Teaching Fast and Slow Thinkers
Thinking, Fast and Slow is a 2011 book by Israeli psychologist Daniel Kahneman.
The book's main thesis is that of a dichotomy between two modes of thought: "System 1" is fast, instinctive and emotional; "System 2" is slower, more deliberative, and more logical. The book delineates rational and non-rational motivations or triggers associated with each type of thinking procedure, and how they complement each other, starting with Kahneman's own research on loss aversion. From framing choices to people's tendency to replace a difficult question with one which is easy to answer, the book summarizes several decades of search to suggest that people have too much confidence in human judgement. This data is summarized from decades of Kahneman's research, often in collaboration with Amos Tversky. It covers different phases of his career: his early work concerning cognitive biases, his work on prospect theory and happiness,or with the Israeli Defense Forces.
Kahneman describes a number of experiments which purport to examine the differences between these two thought systems and how they arrive at different results even given the same inputs. Terms and concepts include coherence, attention, laziness, association, jumping to conclusions, WYSIATI (What you see is all there is), and how one forms judgments. The System 1 vs. System 2 debate includes the reasoning or lack thereof for human decision making, with big implications for many areas including law and market research.
Cue Them In
Let slow thinkers know what will be happening before an activity begins.
It is useful if the facilitator of my class had written a schedule on the board with a brief sentence about what we would be doing throughout the day, things might have gone better for me. In the classroom, teachers can touch base with their students either as a whole class or individually about what they will be asked to do during a specific period.
This could mean that in the morning the teacher leans down to Johnny and tells him that the class will be doing a quick-write about a time students were proud of themselves. For his morning work, he can have some time to think about a list of content ideas. Or a few minutes before a morning meeting, the teacher can let the student know that they are going to be mutually sharing calming strategies they use when they get frustrated. Sometimes this little “heads-up” can give students time to think so they will be ready to participate.
Providing Choices in Class
You have no idea how weird it looked but during writing workshop Sally sits with seemingly no idea what to write. For some students too many choices can lead to making no choice at all. To help during this situation the teacher could ask others in the class to part their current topics and chart them for everyone to see. One student’s idea may flicker an idea for Sally. Or the student may need the teacher to limit the choices for him. Teacher quality matters if the teacher knows the student well, he or she may be able to provide the student with limited choices. “Today you can write about getting your new dog or how you learned your special talent for drawing cartoon characters.”
Extend Wait Time
It may sound apparent, but sometimes extending an activity by a few minutes can help slow thinkers. Instead of taking two minutes to brainstorm, try four. Instead of having 20 minutes of writing time, try 30. It is discouraging for a slow thinker to have to stop an activity just as they are finally getting started.
Using “wait time” can also be helpful when asking questions or soliciting responses. When kids struggle the teacher can try waiting while the student thinks, but this focused attention can be stressful on the slow thinker. As with the examples from my experience, more anxiety does not help slow thinkers think intelligibly. Sometimes I feel that it is more effective to use a “boomerang” approach by asking a question and letting the student know you will come back to them in a minute. Take other comments or questions from the other students and then return to the slow thinker.
Then there is the “phone a friend” option: the student can choose another student to help them, but the slow thinker should be the one to react or repeat the response. You will discover it is important to help the student answer or respond successfully. This shows them that you value their thinking process and that you will provide the necessary support for them to participate successfully.
Foster Self-Advocacy Skills in Slow Thinkers
Teachers can show respect for slow thinkers by teaching them how to advocate for their needs. Teach slow thinkers to
Students need to know that all types of learners and thinkers are valued in the classroom. Having a private word about what you are noticing, and educating the student about their way of thinking, can be very powerful. Teaching them to ask for what they need in the classroom shows that you value their way of thinking and empowers them to take control of their own learning.
Slow brain processes – labelled cognitive reappraisal
There are many brain processes that could be labelled ‘slow’ processes, but one that stands out is cognitive reappraisal. Reappraisal is defined as the regulation of inner states, primarily emotions, through modification of the original reaction. Emotions prompt rapid responses within us. Just like ‘fast’ thinking, emotions involve changes to multiple response systems: behavioural, experiential and physiological. An emotion generally has an identifiable impetus or trigger, either in the external environment or internally, such as a thought. The stimulus that prompts the response may have intrinsic affective properties, such as an aversive shock, or may have a learned emotional value.
If emotions prompt fast responses, cognitive reappraisal is the ability to more slowly re-evaluate our initial reaction. This slower process allows us to regulate our own emotions and respond more appropriately to situations. For instance, think we are walking down the street and we pass a friend. We lift our arm and wave to them and say hello, but they simply carry on walking as if they don’t know us. Our first, fast, reaction may be to suppose that they deliberately ignored us, perhaps prompting emotions such as anger or sadness, which can spiral into a negative mood. However, if we are able to reappraise the condition more slowly, and come to a more balanced view, we may be able to avoid the negative emotional consequences. Perhaps he just didn’t see us? Perhaps he was having a bad day and didn’t feel like talking? Reappraisal allows us to focus on the facts, considering more balanced opinions and thereby regulating our emotions.
There is good evidence that the slow process of cognitive reappraisal can be good for us. Successful reappraisal lowers measures of negative emotions and is linked with adaptive long-term improvements in everyday functioning (Dillon & Labar, 2005). Cognitive reappraisal may also be a crucial factor within cognitive behavioural therapy, or CBT. Its importance is demonstrated by the finding that reappraisal alone has been found to mediate the effects of individual CBT for social anxiety (Goldin et al., 2012). Crucially, individual differences in the ability to regulate one’s emotions using processes such as cognitive reappraisal might be related to both normal and pathological variations in wellbeing (Ochsner & Gross, 2005). The role of cognitive reappraisal variations in mental illness is an interesting route still to follow.
Slow science Movement
At the heart of the slow science movement is a strong opposition to performance targets, and an emphasis instead upon slow, methodical processes and quality-driven research. Proponents such as Uta Frith argue that the current academic environment promotes scientists to strive for fame, promotions and tenure by propelling their results and reviews into print. However, they argue that the emphasis upon productivity is too aggressive, leading to mistakes being made and a lack of quality.
The push to publish facing many academics is said to drive down the quality of research. Daniel Sarewitz argues that large bodies of published scientific research are unreliable or of poor quality, citing a ‘compulsion’ to publish as a causal factor. Indeed, the mantra ‘publish or perish’ appears to have become a widespread marker of the academic lifestyle. There is even statistical evidence that many low-powered studies yield more statistically significant results, suggesting that the most ‘productive’ researchers may in fact be the least reliable (Lakens & Evers, 2014).
Do Smart People Really Think Faster
The smarter the person, the faster information zips around the brain, a UCLA study finds. And this ability to think quickly apparently is inherited.
The study, published in the Journal of Neuroscience, looked at the brains and intelligence of 92 people. All the participants took standard IQ tests. Then the researchers studied their brains using a technique called diffusion tensor imaging, or DTI.
Recommended by LinkedIn
How to Capture Mental Speed
DTI is a variant of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) that can measure the structural integrity of the brain's white matter, which is successfully made up of cells that carry nerve impulses from one part of the brain to another. The greater the structural integrity, the faster nerve impulses travel.
"These images really give you a picture of the mental speed of the brain," says Paul Thompson, Ph.D., a professor of neurology at UCLA School of Medicine.
They're also "the most beautiful images of the brain you could imagine," Thompson says. "My daughter, who's 5, says they look like little flowers at each point in the brain."
Thompson says DTI scans of the 92 participants in the study discovered a clear link between brain speed and intelligence.
"When you say someone is quick-thinking, it's genuinely true," Thompson says. "The impulses are going faster and they are just more efficient at processing information, and then making a decision based on it."
Inherited Power
For instance Thompson's study also found that genetic factors played a big role in brain speed.
The team was able to figure this out because the 92 people in their study were all twins. Some were identical twins, who share all the same genes. Others were non-identical twins, who share only certain genes.
Ideally by comparing the groups, the researchers were able to tease out genes associated with the structural integrity of white matter. And it turned out many of these genes were also associated with intelligence.
Author Richard Haier, Ph.D., emeritus professor at the University of California, Irvine, says this may explain something scientists have been wondering about for a long time.
"We know that intelligence has some genetic component," he says. "And what the Thompson study is showing is that a large part of the genetic aspect of intelligence has to do with the white matter tracks that connect different parts of the brain."
Don't Give Up Just Yet
Haier reveals that the good news is that we're not necessarily stuck with the brain, or the brain speed, we inherit. Lets say he says thinking is like running or weightlifting. It helps to have certain genes. But anyone can get stronger or faster by working out.
The brain is like a muscle, Haier says: "The more you work it the more efficient it gets."
So people who practice the violin, or do math problems, or learn a foreign language are perpetually strengthening definite pathways in their brains.
Much of the popular discussion Thompson notes that our brains, unlike our bodies, peak relatively late in life.
"The wires between the brain cells, the connections, are the things that you can modify throughout life," he says. "They change and they improve through your 40s and 50s and 60s."
There are studies Thompson says there are practical, as well as academic, reasons to measure brain speed.
But the technique can spot problems such as Alzheimer's disease, which slows down the brain. And as the scans are so sensitive, they can show whether new drugs for Alzheimer's are actually working.