem at hand.
I wonder how this would apply to scanning a large amount of information sources for meaning, context, and relationship. I read and gather information from a lot of sources and at the time I don't necessarily know if it's important to me or not. The problem for me occurs when I think, "Aha, something I read recently said something really important about this thing I'm reading right now, but I can't for the life of me remember where I saw it"
I always categorise information by ‘retrieval’ rather than by category.
I try to think about which situations i’m in and when I feel i’ll need that information. So for example if I find a paper I wouldn’t put it in a “Academic Paper”.
I’d think is this more useful for my professional life or for my ‘Substack life’ and then categorise it according to that meaning I have two folders “Professional” and “Substack”.
that's where ai could do wonders, no?
This may be way off base; I haven't used it yet for my writing, and may not--but I can't help noticeing a connection between this thread and the book I got from Scott P. Scheper: "ANTINET ZETTELKASTEN, A knowledge system that will turn you into a prolific reader, researcher and writer," 2022, Greenlamp LLC. From what I have read in it, the analog system he describes (which uses filing hand-written note cards, to build a knowledge tree) seems superior to digital systems (even ai?), because it automatically categorizes and connects information, and has built-in bibliographical data so that one can immediately access original sources. I see so many correlations between his work and Dr. Ng's as it relates to information retrieval and use. I don't know if either of you will comment or look into this rabbit-hole, but down the road I'd be happy to compare notes again, if that should work out...Cheers!
Thank you, it's really helpful
I’m glad!
Excellent and a super beneficial article! Thank you for sharing!
Thank Maryam - I’m glad you liked it!
This is really informative and fascinating, I am going to implement some of these strategies for my learning.
I’m glad you found it useful! A lot of this is also having gone through medical school, a PhD, and continuing professional exams and finding what works vs what doesn’t.
Digestion, you've nailed it in one word alone. The other day I sat down in a workshop about InDesign that was completely undigestable. Maybe it me was me, maybe it was the teaching style. Who knows. The point is I left halfway through because there is absolutely zero value in education when the knowledge is not sinking in.
Luv your work Doc. I've long known we need "hooks" to hang information on... And I understood why intuitively I suppose. Now it's even more clear.
Do you see no value in scheduling for repetition the processing of concepts? Wouldn’t one end up forgetting it if they only “process” the concept once?
Love how you broke this down! As a fourth year medical student I’ve been finding it quite difficult to consolidate the breadth of knowledge but this is brilliant! Should have linked this to my medical knowledge earlier 😂!
Same here 🥺🌌✈️
you need to stop looking at the pages or the time spent
you just have to dive in it without distractions
you need to stop looking at the pages or the time spent
you just have to dive in it without distractions
Super interesting post! I'm curious, do you know how this changes with ADHD? I've found that my working memory is trash but the moment I lock it into my long term memory I'll remember the most obscure of details for 10+ years.
the ancient practice of lectio divina knew this. true memory is not retrieval, it is transformation. what you return to again and again reshapes who you are.
The Voice of the Silence
Nice to have you mention Lectio divina--I can see how that practice can connect to these principles of learning
You’re pointing to a systems failure: learning requires selective pressure. Not everything should stick—only what survives rest, reuse, and constraint. Without that, input never becomes structure. Constraint isn’t the enemy. It’s the filter.
Interesting point on "top-down plausibility-driven processing" where the brain uses what it already knows to make sense of new information. Some people, however, build understanding from the bottom-up, learning from raw examples and patterns before connecting them to prior knowledge.