Session number: 9-1
Average n-back: 6.30
Duration (min.): 30
My aspiration for period #9 is to stay at or above nAve 6.0 for 16 of 19 sessions. And if not, that’s okay too. Here are my records to date.
Within the score list for eight complete periods of BFPro, there are no records for my first three sessions. Martin, my sense is that I’m starting period 9-1 with today’s score.
It isn’t possible for me to post a graph to the blog; but I would like that. Martin, could you please post my training history as a graph. I would appreciate that!
[Duly done: MGW, remarkably similar curve...]
Shaun’s Training History,
Period 1 to 8
No record
No record
No record
2.3
2.95
2.75
3.35
3.4
3.65
3.7
3.8
4.25
4.1
4.4
4.5
4.2
4.3
4.55
4.3
4.45
4.5
4.65
4.8
4.4
4.85
4.4
4.55
4.85
4.9
5.1
4.9
5.05
5.25
5
4.9
5.25
4.6
5.35
4.75
4.9
5.5
5.15
5.2
4.85
5
4.65
5.05
5.2
5.05
4.95
5.45
5.45
5.5
5.55
4.85
4.55
5.05
5.45
5.1
5.45
4.2
4.55
5.15
5
5.15
5.65
5.55
4.8
5.7
5.45
5.65
4.65
4.85
5.4
5.75
5.4
5.2
5.55
6.15
5.75
5.45
5.15
5.6
5.8
6.15
5.3
5.45
5.6
6.2
6.1
5.25
5.35
5.5
5.85
5.35
6.05
6.15
5.8
6
6.55
6.15
6.1
5.75
6.45
6.3
6.5
7
6.4
6.25
6.3
6.25
6.4
6.85
7.05
7.2
6.65
6.45
6.55
5.9
7
6.1
5.7
6
6.1
6.2
6.05
6.85
5.9
6.65
6.1
6.4
6.35
5.65
6.2
5.65
6.35
6.05
6.8
5.75
6.45
6.65
6.85
6.25
6.5
6.25
5.95
6.65
6.4
6.4
6.85
6.25
6.30 (Beginning of period #9)
This post was submitted by Shaun Luttin.
Tags: Brain Exercises, brain-fitness, brain-fitness-pro, buschkuehl, increase intelligence, increase IQ, intelligence-training, IQ-training, jaeggi, martin-buschkuehl, mind-sparke, susanne-jaeggi, Training Working-Memory, working-memory
Outstanding Martin! Thanks for posting that graph. I admire your responsiveness to my requests.
When you write ‘remarkably similar curve,’ I wonder ’similar to what curve?’ I’m keen to compare. Could you please post a link to this similar curve. Then I can look for myself.
Shaun
Hi Shaun.
Sorry about that; I meant that your progress curve was remarkably similar to the curve of my own progress:
http://mindsparke.com/brain-training-blog/brain-exercises/working-memory-training-report-martin-session-160/
Martin
Hi Martin,
Yes, there are some similarities.
For instance, we both seem to plateau for a while before we increase. You appear to have plateaued first at around n=6, again at around n=7, and then to have experienced a more chaotic grouping of scores between n=7 and n=9. My first plateau appears to be between n=5 and n=6, and then between n=6 and n=7.
It seems likely, to me, that shortly I will stop scoring in the n=5 range, and start scoring only in n=6 to n=7.5 range. That’s my prediction. Over the next four weeks, I expect that I will see a few scores below 6, many between 6 and 7, and a few above n=7.
There is one key difference too, between our progress graphs. You have been doing better relatively to me for the first 151 sessions. While you peaked at around 8.xx I peaked at around 7.xx. I am okay with that healthy competition, indeed it keeps the training interesting. Also, I am aware that I am doing better relatively to some other trainers, such as Will, Nanz, and David. That’s okay too.
While in a psychologist class in my Human Kinetics degree, I learned about healthy competition. These were the few principles:
a) Both players / teams know the rules in detail.
b) There is a way to keep track of who is scoring relatively better.
c) There is a way to know when the game is over.
Thus, at the end of the game, neither team has one nor lost, but both know each has done relative to the other. The real benefit of this approach, in my view, is that it moves towards a continuum and moves away from the win-loss dichotomy. So, in the final tennis match between Fedderer and Rodick (sp), one did better relative to the other, but neither is a winner nor a loser. Despite this being just a ‘thinking trick,’ is does seem to attenuate any discouragement, anger, or aggression from competition.
Shaun