Forget What You Know About Good Study Habits
忘掉你所知道的良好学习习惯
作者：本尼迪克·卡瑞
Every September, millions of parents try a kind of psychological witchcraft, to transform their summer-glazed campers into fall students, their video-bugs into bookworms. Advice is cheap and all too familiar: Clear a quiet work space. Stick to a homework schedule. Set goals. Set boundaries. Do not bribe (except in emergencies).
每年九月，数百万家长试图用一种心理魔法，把他们夏天晒得漆黑的野小子们转变成秋天的好学生，把他们的电视虫子变成书虫。建议是廉价而且非常熟悉的：准备一处安静的学习场所。严格遵守家庭作业安排进度表。设定目标。设定边界。不要用钱收买孩子（除非万不得已）。
And check out the classroom. Does Junior’s learning style match the new teacher’s approach? Or the school’s philosophy? Maybe the child isn’t “a good fit” for the school.
接下来检查教室。学生的学习风格是否与新教师的方法相搭配？与学校的理念呢？或者这孩子并不适合这所学校？
Such theories have developed in part because of sketchy education research that doesn’t offer clear guidance. Student traits and teaching styles surely interact; so do personalities and at-home rules. The trouble is, no one can predict how.
这些理论在某些方面相当完备，因为粗略的教育研究无法提供明确的指导意见。学生特点和教学风格肯定有互动，个性和家庭规则也是如此。麻烦的是，没有人能够预测如何互动。
Yet there are effective approaches to learning, at least for those who are motivated. In recent years, cognitive scientists have shown that a few simple techniques can reliably improve what matters most: how much a student learns from studying.
然而，有一些有效地学习方法，至少对那些有积极性的人有效。近年来，认知科学家已表明，一些简单的技巧能够可靠地改善最重要的事情：学生从学习中学到多少。
The findings can help anyone, from a fourth grader doing long division to a retiree taking on a new language. But they directly contradict much of the common wisdom about good study habits, and they have not caught on.
这些研究成果可以帮助每一个人，从做长除法的四年级学生，到学习新语言的退休者。但是这些研究成果直接与有关良好学习习惯的习见相抵触，并且人们还不理解这些研究成果。
For instance, instead of sticking to one study location, simply alternating the room where a person studies improves retention. So does studying distinct but related skills or concepts in one sitting, rather than focusing intensely on a single thing.
例如，与其呆在同一个学习场所，不如简单更换房间就能增强记忆力。因此，在同一处设施内学习完全不同但是相关的技能或概念，好过高度注意某一件事情。
“We have known these principles for some time, and it’s intriguing that schools don’t pick them up, or that people don’t learn them by trial and error,” said Robert A. Bjork, a psychologist at the University of California, Los Angeles. “Instead, we walk around with all sorts of unexamined beliefs about what works that are mistaken.”
洛杉矶加州大学心理学家毕约克说，“我们知道这些原则已经有一段时间了，耐人寻味的是，学校并不接受这些观点，人们也不会通过试错法学会这些观点。事实上，我们相信各种各样未经证实的涉及事情对错的观念。”
Take the notion that children have specific learning styles, that some are “visual learners” and others are auditory; some are “left-brain” students, others “right-brain.” In a recent review of the relevant research, published in the journal Psychological Science in the Public Interest, a team of psychologists found almost zero support for such ideas. “The contrast between the enormous popularity of the learning-styles approach within education and the lack of credible evidence for its utility is, in our opinion, striking and disturbing,” the researchers concluded.
根据这一观点，儿童拥有具体的学习风格，有些属于视觉学习者，有些属于听觉学习者，有些属于左脑学生，有些属于右脑学生。最近一次对相关研究的评审，发表在《公共利益心理科学》杂志，一队心理学家发现，这些观点几乎得不到任何支持。“这些学习方法在教育中的巨大声望，与其效用缺乏有效证据之间巨大的反差，我们认为，突出而令人担忧。”
Ditto for teaching styles, researchers say. Some excellent instructors caper in front of the blackboard like summer-theater Falstaffs; others are reserved to the point of shyness. “We have yet to identify the common threads between teachers who create a constructive learning atmosphere,” said Daniel T. Willingham, a psychologist at the University of Virginia and author of the book “Why Don’t Students Like School?”
研究者表示，教学方式也是如此。一些优秀的教育者在黑板前手舞足蹈好似《笑傲江湖》里的桃谷六仙，其他的则留有一丝羞涩。弗吉尼亚大学心理学家韦翎瀚说，“我们还无法确定那些能够创造建设性学习氛围的教师之间的共性。”他也是《为什么学生不喜欢学校》一书的作者。
But individual learning is another matter, and psychologists have discovered that some of the most hallowed advice on study habits is flat wrong. For instance, many study skills courses insist that students find a specific place, a study room or a quiet corner of the library, to take their work. The research finds just the opposite. In one classic 1978 experiment, psychologists found that college students who studied a list of 40 vocabulary words in two different rooms — one windowless and cluttered, the other modern, with a view on a courtyard — did far better on a test than students who studied the words twice, in the same room. Later studies have confirmed the finding, for a variety of topics.
但是个体学习是另一个问题，心理学家发现，关于学习习惯的大多数备受推崇的建议，很明显是错误的。举例而言，许多学习技能课程坚持宣称，学生应该找一个特殊的地方，自习室或者图书馆的安静角落，去完成他们的功课。研究发现，正好相反。一九七八年一个经典实验中，大学生在两处不同的房间内学习四十个单词，一处没有窗、很杂乱，另一处很现代，窗外有庭院美景。心理学家发现，测试中两间房都到过的学生，远比只在一间房里学习的要好。后来涉及其他主题的研究也证实了这一发现。
The brain makes subtle associations between what it is studying and the background sensations it has at the time, the authors say, regardless of whether those perceptions are conscious. It colors the terms of the Versailles Treaty with the wasted fluorescent glow of the dorm study room, say; or the elements of the Marshall Plan with the jade-curtain shade of the willow tree in the backyard. Forcing the brain to make multiple associations with the same material may, in effect, give that information more neural scaffolding.
文章作者说，大脑会在学习的东西与学习时的背景感受之间建立微妙的联系，不管这一过程是否有意。大脑会用宿舍自习室多余的日光灯为《凡尔赛条约》条文上色，或者把马歇尔计划的内容与后院玉帘遮荫的垂柳联系起来。强迫大脑为同一素材建立多条联系，也许能让信息记得更牢。
“What we think is happening here is that, when the outside context is varied, the information is enriched, and this slows down forgetting,” said Dr. Bjork, the senior author of the two-room experiment.
毕约克博士说，“我们认为这里发生的是，如果外面环境多姿多彩、信息丰富，就遗忘得很慢。”他是两间房实验的第一作者。
Varying the type of material studied in a single sitting — alternating, for example, among vocabulary, reading and speaking in a new language — seems to leave a deeper impression on the brain than does concentrating on just one skill at a time. Musicians have known this for years, and their practice sessions often include a mix of scales, musical pieces and rhythmic work. Many athletes, too, routinely mix their workouts with strength, speed and skill drills.
相比于同一时间内集中学习一项技能，在单一设施中学习不同类型的材料——比如，在学习一门新语言的时候，在记词汇、阅读和口语之间交替学习——似乎能给大脑留下更深的印象。音乐家很早就知道这一点，他们的训练课往往混合了音阶、乐曲片段和韵律练习。许多运动员也是如此，习惯混合强度、速度和技能训练。
The advantages of this approach to studying can be striking, in some topic areas. In a study recently posted online by the journal Applied Cognitive Psychology, Doug Rohrer and Kelli Taylor of the University of South Florida taught a group of fourth graders four equations, each to calculate a different dimension of a prism. Half of the children learned by studying repeated examples of one equation, say, calculating the number of prism faces when given the number of sides at the base, then moving on to the next type of calculation, studying repeated examples of that. The other half studied mixed problem sets, which included examples all four types of calculations grouped together. Both groups solved sample problems along the way, as they studied.
在某些课题领域，这一方法对于学习的优势很显著。最近南佛罗里达大学的罗尔道和邰克立在《应用认知心理学》杂志在线发表的一项研究，他们教授四年级学生四个方程，分别计算棱柱的一个侧面。半数孩子通过学习同一方程式的多个范例来学习，比如说，一个方程式是给出底面的边来计算棱柱的侧面数量。然后开始下一个方程式，反复学习范例。另一半研究混合问题集，把所有四类算式的范例都包含进来了。学习过程中两个小组解决相同的问题。
A day later, the researchers gave all of the students a test on the material, presenting new problems of the same type. The children who had studied mixed sets did twice as well as the others, outscoring them 77 percent to 38 percent. The researchers have found the same in experiments involving adults and younger children.
一天之后，研究者给所有学生一份相关测试，给出了同一类型的新问题。学习混合问题集的孩子成绩是其他孩子的两倍，及格率是77%对38%. 研究者发现，这一实验，成年人和小孩子是一样的。
“When students see a list of problems, all of the same kind, they know the strategy to use before they even read the problem,” said Dr. Rohrer. “That’s like riding a bike with training wheels.” With mixed practice, he added, “each problem is different from the last one, which means kids must learn how to choose the appropriate procedure — just like they had to do on the test.”
罗尔道博士说，“当学生看到许多问题，都是同一类型的，他们甚至在读题目之前就知道解决策略。这有点像骑带有辅助轮的单车，”他补充道，“每道问题都和上一道不同，这意味着孩子必须学会如何选择适当的程序——就像他们在测试中做的一样。”
These findings extend well beyond math, even to aesthetic intuitive learning. In an experiment published last month in the journal Psychology and Aging, researchers found that college students and adults of retirement age were better able to distinguish the painting styles of 12 unfamiliar artists after viewing mixed collections (assortments, including works from all 12) than after viewing a dozen works from one artist, all together, then moving on to the next painter.
这些研究成果不仅用于数学学习，甚至可以用于直观美学学习。上个月发表在《心理学与年老》杂志的一个实验当中，研究者发现，相比于把十二名不熟悉的画家逐个画家一系列作品集中观看，然后换下一个画家这种做法，在同时观看所有画家的所有作品之后，大学生和退休了的成年人能够更好的分辨绘画风格。
The finding undermines the common assumption that intensive immersion is the best way to really master a particular genre, or type of creative work, said Nate Kornell, a psychologist at Williams College and the lead author of the study. “What seems to be happening in this case is that the brain is picking up deeper patterns when seeing assortments of paintings; it’s picking up what’s similar and what’s different about them,” often subconsciously.
威廉斯学院的心理学家柯讷说，这一研究发现破坏了真正掌握特定领域，或某种创造性工作的最好途径的共同前提，密集式沉浸。他也是这项研究的带头人。“这个案例似乎表明，大脑在观看混合画集时采用更深层次的模式，它会找出它们之间的相似和不同。”而这往往是下意识的。
Cognitive scientists do not deny that honest-to-goodness cramming can lead to a better grade on a given exam. But hurriedly jam-packing a brain is akin to speed-packing a cheap suitcase, as most students quickly learn — it holds its new load for a while, then most everything falls out.
认知科学家并不否认，真正需要的填鸭能够为具体考试带来更好的成绩。但是仓促填塞大脑类似于匆匆填装一只廉价行李箱，一如大多数快速学习的学生——新东西只能记住很短时间，然后扔掉几乎所有东西。
“With many students, it’s not like they can’t remember the material” when they move to a more advanced class, said Henry L. Roediger III, a psychologist at Washington University in St. Louis. “It’s like they’ve never seen it before.”
华盛顿大学圣路易斯分校的心理学家罗恒三世说，当学生升入更高年级的时候，“其中很多学生，不像是记不住材料，更像是从未见过这些材料。”
When the neural suitcase is packed carefully and gradually, it holds its contents for far, far longer. An hour of study tonight, an hour on the weekend, another session a week from now: such so-called spacing improves later recall, without requiring students to put in more overall study effort or pay more attention, dozens of studies have found.
当我们仔细而逐步打包神经系统这个行李箱时，它保存的东西能够更加持久。今天晚上学一个小时，周末学一个小时，一周后重复一次：这所谓的间隔学习法能够改善长期记忆，而不需要学生投入更多学习，花费更多精力，很多研究均证明了这一点。
No one knows for sure why. It may be that the brain, when it revisits material at a later time, has to relearn some of what it has absorbed before adding new stuff — and that that process is itself self-reinforcing.
没有人知道具体原因。也许是因为大脑在一段时间之后重新接触到材料的时候，需要重新学习一些以前吸收过的东西才能添加新东西——这一过程也是它的自我强化过程。
“The idea is that forgetting is the friend of learning,” said Dr. Kornell. “When you forget something, it allows you to relearn, and do so effectively, the next time you see it.”
柯讷博士说，“也就是说，以往是学习的朋友。当你遗忘什么东西的时候，遗忘让你重新学习，下次再见到那些内容的时候学习会非常有效率。”
That’s one reason cognitive scientists see testing itself — or practice tests and quizzes — as a powerful tool of learning, rather than merely assessment. The process of retrieving an idea is not like pulling a book from a shelf; it seems to fundamentally alter the way the information is subsequently stored, making it far more accessible in the future.
这也就是认知科学家认为考试本身——或者模拟考试和小测验——是学习的强有力工具的一个原因，考试不仅仅是对学习的评估。回忆一个思路的过程，不像从书架上取一本书，它似乎从根本上改变了随后的信息存储方式，让它在以后可以更快地获取到。
Dr. Roediger uses the analogy of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle in physics, which holds that the act of measuring a property of a particle (position, for example) reduces the accuracy with which you can know another property (momentum, for example): “Testing not only measures knowledge but changes it,” he says — and, happily, in the direction of more certainty, not less.
罗恒博士借用物理学中的海森堡不确定性原则，该原则是指，测量一个例子的某一属性（如位置），会降低你能知道的其他属性（如动量）的精确度。罗恒博士说，“考试不仅衡量知识，也在改变知识”，幸好，改变是朝着更正确的方向发展，而非相反。
In one of his own experiments, Dr. Roediger and Jeffrey Karpicke, also of Washington University, had college students study science passages from a reading comprehension test, in short study periods. When students studied the same material twice, in back-to-back sessions, they did very well on a test given immediately afterward, then began to forget the material.
在他的一个实验当中，罗恒博士与同属华盛顿大学的卡派克，让大学生在很短的时间内，学习若干取自阅读理解考试的科学短文。如果学生们接连学习相同的内容两次，他们会在稍后立即进行的测试中取得非常好的成绩，然后开始遗忘这些素材。
But if they studied the passage just once and did a practice test in the second session, they did very well on one test two days later, and another given a week later.
但是如果他们只学习一次，第二次是做模拟测试，那么他们在两天和一周之后的测试中会取得非常好的成绩。
“Testing has such bad connotation; people think of standardized testing or teaching to the test,” Dr. Roediger said. “Maybe we need to call it something else, but this is one of the most powerful learning tools we have.”
罗恒博士说：“考试给人的感觉不好，人们会想起标准化考试或者应试教育。也许我们需要给他换个叫法，但它确实是我们拥有的最强大的学习工具之一。”
Of course, one reason the thought of testing tightens people’s stomachs is that tests are so often hard. Paradoxically, it is just this difficulty that makes them such effective study tools, research suggests. The harder it is to remember something, the harder it is to later forget. This effect, which researchers call “desirable difficulty,” is evident in daily life. The name of the actor who played Linc in “The Mod Squad”? Francie’s brother in “A Tree Grows in Brooklyn”? The name of the co-discoverer, with Newton, of calculus?
当然，让人一想到考试就胃疼的原因之一是考试往往很难。矛盾的是，研究表明，正是因为难，才让它成为最有效的学习工具。越难记住，也就越难忘掉。这种效应，被研究人员称为“有益的困难”，在生活中很常见到。在电影《卧底侦缉队》中由谁扮演林克？电影《长春树》中弗兰西的弟弟叫什么名字？是谁和牛顿一起发现了微积分？
The more mental sweat it takes to dig it out, the more securely it will be subsequently anchored.
找出答案时越费神，以后在脑海里记得越牢。
None of which is to suggest that these techniques — alternating study environments, mixing content, spacing study sessions, self-testing or all the above — will turn a grade-A slacker into a grade-A student. Motivation matters. So do impressing friends, making the hockey team and finding the nerve to text the cute student in social studies.
没有人敢说这些技术——变换学习环境，混合内容、间隔学习时间、自我测试，或者全加起来——能够把一个天字号懒鬼转变成天字号优等生。这是个学习动机的问题。当然你要想给朋友留下深刻印象，组建一支球队，找点信心给社会学美女帅哥发短信，也能改善学习。
“In lab experiments, you’re able to control for all factors except the one you’re studying,” said Dr. Willingham. “Not true in the classroom, in real life. All of these things are interacting at the same time.”
韦翎瀚博士表示，“在实验里，你可以控制研究因素之外的所有因素，在教室里在生活中就不行。所有事情都是同时起作用的。”
But at the very least, the cognitive techniques give parents and students, young and old, something many did not have before: a study plan based on evidence, not schoolyard folk wisdom, or empty theorizing.
但是，最起码，认知科学让家长与孩子、少年与老人知道了许多以前未曾知道的东西：学习计划要基于证据，而不是校园里的民间智慧，或者空洞的理论。
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
本文已作如下修订：
Correction: September 8, 2010
二〇一〇年九月八日
An article on Tuesday about the effectiveness of various study habits described incorrectly the Heisenberg uncertainty principle in physics. The principle holds that the act of measuring one property of a particle (position, for example) reduces the accuracy with which you can know another property (momentum, for example) — not that the act of measuring a property of the particle alters that property.
周二发表的有关各种有效学习习惯的文章，不正确的描述了物理学中的海森堡不确定性原则。该原则是指，测量一个例子的某一属性（如位置），会降低你能知道的其他属性（如动量）的精确度。不是说，测量粒子一种属性的行为会改变这种属性。
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/07/health/views/07mind.html
