In response to Me and M&Ms
Comment author: StephenR 04 August 2014 02:21:04AM *  8 points [-]

There's a nice conventional categorisation of behaviour modification programmes that goes like this:

Fixed-ratio: a reward is given after a fixed number of nonreinforced responses (e.g. an M&M after every pomodoro, or even fifth pomodoro). Fixed-interval: a reward is given after a fixed interval of time (e.g. you might always set the pomodoro for 25 minutes as per convention). Variable-ratio: a reward is given after a variable number of nonreinforced responses (e.g. you flip a coin after every pomodoro to decide whether you get an M&M). Variable-interval: a reward is given after a variable time interval (i.e. you find some way to determine how long to set the pomodoro, perhaps with a lower bound).

The schedule of reinforcement you're using is left a bit vague. It looks like you're following an FR schedule but could also be doing an FI or VI schedule. But for the purposes of offering advice to people who might want to try something like this, I'll assume you're using either FR or FI.

Psychologists categorise schedules in that way because they want to study the effects of differences in reinforcement. In particular they've been interested in the effects of changes in schedules on the extinction of a behaviour. One major result from the literature (which is reported in most psych textbooks that include a chapter on learning theories) is that variable schedules (using either ratios of respondes or time intervals) are much more resistant to extinction than fixed schedules. As an example, consider a slot machine at a casino; it doesn't have a fixed ratio of 1 reward for every nth try. Instead it varies the ratio of attempts and rewarded attempts, taking advantage of the much stronger reinforcement effect.

So my first piece of advice is: do not use fixed schedules. Varying the rate of reinforcement (either as a function of time or number of completed pomodoros) will help make the good habit you're trying to build stick if your pomodoros use is ever disrupted (because you're busy, you somehow forget, or whatever).

Another result from the literature is that ratio schedules produce higher response rates. This occurs because faster responding increases the likelihood of being reward sooner, since ratio schedules don't depend on time but on attempts. In many situations you might want to take advantage of this and opt for a VR schedule (say if you wanted to encourage a child to behave). In this case, though, it would probably only lead to extinction or abuses. Extinction because if your time intervals are somewhat long (say around 30-60 minutes), then the rewards might be given too infrequently to build your motivation and give you energy. Abuses because the big spaces between rewards might encourage you to cheat the system and eat some M&Ms anyhow because you want the energy.

That leads me to my second bit of advice: don't use a VR schedule; instead vary the time interval. I suggest finding some way to randomise the selection (like rolling dice, throwing darts, or having an algorithm spit out a number) and putting a lower bound on the time intervals (to give yourself enough time to build some flow and focus).

In response to comment by StephenR on Me and M&Ms
Comment author: coyotespike 05 August 2014 12:22:30AM 0 points [-]

That's very interesting indeed.

I get one reward per pomodoro, unless I chain the pomodoros together, in which case the reward matches the number of pomodoros completed (so if I do three in a row, 75 minutes of work, then I get 3 M&Ms). If I want to take a break, then I accept that I'll only get 1 M&M, instead of 2 or 3, after the next pomodoro.

In practice, then, I'm using variable intervals. Based on your feedback, I'll experiment with eating all the rewards at the end of the time interval, instead of devouring them after each pom.

In response to Me and M&Ms
Comment author: B_For_Bandana 03 August 2014 08:51:52PM *  5 points [-]

Can I ask a silly question? My understanding of your situation is that you want to get your work done, but sometimes you don't have the willpower, so you use your M&M system for motivation. But then you are faced with the possibility of just eating a bunch of M&M's without doing anything. And there is no meta-M&M system to motivate you to keep from eating M&M's. So I don't see how this can actually help you. Empirically, it clearly does, but I have trouble understanding how. Why is it easier to keep from eating M&M's "on your own" and leverage that ability to motivate you to do work, than it is to keep doing work "on your own" in the first place?

If I have just ruined the effect, I sincerely apologize...

In response to comment by B_For_Bandana on Me and M&Ms
Comment author: coyotespike 05 August 2014 12:07:07AM *  3 points [-]

What Emile said, although I do have to make sure I don't cheat! (Also, the M&Ms are in a desk drawer where I can't see them) Before I tried this, every time I goofed off during a pomodoro, the mild buzz of surfing the internet served as a reward. Now, I tell myself, "don't goof off, or no M&M for you!"

There's a second reward as well, which may not apply to everyone equally. I work full-time, basically in legal research. I used to spread 10 pomodoros out over the day (okay, 8). Now I do 10 as fast as possible, and then switch to personal research. This makes the day much more pleasurable. The M&Ms reinforce this faster-moving, more engaging schedule.

Me and M&Ms

12 coyotespike 02 August 2014 07:06PM

Ah, delicious dark chocolate M&Ms, colorfully filling a glass jar with your goodness. How do I love thee? About four of you an hour. Here's a brief rundown of my most recent motivation hacking experiment. 

1. Gwern has an interesting article arguing that Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) may shift the learning advantage from intelligence toward conscientiousness (actually he's not sure about the intelligence part). This shift occurs because MOOCs select for higher-quality instruction and better feedback, broadly speaking and over time, but it's much harder to stay on task without a malevolent instructor and bad grades breathing down your neck. This thesis jives with my own experience; if I get stuck on a math problem, I just google "an intuitive approach to x," and I usually find a couple of people begging to teach me the concept. But it's harder to get started and to stay focused than in a classroom.

2. Given that knowledge compounds and grants increasing advantages, I'd really like to keep taking advantage of MOOCs. Some MOOCs are better than others, but many are better than your standard college course - and they're free. For a non-technical guy getting technical, like me, it's a golden age of education. So, it would be great if I were highly conscientious. Gwern points out that conscientiousness is a relatively stable Big Five personality trait.

3. The question then becomes, can conscientiousness be developed? Well, I'm not a Cartesian agent, so wouldn't it make sense to reward myself for conscientiousness? Enter the M&Ms. I set a daily target for pomodoros. When I finish a pomodoro, I get a big peanut M&M or two small ones. If I finish two in a row, I get two servings, and so on. In this way, I encourage myself to get started, and then to keep going to build Deep Focus. Each pomodoro becomes cause for celebration, and I find my rapid progress through pomodoros (and chocolate) energizing, where long periods of distraction were tiring.

This has worked fantastically well for the last two weeks. I hit my pomodoro target for paid work, then switch to educational work. I plan to keep it up, and maybe I'll use chocolate as motivation somewhere else as well. Now back to my M&Ms, green, yellow, blue, orange, brown, red . . . 

Comment author: coyotespike 03 July 2014 04:02:16AM 2 points [-]

I'll be taking the Coursera course, since I have no experience in R. It's part of the Data Science Specialization. Reviews online suggest the course may be somewhat disorganized, but also said Code School's introduction was easier. So I might check out Code School as well.

The Coursera course will repeat, as ShardPhoenix said, so I'll report back when finished.

Comment author: coyotespike 02 August 2014 03:22:00AM 0 points [-]

Okay, here's a preliminary update. I dropped the R Programming course on Coursera because after a basic introduction to R, the first substantive assignment jumped a couple levels in difficulty. In other words, there was a gap between the instruction and the assignment. This was frustrating. So be aware that you will need a bit of extra time to invest in order to get past this gap, either before or during the course. (I contrast this with the Introduction to Programming with Python course I'm taking on EdX from MIT, which is simply a flawless course, with a smooth and sure conceptual slope.)

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 01 July 2014 04:40:16PM *  3 points [-]

I'd like to coin some terminology: anti-lists.

Having a well-constructed list helps you get things done. Every action on the list has an immediate successor, so you don't have to think about the next actionable step required to complete your overall goal. If the goal is "clean my home" or "pack for my trip abroad", this is very useful. If the goal is "enjoyably waste time", it can cause some problems.

An annoying number of time-wasting activities are very good at giving you the next actionable step in wasting your time. In some cases this is deliberate, such as websites that provide you with lists of related articles once you've finished reading them. In some cases it's presumably accidental but still very effective. Heavily cross-referenced websites such as Wikipedia, TVTropes or Less Wrong can create a tab explosion, and once you've finished reading this tab, the obvious successor to that action is reading the next tab. Once you've watched an episode of a TV series, there is generally an obvious successor to that episode, and if you have immediate and easy access to that successor, watching it becomes a strong candidate for your next action.

I have recently started thinking in terms of "anti-listing" activities that are conducive to this sort of behaviour. To anti-list an activity is to take action to disrupt the line of succession. In the case of the series of Robot Chicken I just downloaded, this is literally a case of removing the list of files from my immediate environment. This seems like a fairly robust way of thinking about my activity management.

Comment author: coyotespike 05 July 2014 04:22:23PM 1 point [-]

Also, I've heard the term "anti to-do list" used to mean a list you make of what you've actually accomplished, instead of what you planned to accomplish (and it's a very useful tool). So I got that term mixed up with your term.

I like your concept of trying to break the flow of time-wasting activities; it sounds like a situation for some sort of pre-commitment device. "Okay, I've got an implicit list of not-so-good activities putting itself together here...I'd better break the chain and commit to read only two more articles..." Or something. I realize that doesn't really solve your terminological difficulty!

Comment author: ShardPhoenix 27 June 2014 01:21:07AM 5 points [-]

There is also a 4 week Coursera course in R starting on July 7th (with several other sessions throughout the year): https://www.coursera.org/course/rprog

Comment author: coyotespike 03 July 2014 04:02:16AM 2 points [-]

I'll be taking the Coursera course, since I have no experience in R. It's part of the Data Science Specialization. Reviews online suggest the course may be somewhat disorganized, but also said Code School's introduction was easier. So I might check out Code School as well.

The Coursera course will repeat, as ShardPhoenix said, so I'll report back when finished.

Comment author: coyotespike 22 June 2014 05:46:06PM 8 points [-]

This article has materially helped me over the past couple of weeks. Before, I believed that ego depletion occurred from physical, mental, or emotional effort, and I viewed it as a depletable resource. This gave me a massive excuse to slag off after I finished a task.

But the idea that willpower gets a boost as soon as the brain perceives a reward gave me a different way to look at it. Now, I focus on the reward/'hit' I get from achieving small goals. As long as I celebrate each finished task, I win, and my willpower should increase rather than decrease!

This makes me feel like a badass. If I can keep the big picture in mind, and see how each small goal advances me toward my ultimate goal, and only get more revved up everytime I finish a task, then I'm a freaking Punisher.

So thanks.

View more: Prev