A Rhetorical Analysis Of Genius Or Not By Ericsson

1639 Words4 Pages

During the article “Genius or Not” Ericsson starts off by talking about how the greatest people in their field have been working at this their entire life. For example he talks about how Tiger Woods was considered to be the greatest golfer of all time. Well people wondered what makes him so good, and the article claimed it comes from several reasons, but mainly the amount of time he had put in since his early childhood, and even to this day tries to outwork all of his opponents. Which leads us to our next point of what do these top of the line athletes or performers get through all this practice and mentoring. The article claims that “The creme de la creme appear to develop several important cognitive skills. The fist called ‘chunking’ is the …show more content…

This is seeking an overall explanation of the process and through that there are several possible ways the movements are achieved. You can see influences from the body, from the environment, from the neural structure which means we think of control as a heterarchy. Our body is made to find the most energy efficient way to complete the movement, which is why we don’t think about walking we are just so used to doing it that we do it without even thinking about it. We walk at a certain speed depending on leg length, and incline or decline of walking surface. Those are both control parameters. Leg length would be considered dynamics of the action system. An example of dynamics of environment would be the steepness of your walking surface, and the third and final element of Schmidt’s and Fitzpatrick theory would be Dynamics of Central Nervous system. An example of that would be if I am tired before my walk or in a hurry. You're body and mind is taking all of this into mind when you are walking to give you the most energy efficient way to walk. But what happens if you were to change on of these thing, or to throw a curve ball into the movement. Say you are walking uphill and all of a sudden you come to a very steep hill, you cant walk at the same speed anymore, so you're legs start to move faster and faster. But then the movement becomes unstable, so all of a sudden your brain sends out the signal that your …show more content…

This study found that bandwidth effects worked but only if the feedback is appropriate of learning the task. If only gave KR or told where the ball landed, it wasn't effective and they need some sort of guidance on how to perform the shot. They then found that if you use transitional feedback which tells you what you just did and how to improve on it, that helped people translate the most from making an error to correcting their mistake. 10% bandwidth far more consistent than any other group. That implies that a lower percentage of feedback can be useful. The second graph by Wulf and Shea is a ski simulator task. This shows that feedback 100% of the time is desirable in some situations. The feedback presented here was about relative force onset, thats when people shift weight from one foot to another, it was desirable to switch foot about at the middle when crossing the platform. They were trying to time the shift in their weight to the particular point during the skill. They found that in this situation giving feedback all the time helped more than half of the time. Their are many potential explanations about why this is. The golf chip is discrete, the ski simulator is continuous. The golf chip had terminal and verbal feedback

Open Document