Spaced versus Focused

We’ve discussed the four principles and how to apply them. This is, essentially, all that you need. Just that constant loop of doing something a lot, reflecting on it, and experimenting. Apply that consistently and you will not only learn any skill, you will also get better at that specific loop.

All the chapters from now on are mostly logical consequences of that loop. If you practice it a few months, if you study it more closely, all these extra tips follow from it.

So let’s start with the first one.

Spaced learning is more effective than focused learning

What does that mean?

Focused Learning: means that you focus on one thing until you understand it. Maybe you’re studying a topic, like “psychology”. Then you bundle all related information on a subtopic (like “depression”) and focus on that until you’ve learned it completely. This is the typical way many people learn and many courses are taught.

Spaced Learning: means that you focus on many things at once, and keep looping back, until all of it sinks in. To keep with our example: you’d study “depression”, but also “memory” and “social”, all besides each other. And once you’ve seen everything, you loop back to “depression” again. That’s why it’s called spaced learning: there is time and space before you see a subject again.

Research shows that spaced learning is much better. It’s very clear on that.

This isn’t surprising, now that you’ve read this guide.

• Because you study multiple things, you can form more associations in your brain
• Because there is space before you see something again, it’s harder to recall. This challenge makes your brain grow more.
• Because you have variety in what you study, you keep experimenting and stay motivated.

Note that spaced learning is not random learning. It doesn’t mean you wake up each day and do something entirely randomly. It means picking a fixed (sub)set of topics and looping through them. So you’re certain to see each topic again after time, but not before focusing on something else first.

Why don’t we do it?

Our educational systems teach “focused learning”. So yes, this is another misconception about learning you want to forget.

But there’s a reason they do it this way. Focused learning has two advantages:

• It provides tangible results more quickly
• And keeps more control

If you study one tiny thing for a week, you will get an amazing grade on the test about it next week. You know you understand that one thing, because that’s all you looked at and you’ve given it a lot of time.

If you spread your attention over many things, your brain will be a mess at the end of the week. You’ve given everything a bit of time and you’ve learned everything somewhat. You’ll only see the results of spaced learning if you give it enough time.

After a few weeks (or months), you’ll notice …

• That you forgot most of what you did using focused learning
• But suddenly everything clicks and you recall everything from spaced learning

It’s that same pattern of rising and falling, of making mistakes and growing back stronger. The best techniques for learning something will never produce a straight line upward. They will perform worse than the “school techniques” at some points, but eventually outperform them wildly.

Example: infodumps

There’s this great sin in the world of writing called the infodump. The name is, as always, a great description of the issue.

You want to tell the reader something. Maybe they need information about your fantasy world, or background on a character, or a detailed description of a important place. What do you do? You apply the “focused learning” approach, because that’s what you know.

You dump all that related info in one big chunk on the page.

Why is this bad? Well, it’s boring to read and it completely stops your story for one or multiple pages. But besides that, it is terribly ineffective.

Five pages later, the reader will have forgotten most of that blog. Fifty pages later, when it actually becomes important, they have certainly forgotten all of it.

Instead, you need to do spaced information.

• You mention something in one sentence in chapter 3
• Then, in chapter 6, you mention it again in a different way
• Later, in chapter 9, you tell even more about it and repeat some of what you already said
• Finally, in chapter 14, this knowledge is used for an amazing climax to the story—and the reader will understand it, because they actually learned this knowledge properly

It took me a few books to understand this. Feedback on my earlier books was always “this comes out of nowhere” or “there’s too much going on”. (To which I replied: “it did not come out of nowhere, I told the reader that in chapter 2!” Which isn’t a reply people want to hear, so don’t do that.)

Now it makes a world of difference. I write books that are of similar complexity, with many mysteries or storylines, but conveying all information using spaced learning. And now I rarely get that feedback again. Instead, readers note that it feels like you’re always “progressing” with each chapter.

Yes, that’s what learning feels like!

Example: game tutorials

This is similar, but applied to a completely different medium.

Any game needs some explanation on how to play it. Most need a lot of explanation on how to play it.

This is, honestly, one of the hardest things in game development. How do you explain a complex system (which buttons to press, what is your goal, what can you do, when do you win, …) to any user that might try your game? How do you explain it in a way that is intuitive, fast and fun? A way that players will remember?

And the answer is simple: spaced learning. More and more games do this—even board games—because it’s simply the best method. I usually call this a “campaign”.

It’s best illustrated using a (good) puzzle game. When you start one, they will only tell you the basics: what you can do and when the puzzle is solved. The first few levels of a puzzle game are tiny and easy.

Then they add a new mechanic. A new rule, a new thing to do, whatever. Levels get slightly bigger for a while and slightly harder.

Then they add a new mechanic. This loop repeats, over and over, as the game builds its complexity. By the time you reach level 50, you might have learned 10 different rules and play huge puzzles. But it doesn’t feel overwhelming to you.

• Because the rules were spaced out.
• Because the old rules were still in effect, every level, you were constantly reminded of them. You could connect the new rule to the old ruleset in your mind.

This can be magical. When I really studied this, I made a game that had loads of content, but taught it all in this way. When players reached the final levels, they had a book worth of information in their head—but they never felt the game was too hard to understand. It never felt like homework. (Of course, another crucial component is the fact that it’s a game and it should be fun.)

This is also the difference between making and breaking a game. The tutorial is the first thing players see—and if it’s not right, they won’t play your whole game that comes after it. When a game starts with a wall of text, or a lot of instructive images, I immediately sigh and usually give up. Because the game teaches itself so ineffectively, it reduces the fun, and increases the time before you can actually play.

It’s the infodump all over again. Don’t do it, not to others, not to yourself when learning.

The campaign tip

What might you take away from all this? Create a campaign for yourself!

• Divide the thing you want to learn into multiple chunks or topics.
• Space similar topics out over time. For example, you focus on “topic A” only in the first weekend of every month.
• Once in a while, drop the topic you understand the best, and swap it for a new one in the rotation. (You leveled up. You learned a new mechanic!)

As you notice, most of my tips come back to “gamifying” your learning process. Because games are the learning process on steroids.

Example: this guide

Remember how I gave away all the secrets of this guide during the introduction? I told you exactly which concepts and general ideas we’d discuss.

Why do you think I did that? ;)

To already get you thinking about it. You didn’t actually understand it, yet. They were just a few words at the back of your brain, like “association” or “the four principles”. But then I mentioned them again, and this network of neurons became stronger.

Then I explained the topic in-depth, and you felt like you were ready for it. (Hopefully.)