If “honey moon periods” happen, what’s the best way to explain them? Is it a mean-time-to-failure type thing, where during any time interval of a certain length, there’s a certain chance that something will break and the technique will stop working? Is it an attentional control thing, where techniques that you’ve used for a while, you pay less attention to, and the lack of attention paid leads to them no longer working? (See also.) Diminishing enthusiasm? Some other thing?
One pattern I think I might have noticed: sometimes when I stop using a technique for a while, or become less careful/rigorous in my usage, I continue to have an easy time doing whatever it enabled me to do for a few days afterwards. Maybe if it weren’t for this deceptive “coasting” period, I would stick with techniques that seem to work more carefully.
I think asking “what’s the best way” is assuming it’s just one thing. I see no reason it can’t be the combination of a whole laundry list of things, just like “placebo effect” can be multiple things:
motivational effect (“I have an awesome new strategy! THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING”)
regression to the mean (“I had an awful period, cast about for a new strategy, and simultaneously, things seem to be getting better! And of course correlation=causation”)
survivorship bias (if 10 people start a useless thing simultaneously, after a few weeks a good chunk of them probably still think it’s working; a few months later, there will be many fewer survivors...)
wishful thinking (“I had a bad few days—but they were exceptions and have a perfectly reasonable explanation X, Y, and Z, so I still have faith in this thing.”)
time delay before meta-akrasia kicks in (“That part of me hasn’t figured out the right excuses and tactics to defeat the new system, so it’s working—temporarily.”)
It seems some of your ideas basically amount to “no techniques really work, and people only think they work because of random variation and measurement error and stuff”. Not sure how plausible this is.
It seems some of your ideas basically amount to “no techniques really work, and people only think they work because of random variation and measurement error and stuff”. Not sure how plausible this is.
Though it would be odd (and require a strong explanation) if no productivity techniques do work. Which is like saying, no medicines really work, it’s all just placebo effect etc. Since productivity fails for particular reasons (e.g. procrastination), and presumably techniques (like medicines) can be designed to fix or at least mitigate those reasons.
When I started using Pomodoros, I quickly got the sense that I had never before actually understood what it meant to focus. For example, I learned that I don’t actually focus on the task at hand when I’m listening to music. When my “honeymoon period” ended, I had learned what focusing felt like, and learned to turn “focus” on and off without the need of the timer.
So it may just be that Pomodoros serve a transient purpose—they are a process you go through, not a tool you keep using. At least this is how it feels for me.
I can’t focus with music on at all. I’m not sure if that’s common or not. I know plenty of people who watch tv/listen to music while working, and they’re fine.
Cf when I first went on a diet some years ago, which worked spectacularly well, the main outcome (other than losing weight) was I learned to notice when I was full and didn’t need to eat more.
If “honey moon periods” happen, what’s the best way to explain them? Is it a mean-time-to-failure type thing, where during any time interval of a certain length, there’s a certain chance that something will break and the technique will stop working? Is it an attentional control thing, where techniques that you’ve used for a while, you pay less attention to, and the lack of attention paid leads to them no longer working? (See also.) Diminishing enthusiasm? Some other thing?
One pattern I think I might have noticed: sometimes when I stop using a technique for a while, or become less careful/rigorous in my usage, I continue to have an easy time doing whatever it enabled me to do for a few days afterwards. Maybe if it weren’t for this deceptive “coasting” period, I would stick with techniques that seem to work more carefully.
I think asking “what’s the best way” is assuming it’s just one thing. I see no reason it can’t be the combination of a whole laundry list of things, just like “placebo effect” can be multiple things:
motivational effect (“I have an awesome new strategy! THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING”)
regression to the mean (“I had an awful period, cast about for a new strategy, and simultaneously, things seem to be getting better! And of course correlation=causation”)
survivorship bias (if 10 people start a useless thing simultaneously, after a few weeks a good chunk of them probably still think it’s working; a few months later, there will be many fewer survivors...)
wishful thinking (“I had a bad few days—but they were exceptions and have a perfectly reasonable explanation X, Y, and Z, so I still have faith in this thing.”)
time delay before meta-akrasia kicks in (“That part of me hasn’t figured out the right excuses and tactics to defeat the new system, so it’s working—temporarily.”)
I’m sure you could suggest some more.
It seems some of your ideas basically amount to “no techniques really work, and people only think they work because of random variation and measurement error and stuff”. Not sure how plausible this is.
Currently, it’s pretty darn plausible.
Though it would be odd (and require a strong explanation) if no productivity techniques do work. Which is like saying, no medicines really work, it’s all just placebo effect etc. Since productivity fails for particular reasons (e.g. procrastination), and presumably techniques (like medicines) can be designed to fix or at least mitigate those reasons.
When I started using Pomodoros, I quickly got the sense that I had never before actually understood what it meant to focus. For example, I learned that I don’t actually focus on the task at hand when I’m listening to music. When my “honeymoon period” ended, I had learned what focusing felt like, and learned to turn “focus” on and off without the need of the timer.
So it may just be that Pomodoros serve a transient purpose—they are a process you go through, not a tool you keep using. At least this is how it feels for me.
I can’t focus with music on at all. I’m not sure if that’s common or not. I know plenty of people who watch tv/listen to music while working, and they’re fine.
Cf when I first went on a diet some years ago, which worked spectacularly well, the main outcome (other than losing weight) was I learned to notice when I was full and didn’t need to eat more.