Forums IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ PhotoReading, Memory Optimizer Studying and Memory

Here is a reason why your studying should not exceed 4 hours

quote:

---

The Principle of Neuro-Transmitter Depletion

Often students study or attempt to read for too long a period of time without stopping for a rest break. B.F. Skinner and other experts have concluded that the average student cannot usually study really difficult material efficiently for more than about four hours a day. Then efficiency and memory begin to suffer. Research shows that the average student cannot study effectively on the same subject for more than about four consecutive hours, even with short breaks every hour. What occurs is what is referred to as The Principle of Neuro-Transmitter Depletion. Neuro-scientists have developed techniques to monitor activity (usually defined as electrical impulses) and chemical changes in the brain during study or thought processing. If one studies the same subject too long, fatigue, boredom, sometimes slight disorientation may occur. It is a common result of too much consecutive study when even the most simple concept begins not to make sense any longer. The monitoring of brain activity and chemical changes indicate that studying too long results in a depletion of chemicals in the brain cells necessary for efficient processing of information. Therefore, for effective consolidation of material into memory storage, take frequent breaks (at least 10 minutes every hour) and do not attempt to deal with really difficult material for more than about four hours a day, and do not study any easier subject area (even with breaks) for more than four consecutive hours

---

I copied and pasted that from this site in case you didn't want to read the 'whole' article yourself.
http://www.web-us.com/memory/memory_and_related_learning_prin.htm

Alex

Hello AlexK,
My suspicion is that this would only apply to conscious instead of nonconscious activity. Since the nonconscious is ALWAYS active, even when we sleep, I don't believe that it gets worn out or tired.
Furthermore, if this 4 hour limit is to be taken literally, then you can only learn for 4 hours a day, which would make half of an 8 hour school day worthless. It just doesn't seem to make logical sense to me. I have personally studied nonstop for an entire weekend for an IT certification exam, and passed with flying colors. Taking frequent breaks, stretching out, and drinking plenty of water seems to be the secret to endurance in studying.
Thanks Alex for bringing up an interesting article. Does anyone else out there have any ideas on this?

Hi!
Studying is a conscious activity, don't you think?

KWLee

As I understand it, the 4 hour limit has to do with learning at your greatest rate possible. Most of us don't operate at maximal learning all the time, or even very often/

The mind conscious, or otherwise, still has physiological limits. The 4 hour limit shouldn't be expected to be a universal global constant for all people. Some variance is a surety. Also it may be possible to increased your capacity true appropriate nutrition and training. The body does adapt to it's environment.

I think that normal academic studying shouldn't be considered maximal neuro-transmitter depletion activity. And it's be long know that many breaks make for better studying. The problem most students have is ENDING the breaks.

This article makes sense to me in regards to cramming. I do have to agreewith Iam2 that most of my "acadmeic" studying was futzing around with bursts of productive activity - that's why I found a need to cram.

Not to stir up the pot, but based on what I've been seeing about how most schools use their 8 hour days, the greater part of the day is academically worthless. Moving from room to room, taking care of paperwork, trying to reach all students at all levels. That's why homeschoolers do more in 1/2 the time, I figure.

Go on stir the pot!

It's well known that schools aren't mainly about teaching and learning, ie they have a 'hidden curriculum' of teaching people to obey and become nice compliant cogs in the economic machine.

If they want us to learn why don't they teach us how?

I recall seeing a programme here in the UK about a guy who could teach anyone a language to GCSE level (exams at 16) in the space of a week. Why don't schools do that?

The biggest thing you can do to rebel at school is to succeed.

Come the revolution......

Nick

Hey, slightly off topic, but as long as we're talking about neurotransmitters...

Are there any Choline Cloride supliments out there besides the energy drink KMX? I love the fact that I can think lightening-fast, but $2 a can is a bit much.

KWLee,
In my reply to AlexK, I guess I should have pointed out that I was referring to studying via PR, which uses both the conscious and the nonconscious minds. Maybe I am assuming that the majority of the learning process is done by the nonconscious.
Now that I think of it, I wonder if creating the neural pathways is done by the conscious mind or the nonconscious? I was assuming the latter, as the PhotoReading step blasts the information directly into the nonconscious.
In any case, I think that any limit on study time is highly individual.

Hi.

I'm not qualified to answer your question on the formation of neural pathways, but I think you'll find Alex's version useful:
http://www.learningstrategies.com/forum/ubb/Forum8/HTML/002712.html

KWLee

Well, I'd have to agree if we're talking PR studying vs "normal" studying.

KWLee, thanks for the link to the neural pathways discussion. I found it very interesting as I'm teaching my 2 year old based on the principle that what kids age 0-6 want to do more than anything is take in information. It's a innovation started, I think, by Glenn Doman. We have a great time and I am often astounded at what my little one is absorbing.