VIKINGanimprintofPenguinCanada,adivisionofPenguinRandomHouseCanadaLimited

PenguinCanada,320FrontStreetWest,Suite1400,Toronto,OntarioM5V3B6,CanadaPenguinGroup(USA)LLC,375HudsonStreet,NewYork,NewYork10014,U.S.A.

PenguinBooksLtd,80Strand,LondonWC2R0RL,EnglandPenguinIreland,25StStephen’sGreen,Dublin2,Ireland(adivisionofPenguinBooksLtd)

PenguinBooksAustralia,707CollinsStreet,Melbourne,Victoria3008,AustraliaPenguinBooksIndia,11CommunityCentre,PanchsheelPark,NewDelhi–110017,IndiaPenguinBooksNewZealand,67ApolloDrive,Rosedale,Auckland0632,NewZealand

PenguinBooksSouthAfrica,24SturdeeAvenue,Rosebank,Johannesburg2196,SouthAfrica

PenguinBooksLtd,RegisteredOffices:80Strand,LondonWC2R0RL,England

PublishedinVikinghardcoverbyPenguinCanada,2016SimultaneouslypublishedintheUnitedStatesbyHoughtonMifflin

HarcourtPublishingCompany

Copyright©K.AndersEricssonandRobertPool,2016

Allrightsreserved.Withoutlimitingtherightsundercopyrightreservedabove,nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedinorintroducedintoaretrievalsystem,ortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans(electronic,mechanical,photocopying,recordingorotherwise),

withoutthepriorwrittenpermissionofboththecopyrightownerandtheabovepublisherofthisbook.

LIBRARYANDARCHIVESCANADACATALOGUINGINPUBLICATION

Ericsson,K.Anders(KarlAnders),1947-,authorPeak:howtomasteralmostanything/Anders

EricssonandRobertPool.

Includesbibliographicalreferences.ISBN978-0-670-06876-0(bound)

1.Expertise.I.Pool,Robert,1955-,authorII.Title.

BF378.E94E752016153C2015-907883-0

eBookISBN978-0-14-319646-4

www.penguinrandomhouse.ca

v3.1

http://www.penguinrandomhouse.ca

Tomywife,Natalie,forfacilitatingandencouragingmyeffortstokeeppushingbeyondmycurrentlevelofunderstandingofexpertperformanceand

gettingclosertothepeak.

—A.E.

Tomysoulmateandmymuse,Deanne,whotaughtmemuchofwhatIknowaboutwriting,mostofwhatIknowaboutliving,andallofwhatIknow

aboutlove.

—R.P.

Contents

CoverTitlePage

CopyrightDedication

Authors’NoteIntroduction:TheGift

1.ThePowerofPurposefulPractice

2.HarnessingAdaptability3.MentalRepresentations

4.TheGoldStandard5.PrinciplesofDeliberatePracticeontheJob

6.PrinciplesofDeliberatePracticeinEverydayLife7.TheRoadtoExtraordinary

8.ButWhatAboutNaturalTalent?9.WhereDoWeGofromHere?

Acknowledgments

Notes

kindle:embed:0006?mime=image/jpg

Authors’Note

This book is the product of a collaboration between two people, apsychologicalscientistandasciencewriter.Webegantalkingregularlyabout the subject—expert performers and “deliberate practice”—morethanadecadeagoandbeganseriousworkonthebookmorethanfiveyearsago.Duringthattimethebookgrewinthegive-and-takebetweenthe two of us to the point that it is now difficult even for us to tellexactlywho is responsible forwhich piece of it.Whatwe do know isthat it is amuch better—and different—book than either of uswouldhaveproducedalone.However,whilethebookisacollaboration,thestorythatittellsisthe

storyof justoneofus(Ericsson),whohasspenthisadult lifestudyingthe secrets of extraordinary performers. Thus, we chose to write thebookfromhispointofview,andthe“I”inthetextshouldbeunderstoodasreferringtohim.Nonetheless,thebookisourjointefforttodescribethisexceptionallyimportanttopicanditsimplications.

AndersEricssonRobertPoolOctober2015

Introduction:TheGift

WHYARESOMEPEOPLEsoamazinglygoodatwhattheydo?Anywhereyoulook, from competitive sports and musical performance to science,medicine,andbusiness,therealwaysseemtobeafewexceptionalsortswhodazzleuswithwhattheycandoandhowwelltheydoit.Andwhenweareconfrontedwithsuchanexceptionalperson,wenaturallytendtoconcludethatthispersonwasbornwithsomethingalittleextra.“Heissogifted,”wesay,or,“Shehasarealgift.”Butisthatreallyso?FormorethanthirtyyearsIhavestudiedthese

people, the special ones who stand out as experts in their fields—athletes, musicians, chess players, doctors, salespeople, teachers, andmore. I havedelved into the nuts andbolts ofwhat theydo andhowthey do it. I have observed, interviewed, and tested them. I haveexploredthepsychology,thephysiology,andtheneuroanatomyoftheseextraordinarypeople.AndovertimeI’vecometounderstandthat,yes,these people do have an extraordinary gift, which lies at the heart oftheircapabilities.But it isnot thegift thatpeopleusuallyassume it tobe,anditisevenmorepowerfulthanweimagine.Mostimportantly,itis a gift that every one of us is born with and can, with the rightapproach,takeadvantageof.

THELESSONOFPERFECTPITCH

The year is 1763, and a youngWolfgangAmadeusMozart is about toembarkonatouraroundEuropethatwilljump-starttheMozartlegend.Just seven years old and barely tall enough to see over the top of aharpsichord,hecaptivatesaudiencesinhishometownofSalzburgwithhisskillontheviolinandvariouskeyboardinstruments.Heplayswithafacility that seems impossible to believe in someone so young. ButMozart has another trick up his sleeve that is, if anything, evenmoresurprisingtothepeopleofhisera.WeknowaboutthistalentbecauseitwasdescribedinaratherbreathlesslettertotheeditorabouttheyoungMozartthatwaspublishedinanewspaperinAugsburg,Mozart’sfather’shometown, shortlybeforeMozartandhis family leftSalzburg for theirtour.The letterwriter reported thatwhen theyoungMozartheardanote

played on a musical instrument—any note—he could immediatelyidentify exactly which note it was: the A-sharp in the second octaveabovemiddleC,perhaps,ortheE-flatbelowmiddleC.Mozartcoulddothis even if hewas in another roomand couldnot see the instrumentbeingplayed,andhecoulddo itnot just for theviolinand fortepianobutforeveryinstrumentheheard—andMozart’s father,asacomposerandmusic teacher, hadnearly every imaginablemusical instrument inhishouse.Norwas it justmusical instruments.Theboy could identifythenotesproducedbyanythingthatwassufficientlymusical—thechimeofaclock, the tollofabell, theah-chooofa sneeze. Itwasanabilitythatmostadultmusiciansofthetime,eventhemostexperienced,couldnotmatch, and it seemed, evenmore thanMozart’s skill on keyboardand violin, to be an example of the mysterious gifts that this youngprodigyhadbeenbornwith.Thatabilityisnotquitesomysterioustoustoday,ofcourse.Weknow

a good dealmore about it now than 250 years ago, andmost peopletodayhaveat leastheardof it.The technical term is “absolutepitch,”althoughitisbetterknownas“perfectpitch,”anditisexceptionallyrare—onlyaboutoneineverytenthousandpeoplehasit.Itismuchlessrareamongworld-classmusiciansthanamongtherestofus,butevenamong

virtuosos it is far from normal: Beethoven is thought to have had it;Brahmsdidnot.VladimirHorowitzhadit;IgorStravinskydidnot.FrankSinatrahadit;MilesDavisdidnot.Itwould seem, in short, to be a perfect example of an innate talentthatafewluckypeoplearebornwithandmostarenot.Indeed,thisiswhatwaswidelybelieved forat least twohundredyears.Butover thepast few decades a very different understanding of perfect pitch hasemerged, one that points to an equally different vision of the sorts ofgiftsthatlifehastooffer.Thefirsthintemergedwiththeobservationthattheonlypeoplewhohadreceivedthis“gift”hadalsoreceivedsomesortofmusicaltrainingearlyintheirchildhood.Inparticular,agooddealofresearchhasshownthatnearlyeveryonewithperfectpitchbeganmusicaltrainingataveryyoungage—generallyaroundthreetofiveyearsold.Butifperfectpitchisaninnateability,somethingthatyouareeitherbornwithornot,thenitshouldn’tmakeanydifferencewhetheryoureceivemusictrainingasachild.Allthatshouldmatteristhatyougetenoughmusicaltraining—atanytimeinyourlife—tolearnthenamesofthenotes.Thenextclueappearedwhenresearchersnoticedthatperfectpitchismuchmorecommonamongpeoplewhospeakatonallanguage,suchasMandarin, Vietnamese, and several other Asian tongues, in which themeaningofwordsisdependentontheirpitch.Ifperfectpitchisindeedageneticgift,thentheonlywaythatthetonal-languageconnectionwouldmakesensewouldbeifpeopleofAsianancestryaremorelikelytohavegenes for perfect pitch than people whose ancestors came fromelsewhere,suchasEuropeorAfrica.Butthatissomethingthatiseasytotestfor.YoujustrecruitanumberofpeopleofAsianancestrywhogrewupspeakingEnglishorsomeothernontonallanguageandseeiftheyaremore likely tohaveperfect pitch.That researchhasbeendone, and itturns out that people ofAsianheritagewhodon’t growup speaking atonal language are no more likely than people of other ethnicities tohave perfect pitch. So it’s not the Asian genetic heritage but ratherlearningatonallanguagethatmakeshavingperfectpitchmorelikely.Up until a few years ago, this was pretty much what we knew:Studyingmusicasachildwasthoughttobeessentialtohavingperfectpitch,andgrowingupspeakingatonallanguageincreasedyouroddsofhaving perfect pitch. Scientists could not say with certainty whether

perfectpitchwasaninnatetalent,buttheyknewthatifitwasagift,itwas a gift that only appeared among those people who had receivedsometraininginpitchinchildhood.Inotherwords,itwouldhavetobesomesortof“useitorloseit”gift.Eventheluckyfewpeoplewhoareborn with a gift for perfect pitch would have to do something—inparticular,somesortofmusicaltrainingwhileyoung—todevelopit.We now know that this isn’t the case, either. The true character ofperfect pitch was revealed in 2014, thanks to a beautiful experimentcarriedoutattheIchionkaiMusicSchoolinTokyoandreportedinthescientific journalPsychologyofMusic.TheJapanesepsychologistAyakoSakakibararecruitedtwenty-fourchildrenbetweentheagesoftwoandsix and put them through a months-long training course designed toteachthemtoidentify,simplybytheirsound,variouschordsplayedonthepiano.Thechordswereallmajorchordswiththreenotes,suchasaC-majorchordwithmiddleCandtheEandGnotesimmediatelyabovemiddleC.Thechildrenweregivenfourorfiveshorttrainingsessionsperday,eachlastingjustafewminutes,andeachchildcontinuedtraininguntil he or she could identify all fourteen of the target chords thatSakakibarahadselected.Someofthechildrencompletedthetraininginless thanayear,whileothers tookas longasayearandahalf.Then,once a child had learned to identify the fourteen chords, Sakakibaratested that child to see if he or she could correctly name individualnotes.Aftercompleting trainingeveryoneof thechildren in the studyhaddevelopedperfectpitchandcould identify individualnotes playedonthepiano.Thisisanastonishingresult.Whileinnormalcircumstancesonlyoneineverytenthousandpeopledevelopsperfectpitch,everysingleoneofSakakibara’sstudentsdid.Theclearimplicationisthatperfectpitch,farfrom being a gift bestowed upon only a lucky few, is an ability thatprettymuchanyonecandevelopwith the right exposureand training.Thestudyhascompletelyrewrittenourunderstandingofperfectpitch.Sowhat aboutMozart’s perfect pitch? A little investigation into hisbackgroundgivesus a pretty good ideaofwhathappened.Wolfgang’sfather, Leopold Mozart, was a moderately talented violinist andcomposerwhohadneverhadthedegreeofsuccesshedesired,sohesetouttoturnhischildrenintothesortofmusicianshehimselfhadalwayswantedtobe.HebeganwithMozart’soldersister,MariaAnna,whoby

thetimeshewaselevenwasdescribedbycontemporariesasplayingthepianoandharpsichordaswellasprofessionaladultmusicians.TheelderMozart—who wrote the first training book for children’s musicaldevelopment—began working with Wolfgang at an even younger agethanhehad startedwithMariaAnna.By the timeWolfgangwas four,hisfatherwasworkingwithhimfulltime—ontheviolin,thekeyboard,andmore.Whilewedon’tknowexactlywhatexercisesMozart’s fatherused to trainhis son,wedoknow thatby the timeMozartwas sixorsevenhehadtrainedfarmoreintenselyandforfarlongerthanthetwodozen children who developed perfect pitch through Sakakibara’spractice sessions. In retrospect, then, there should be nothing at allsurprisingaboutMozart’sdevelopmentofperfectpitch.Sodidtheseven-year-oldWolfganghaveagiftforperfectpitch?Yes

andno.Was he bornwith some rare genetic endowment that allowedhimtoidentifytheprecisepitchofapianonoteorawhistlingteakettle?Everything that scientists have learned about perfect pitch says no.Indeed,ifMozarthadbeenraisedinsomeotherfamilywithoutexposuretomusic—orwithout enough of the right sort of exposure—hewouldcertainly havenever developed that ability at all.Nonetheless,Mozartwasindeedbornwithagift,anditwasthesamegiftthatthechildreninSakakibara’sstudywerebornwith.Theywereallendowedwithabrainso flexible and adaptable that it could,with the right sort of training,developacapabilitythatseemsquitemagicaltothoseofuswhodonotpossessit.Inshort,perfectpitchisnotthegift,but,rather,theabilitytodevelop

perfect pitch is the gift—and, as nearly as we can tell, pretty mucheveryoneisbornwiththatgift.This is a wonderful and surprising fact. In the millions of years of

evolutionleadinguptomodernhumans,therewerealmostcertainlynoselectionpressures favoringpeoplewhocould identify, say, theprecisenotes that a birdwas singing. Yet herewe are today, able to developperfectpitchwitharelativelysimpletrainingregimen.Onlyrecentlyhaveneuroscientistscometounderstandwhysuchagift

shouldexist.Fordecadesscientistsbelievedthatwewerebornwithourbrains’circuitsprettymuchfixedandthatthiscircuitrydeterminedourabilities.Eitheryourbrainwaswiredforperfectpitch,oritwasn’t,andtherewasn’tmuchyoucoulddotochangeit.Youmightneedacertain

amountofpracticetobringthatinnatetalentintofullbloom,andifyoudidn’tgetthispractice,yourperfectpitchmightneverdevelopfully,butthe general belief was that no amount of practice would help if youdidn’thavetherightgenestostartwith.But since the 1990s brain researchers have come to realize that thebrain—even the adult brain—is far more adaptable than anyone everimagined,andthisgivesusatremendousamountofcontroloverwhatourbrainsareabletodo. Inparticular, thebrainrespondstotherightsortsoftriggersbyrewiringitselfinvariousways.Newconnectionsaremadebetweenneurons,whileexistingconnectionscanbestrengthenedorweakened,andinsomepartsofthebrainitisevenpossiblefornewneurons to grow. This adaptability explains how the development ofperfectpitchwaspossible inSakakibara’ssubjectsaswellas inMozarthimself: their brains responded to the musical training by developingcertaincircuitsthatenabledperfectpitch.Wecan’tyetidentifyexactlywhichcircuitsthoseareorsaywhattheylooklikeorexactlywhattheydo, butwe know theymust be there—andweknow that they are theproductofthetraining,notofsomeinborngeneticprogramming.Inthecaseofperfectpitch,itseemsthatthenecessaryadaptabilityinthebraindisappearsby the timea childpassesabout sixyearsold, sothatiftherewiringnecessaryforperfectpitchhasnotoccurredbythen,itwillneverhappen. (Although,aswewill see inchapter8, there areexceptionsofasort,andtheseexceptionscanteachusagreatdealaboutexactlyhowpeopletakeadvantageofthebrain’sadaptability.)Thislossispart of abroaderphenomenon—that is, thatboth thebrainand thebodyaremoreadaptableinyoungchildrenthaninadults,sotherearecertain abilities that can only be developed, or that are more easilydeveloped, before the age of six or twelve or eighteen. Still, both thebrain and the body retain a great deal of adaptability throughoutadulthood,andthisadaptabilitymakesitpossibleforadults,evenolderadults, to develop a wide variety of new capabilities with the righttraining.Withthistruthinmind,let’sreturntothequestionthatIaskedatthebeginning:Why are some people so amazingly good atwhat they do?Overmy years of studying experts in various fields, I have found thattheyalldeveloptheirabilities inmuchthesamewaythatSakakibara’sstudents did—through dedicated training that drives changes in the

brain(andsometimes,dependingontheability,inthebody)thatmakeitpossible for themtodo things that theyotherwisecouldnot.Yes, insomecasesgeneticendowmentmakesadifference,particularlyinareaswhereheightorotherphysicalfactorsareimportant.Amanwithgenesfor being five feet five will find it tough to become a professionalbasketball player, just as a six-foot woman will find it virtuallyimpossible to succeedas an artistic gymnast at the international level.And,aswewilldiscusslaterinthisbook,thereareotherwaysinwhichgenesmay influence one’s achievements, particularly those genes thatinfluencehowlikelyapersonistopracticediligentlyandcorrectly.Buttheclearmessagefromdecadesofresearchisthatnomatterwhatroleinnate genetic endowment may play in the achievements of “gifted”people,themaingiftthatthesepeoplehaveisthesameoneweallhave—theadaptabilityofthehumanbrainandbody,whichtheyhavetakenadvantageofmorethantherestofus.If you talk to these extraordinary people, you find that they all

understandthisatoneleveloranother.Theymaybeunfamiliarwiththeconceptofcognitiveadaptability,buttheyseldombuyintotheideathattheyhavereachedthepeakof their fieldsbecausetheywerethe luckywinnersofsomegeneticlottery.Theyknowwhatisrequiredtodeveloptheextraordinaryskillsthattheypossessbecausetheyhaveexperienceditfirsthand.Oneofmyfavorite testimoniesonthis topiccamefromRayAllen,a

ten-timeAll-StarintheNationalBasketballAssociationandthegreatestthree-pointshooterinthehistoryofthatleague.Someyearsback,ESPNcolumnist Jackie MacMullan wrote an article about Allen as he wasapproachinghisrecordformostthree-pointshotsmade.IntalkingwithAllen for that story, MacMullan mentioned that another basketballcommentator had said that Allenwas bornwith a shooting touch—inotherwords,aninnategiftforthree-pointers.Allendidnotagree.“I’vearguedthiswithalotofpeopleinmylife,”hetoldMacMullan.

“WhenpeoplesayGodblessedmewithabeautiful jumpshot, itreallypissesmeoff.Itellthosepeople,‘Don’tunderminetheworkI’veputineveryday.’Not somedays.Everyday.Askanyonewhohasbeenonateamwithmewhoshootsthemost.GobacktoSeattleandMilwaukee,andaskthem.Theanswerisme.”And,indeed,asMacMullannoted,ifyoutalktoAllen’shighschoolbasketballcoachyouwillfindthatAllen’s

jump shot was not noticeably better than his teammates’ jump shotsback then; in fact, itwas poor. ButAllen took control, andover time,withhardworkanddedication,hetransformedhisjumpshotintoonesogracefulandnaturalthatpeopleassumedhewasbornwithit.Hetookadvantageofhisgift—hisrealgift.

ABOUTTHISBOOK

This is a book about the gift that Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart,Sakakibara’s schoolchildren, and Ray Allen all shared—the ability tocreate,throughtherightsortoftrainingandpractice,abilitiesthattheywould not otherwise possess by taking advantage of the incredibleadaptability of the human brain and body. Furthermore, it is a bookabouthowanyonecanput thisgift towork inorder to improve inanareatheychoose.Andfinally,inthebroadestsensethisisabookabouta fundamentallynewwayof thinkingabouthumanpotential,one thatsuggestswehavefarmorepowerthanweeverrealizedtotakecontrolofourownlives.Since antiquity, people have generally assumed that a person’s

potentialinanygivenfieldisinevitablyandunavoidablylimitedbythatperson’sinherenttalent.Manypeopletakepianolessons,butonlythosewith some specialgiftbecome trulygreatpianistsor composers.Everychildisexposedtomathematicsinschool,butonlyafewhavewhatittakestobecomemathematiciansorphysicistsorengineers.Accordingtothisview,eachofus isbornwithasetof fixedpotentials—apotentialformusic,apotentialformathematics,apotentialforsports,apotentialfor business—and we can choose to develop (or not) any of thosepotentials,butwecannotfillanyoneofthoseparticular“cups”uppastits brim. Thus the purpose of teaching or training becomes helping apersonreachhisorherpotential—tofillthecupasfullyaspossible.Thisimpliesacertainapproachtolearningthatassumespresetlimits.But we now understand that there’s no such thing as a predefined

ability. The brain is adaptable, and training can create skills—such asperfectpitch—thatdidnotexistbefore.Thisisagamechanger,becauselearningnowbecomesawayofcreatingabilitiesratherthanofbringingpeopletothepointwheretheycantakeadvantageoftheirinnateones.In thisnewworld itno longermakes sense to thinkofpeopleasbornwith fixed reserves of potential; instead, potential is an expandablevessel, shaped by the various things we do throughout our lives.Learning isn’t a way of reaching one’s potential but rather a way ofdevelopingit.Wecancreateourownpotential.Andthisistruewhether

our goal is to become a concert pianist or just play the piano wellenoughtoamuseourselves, to join thePGAgolf touror justbringourhandicapsdownafewstrokes.The question then becomes, How do we do it? How do we takeadvantageofthisgiftandbuildabilitiesinourareaofchoice?Muchofmy research over the past several decades has been devoted toansweringthisquestion—thatis,toidentifyandunderstandindetailthebestways to improveperformance in agivenactivity. In short, I havebeenasking,Whatworksandwhatdoesn’tandwhy?Surprisingly,thisquestionhasgottenverylittleattentionfrommostofthepeoplewhohavewritten about this general subject.Over thepastfew years a number of books have argued that people have beenoverestimatingthevalueofinnatetalentandunderestimatingthevalueofsuchthingsasopportunity,motivation,andeffort. Icannotdisagreewiththis,anditiscertainlyimportanttoletpeopleknowthattheycanimprove—andimprovealot—withpractice,orelsetheyareunlikelytobe motivated to even try. But sometimes these books leave theimpression that heartfelt desire and hard work alone will lead toimprovedperformance—“Justkeepworkingatit,andyou’llgetthere”—andthisiswrong.Therightsortofpracticecarriedoutoverasufficientperiodoftimeleadstoimprovement.Nothingelse.Thisbookdescribesindetailwhatthat“rightsortofpractice”isandhowitcanbeputtowork.Thedetailsaboutthissortofpracticearedrawnfromarelativelynewarea of psychology that can be best described as “the science ofexpertise.” This new field seeks to understand the abilities of “expertperformers,”thatis,peoplewhoareamongthebestintheworldatwhatthey do,who have reached the very peak of performance, and I havepublished several academic books on the topic, including Toward aGeneral Theory of Expertise: Prospects and Limits in 1991, The Road toExcellence in1996,andTheCambridgeHandbookofExpertiseandExpertPerformancein2006.Thoseofusintheexpertisefieldinvestigatewhatsets these exceptional people apart from everyone else.We also try toassemble a step-by-step accounting of how these expert performersimprovedtheirperformanceovertimeandexactlyhowtheirmentalandphysicalabilitieschangedastheyimproved.Morethantwodecadesago,after studying expert performers from a wide range of fields, my

colleaguesandIcametorealizethatnomatterwhatthefield,themosteffectiveapproachestoimprovingperformanceallfollowasinglesetofgeneral principles. We named this universal approach “deliberatepractice.” Today deliberate practice remains the gold standard foranyone in any field who wishes to take advantage of the gift ofadaptabilityinordertobuildnewskillsandabilities,anditisthemainconcernofthisbook.Thefirsthalfofthisbookdescribeswhatdeliberatepracticeis,whyitworks as well as it does, and how experts apply it to produce theirextraordinaryabilities.Todothatwewillhavetoexaminevarioustypesof practice, from the least to themost sophisticated, anddiscusswhatdifferentiatesthem.Becauseoneofthekeydifferencesamongdifferenttypesofpracticeistheextenttowhichtheyharnesstheadaptabilityofthe human brain and body, we will take some time to discuss thatadaptabilityandwhattriggersit.We’llalsoexploreexactlywhatsortsofchanges take place in the brain in response to deliberate practice.Becausegainingexpertiseislargelyamatterofimprovingone’smentalprocesses (including, in some fields, themental processes that controlbody movements), and because physical changes such as increasingstrength, flexibility, and endurance are already reasonably wellunderstood,thisbook’sfocuswillbemostlyonthementalsideofexpertperformance, although there is certainly a significant physicalcomponent to expertise in sports and other athletic endeavors. Afterthese explorations we will examine how everything fits together toproduceanexpertperformer—along-termprocessthatgenerallytakesadecadeormore.Next,inabriefinterlude,weexaminemorecloselytheissueofinnateendowmentandwhatroleitmightplayinlimitinghowfarsomepeoplecan go in attaining expert performance. There are some inheritedphysicalcharacteristics,suchasheightandbodysize,thatcaninfluenceperformance in various sports and other physical activities and thatcannotbechangedbypractice.However,mosttraitsthatplayaroleinexpertperformancecanbemodifiedbytherightsortofpractice,atleastduringsomeperiodofone’slifespan.Moregenerally,thereisacomplexinterplaybetweengeneticfactorsandpracticeactivitiesthatwearejustbeginningtounderstand.Somegeneticfactorsmayinfluenceaperson’sability to engage in sustained deliberate practice—for instance, by

limitingaperson’scapabilitytofocusforlongperiodsoftimeeveryday.Conversely,engaginginextendedpracticemayinfluencehowgenesareturnedonandoffinthebody.The last part of the book takes everything we have learned about

deliberate practice by studying expert performers and explainswhat itmeansfortherestofus.Iofferspecificadviceaboutputtingdeliberatepractice towork in professional organizations in order to improve theperformanceofemployees,abouthow individuals canapplydeliberatepractice to get better in their areas of interest, and even about howschoolscanputdeliberatepracticetoworkintheclassroom.While the principles of deliberate practice were discovered by

studying expert performers, the principles themselves can be used byanyonewhowantstoimproveatanything,evenifjustalittlebit.Wantto improve your tennis game? Deliberate practice. Your writing?Deliberate practice. Your sales skills? Deliberate practice. Becausedeliberate practice was developed specifically to help people becomeamongthebestintheworldatwhattheydoandnotmerelytobecome“goodenough,”itisthemostpowerfulapproachtolearningthathasyetbeendiscovered.Hereisagoodwaytothinkaboutit:Youwishtoclimbamountain.

You’renot surehowhighyouwant togo—thatpeak looks anawfullylongwayoff—butyouknowyouwanttogethigherthanyoucurrentlyare.Youcouldsimply takeoffonwhicheverpath lookspromisingandhopeforthebest,butyou’reprobablynotgoingtogetveryfar.Oryoucouldrelyonaguidewhohasbeentothepeakandknowsthebestwaythere.Thatwillguaranteethatnomatterhowhighyoudecidetoclimb,you are doing it in themost efficient, effectiveway. That bestway isdeliberate practice, and this book is your guide. It will show you thepathtothepeak;howfaryoutravelalongthatpathisuptoyou.

1

ThePowerofPurposefulPractice

IN JUST OUR FOURTH SESSION together, Steve was already beginning tosounddiscouraged. ItwasThursdayof the firstweekofanexperimentthatIhadexpectedtolastfortwoorthreemonths,butfromwhatStevewastellingme,itmightnotmakemuchsensetogoon.“Thereappearstobealimitformesomewherearoundeightorninedigits,”hetoldme,hiswordscapturedbythetaperecorderthatranthroughouteachofoursessions.“Withninedigitsespecially,it’sverydifficulttogetregardlessofwhat pattern I use—you know,my own kind of strategies. It reallydoesn’tmatterwhatIuse—itseemsverydifficulttoget.”Steve, anundergraduate atCarnegieMellonUniversity,where Iwas

teachingatthetime,hadbeenhiredtocomeinseveraltimesaweekandworkonasimpletask:memorizingstringsofnumbers.Iwouldreadhima series of digits at a rate of about one per second—“Seven…four…zero…one…one…nine…”andsoon—andStevewouldtrytorememberthemallandrepeatthembacktomeonceIwasdone.OnegoalwassimplytoseehowmuchStevecouldimprovewithpractice. Now, after four of the hour-long sessions, he could reliablyrecall seven-digit strings—the lengthofa localphonenumber—andheusuallygottheeight-digitstringsright,butninedigitswashitormiss,andhehadnevermanagedtorememberaten-digitstringatall.Andatthispoint,givenhisfrustratingexperienceoverthefirstfewsessions,hewasprettysurethathewasn’tgoingtogetanybetter.What Steve didn’t know—but I did—was that pretty much all of

psychologicalscienceatthetimeindicatedthathewasright.Decadesofresearchhad shown that there is a strict limit to the number of itemsthat a person can retain in short-term memory, which is the type ofmemorythebrainusestoholdontosmallamountsofinformationforabriefperiodof time. If a friendgivesyouhis address, it is your short-termmemorythatholdsontoitjustlongenoughtowriteitdown.Orifyou’re multiplying a couple of two-digit numbers in your head, yourshort-term memory is where you keep track of all the intermediatepieces:“Let’ssee:14times27…First,4times7is28,sokeepthe8andcarrythe2,then4times2is8…”andsoon.Andthere’sareasonit’scalled“short-term.”You’renotgoingtorememberthataddressorthoseintermediate numbers five minutes later unless you spend the timerepeatingthemtoyourselfoverandoveragain—andthustransferthemintoyourlong-termmemory.The problem with short-term memory—and the problem that Stevewascomingface-to-facewith—isthatthebrainhasstrictlimitsonhowmanyitemsitcanholdinshort-termmemoryatonce.Forsomeitissixitems, for others it may be seven or eight, but the limit is generallyaboutsevenitems—enoughtoholdontoalocalphonenumberbutnotaSocial Security number. Long-term memory doesn’t have the samelimitations—infact,noonehaseverfoundtheupperlimitsoflong-termmemory—but it takes much longer to deploy. Given enough time towork on it, you can memorize dozens or even hundreds of phonenumbers,butthetestIwasgivingStevewasdesignedtopresentdigitsso fast that he was forced to use only his short-term memory. I wasreading the digits at a rate of one per second—too fast for him totransferthedigitsintohislong-termmemory—soitwasnosurprisethathewas running into awall at numbers thatwere about eight or ninedigitslong.Still, Ihopedhemightbeable todoa littlebetter.The idea for thestudyhadcomefromanobscurepaperIhaddiscoveredwhilesearchingthrougholdscientific studies,apaperpublished ina1929 issueof theAmerican Journal of Psychology by Pauline Martin and SamuelFernberger,twopsychologistsattheUniversityofPennsylvania.MartinandFernbergerreportedthattwoundergraduatesubjectshadbeenable,withfourmonthsofpractice,toincreasethenumberofdigitstheycouldrememberwhengiventhedigitsatarateofaboutonepersecond.One

ofthestudentshadimprovedfromanaverageofninedigitstothirteen,whiletheotherhadgonefromeleventofifteen.This result had been overlooked or forgotten by the broaderpsychological research community, but it immediately captured myattention.Wasthissortofimprovementreallyevenpossible?And,ifso,howwasitpossible?MartinandFernbergerhadofferednodetailsabouthowthestudentshadimprovedtheirdigitmemory,butthatwasexactlythesortofquestionthatmostintriguedme.Atthetime,Iwasjustoutofgraduateschool,andmymainareaofinterestwasthementalprocessesthat take place when someone is learning something or developing askill. For my dissertation I had honed a psychological research toolcalled“thethink-aloudprotocol”thatwasdesignedspecificallytostudysuchmentalprocesses.SoincollaborationwithBillChase,awell-knownCarnegieMellonpsychologyprofessor, I setout to redo theoldMartinandFernbergerstudy,andthistimeIwouldbewatchingtoseeexactlyhowoursubjectimprovedhisdigitmemory—ifindeedhedid.The subject we had recruited was Steve Faloon, who was about astypical a Carnegie Mellon undergraduate as we could have hoped tofind.Hewasapsychologymajorwhowasinterestedinearlychildhooddevelopment. He had just finished his junior year. His scores onachievement tests were similar to those of other Carnegie Mellonstudents,whilehisgradesweresomewhathigherthanaverage.Tallandthin with thick, dark-blond hair, he was friendly, outgoing, andenthusiastic. And he was a serious runner—a fact that did not seemmeaningfultousatthetimebutthatwouldturnouttobecrucialtoourstudy.On the first day that Steve showed up for the memory work, hisperformance was dead-on average. He could usually remember sevendigits and sometimes eight but no more. It was the same sort ofperformanceyouwouldexpect fromanyrandompersonpickedoff thestreet.OnTuesday,Wednesday,andThursdayhewasalittlebetter—anaverageofjustunderninedigits—butstillnobetterthannormal.Stevesaidhethoughtthatthemaindifferencefromthefirstdaywasthatheknew what to expect from the memory test and thus was morecomfortable. It was at the end of that Thursday’s session that Steveexplainedtomewhyhethoughthewasunlikelytogetanybetter.Then on Friday something happened that would change everything.

Stevefoundawaytobreakthrough.Thetrainingsessionswentlikethis:Iwould startwith a random five-digit string, and if Steve got it right(whichhealwaysdid),Iwouldgotosixdigits.Ifhegotthatright,we’dgotosevendigits,andsoon,increasingthelengthofthestringbyoneeachtimehegotitright.Ifhegotitwrong,Iwoulddropthelengthofthe string by two and go again. In this way Steve was constantlychallenged,butnot toomuch.Hewasgivenstringsofdigits thatwererightattheboundarybetweenwhathecouldandcouldn’tdo.Andon thatFriday, Stevemoved theboundary.Up to thatpointhe

had remembered a nine-digit string correctly only a handful of times,and he had never remembered a ten-digit string correctly, so he hadneverevenhadachancetotrystringsofelevendigitsorlonger.Buthebeganthat fifthsessiononaroll.Hegot the first three tries—five,six,andsevendigits—rightwithoutaproblem,missedthefourthone,thengotbackontrack:sixdigits,right;sevendigits,right;eightdigits,right;nine digits, right. Then I read out a ten-digit number—5718866610—andhe nailed that one aswell.Hemissed the next stringwith elevendigits,butafterhegotanotherninedigitsandanothertendigitsright,Ireadhimasecondeleven-digitstring—90756629867—andthistimeherepeatedthewholethingbacktomewithoutahitch.Itwastwodigitsmore thanhehadevergottenrightbefore,andalthoughanadditionaltwodigitsmaynotseemparticularlyimpressive,itwasactuallyamajoraccomplishmentbecausethepastseveraldayshadestablishedthatStevehada“natural”ceiling—thenumberofdigitshecouldcomfortablyholdinhisshort-termmemory—ofonlyeightornine.Hehadfoundawaytopushthroughthatceiling.That was the beginning of what was to be themost surprising two

years of my career. From this point on, Steve slowly but steadilyimprovedhisabilitytorememberstringsofdigits.Bythesixtiethsessionhewasabletoconsistentlyremembertwentydigits—farmorethanBillandIhadimaginedheevercould.Afteralittlemorethanonehundredsessions, he was up to forty, which was more than anyone, evenprofessionalmnemonists,hadeverachieved,andstillhekeptgoing.Heworkedwithmeformorethantwohundredtrainingsessions,andbytheend he had reached eighty-two digits—eighty-two! If you think aboutthatforamoment,you’llrealizejusthowincrediblethismemoryabilitytrulyis.Hereareeighty-tworandomdigits:

0326443449602221328209301020391832373927788917267653245037746120179094345510355530

Imagine hearing all of those read out to you at one per second andbeingabletorememberthemall.ThisiswhatSteveFaloontaughthimselftodooverthetwoyearsofourexperiment—allwithoutevenknowingitwaspossible,justbycontinuingtoworkonitweekafterweek.

THERISEOFEXTRAORDINARYPERFORMERS

In1908JohnnyHayeswontheOlympicmarathoninwhatnewspapersat the time described as “the greatest race of the century.” Hayes’swinningtime,whichsetaworldrecordforthemarathon,was2hours,55minutes,and18seconds.Today, barely more than a century later, the world record for a

marathon is 2 hours, 2 minutes, and 57 seconds—nearly 30 percentfasterthanHayes’srecordtime—andifyou’reaneighteen-tothirty-four-year-oldmale, you aren’t even allowed to enter the BostonMarathonunlessyou’verunanothermarathoninlessthan3hours,5minutes.Inshort,Hayes’sworld-recordtimein1908wouldqualifyhimfortoday’sBostonMarathon (which has about thirty thousand runners) but withnotalottospare.That same1908SummerOlympics sawanear disaster in themen’s

divingcompetition.Oneofthediversbarelyavoidedseriousinjurywhileattempting a double somersault, and an official report released a fewmonths later concluded that the dive was simply too dangerous andrecommendedthatitbebannedfromfutureOlympicGames.Todaythedoublesomersaultisanentry-leveldive,withten-year-oldsnailingitincompetitions, and by high school the best divers are doing four and ahalfsomersaults.World-classcompetitorstakeitevenfurtherwithdivessuchas “theTwister”—twoandahalf backward somersaultswith twoand a half twists added. It’s difficult to imagine what those early-twentieth-century experts who found the double-somersault dive toodangerouswouldhavethoughtabout theTwister,butmyguess is thattheywouldhavedismisseditaslaughablyimpossible—assuming,thatis,that someone would have had the imagination and the audacity tosuggestitinthefirstplace.In theearly1930sAlfredCortotwasoneof thebest-knownclassical

musiciansintheworld,andhisrecordingsofChopin’s“24Études”wereconsideredthedefinitiveinterpretation.Todayteachersofferthosesameperformances—sloppy andmarred bymissed notes—as an example ofhownottoplayChopin,withcriticscomplainingaboutCortot’scarelesstechnique,andanyprofessionalpianistisexpectedtobeabletoperform

theétudeswithfargreatertechnicalskillandélanthanCortot.Indeed,Anthony Tommasini, the music critic at the New York Times, oncecommented that musical ability has increased so much since Cortot’stimethatCortotwouldprobablynotbeadmittedtoJuilliardnow.In1973DavidRichardSpencerofCanadahadmemorizedmoredigitsofpithananypersonbeforehim:511.Fiveyearslater,afterarapid-fireseriesofnewrecordssetbyahandfulofpeoplecompetingtoclaimthememorizationtitle, therecordbelongedtoanAmerican,DavidSanker,who had committed 10,000 digits of pi to memory. In 2015, afteranother thirty-plus years of gains, the recognized title holder wasRajveerMeenaofIndia,whohadmemorizedthefirst70,000digitsofpi—an accumulation that took him 24 hours and 4minutes to recite—althoughAkiraHaraguchiofJapanhadclaimedtohavememorizedaneven more incredible 100,000 digits, or nearly two hundred times asmanyasanyonehadmemorizedjustforty-twoyearsearlier.Thesearenotisolatedexamples.Weliveinaworldfullofpeoplewithextraordinary abilities—abilities that from the vantage point of almostanyother time inhumanhistorywouldhavebeendeemed impossible.Consider Roger Federer’s magic with a tennis ball, or the astoundingvault that McKayla Maroney nailed in the 2012 Summer Olympics: around-off onto the springboard, abackhandspringonto thevault, andthen a high, arching flight with McKayla completing two and a halftwistsbefore she landed firmlyandwith complete controlon themat.There are chess grandmasters who can play several dozen differentgames simultaneously—while blindfolded—and a seemingly unendingsupplyofyoungmusicalprodigieswhocandothingsonthepiano,theviolin, the cello, or the flute thatwouldhaveastonishedaficionadosacenturyago.But while the abilities are extraordinary, there is no mystery at allabout how these people developed them. They practiced. A lot. Theworld-record time in themarathonwasn’t cut by 30 percent over thecourseofacenturybecausepeoplewerebeingbornwithagreatertalentfor running long distances. Nor did the second half of the twentiethcentury see some sudden surge in the births of people with a gift forplayingChopinorRachmaninofforformemorizingtensofthousandsofrandomdigits.What the second half of the twentieth century did seewas a steady

increaseintheamountoftimethatpeopleindifferentareasdevotedtotraining,combinedwithagrowingsophisticationoftrainingtechniques.Thiswastrueinahugenumberoffields,particularlyhighlycompetitivefields such as musical performance and dance, individual and teamsports, and chess and other competitive games. This increase in theamountandsophisticationofpracticeresultedinasteadyimprovementin the abilities of the performers in these various fields—animprovementthatwasnotalwaysobviousfromyeartoyearbutthatisdramaticwhenviewedoverthecourseofseveraldecades.Oneofthebest,ifsometimesbizarre,placestoseetheresultsofthissortofpractice is inGuinnessWorldRecords. Flip through thepagesofthe book or visit the online version, and you will find such recordholdersastheAmericanteacherBarbaraBlackburn,whocantypeupto212 words per minute; Marko Baloh of Slovenia, who once rode 562milesonabicycleintwenty-fourhours;andVikasSharmaofIndia,whoin just one minute was able to calculate the roots of twelve largenumbers,eachwithbetweentwentyandfifty-onedigits,withtherootsranging from the seventeenth to the fiftieth root.That lastmaybe themost impressive of all of them because Sharma was able to performtwelve exceedingly difficultmental calculations in just sixty seconds—fasterthanmanypeoplecouldpunchthenumbersintoacalculatorandreadofftheanswers.Iactuallyreceivedane-mailfromoneGuinnessworldrecordholder,BobJ.Fisher,whoatone timeheld twelvedifferentworld records forbasketball free-throw shooting. His records include such things as themost free throws accomplished in thirty seconds (33), themost in tenminutes(448),andthemostinonehour(2,371).Bobwrotetotellmethat he had read about my studies of the effects of practice and hadappliedwhathehadlearnedfromthosestudiesindevelopinghisabilitytoshootbasketballfreethrowsfasterthananyoneelse.Those studies all have their roots in thework that I didwith SteveFaloon in the late1970s. Since that time I havedevotedmy career tounderstandingexactlyhowpracticeworks tocreatenewandexpandedcapabilities, with a particular focus on those people who have usedpractice tobecomeamong thebest in theworldatwhat theydo.Andafter several decades of studying these best of the best—these “expertperformers,” to use the technical term—I have found that no matter

what field you study, music or sports or chess or something else, themost effective types of practice all follow the same set of generalprinciples.There isnoobviousreasonwhythisshouldbethecase.Whyshould

the teaching techniques used to turn aspiring musicians into concertpianists have anything to do with the training that a dancer must gothrough to become a prima ballerina or the study that a chess playermustundertaketobecomeagrandmaster?Theansweristhatthemosteffective and most powerful types of practice in any field work byharnessingtheadaptabilityofthehumanbodyandbraintocreate,stepbystep,theabilitytodothingsthatwerepreviouslynotpossible.Ifyouwishtodevelopatrulyeffectivetrainingmethodforanything—creatingworld-class gymnasts, for instance, or even something like teachingdoctorstoperformlaparoscopicsurgery—thatmethodwillneedtotakeinto account what works and what doesn’t in driving changes in thebody and brain. Thus, all truly effective practice techniques work inessentiallythesameway.These insights areall relativelynewandweren’t available to all the

teachers, coaches, and performers who produced the incredibleimprovementsinperformancethathaveoccurredoverthepastcentury.Instead, these advanceswere all accomplished through trial and error,with the people involved having essentially no idea why a particulartrainingmethodmightbeeffective.Furthermore,thepractitionersinthevariousfieldsbuilttheirbodiesofknowledgeinisolation,withnosensethatallofthiswasinterconnected—thattheice-skaterwhowasworkingonatripleaxelwasfollowingthesamesetofgeneralprinciplesas,say,thepianistworkingtoperfectaMozartsonata.Soimaginewhatmightbe possible with efforts that are inspired and directed by a clearscientificunderstandingofthebestwaystobuildexpertise.Andimaginewhatmightbepossibleifweappliedthetechniquesthathaveprovedtobesoeffectiveinsportsandmusicandchesstoallthedifferenttypesoflearning that people do, from the education of schoolchildren to thetraining of doctors, engineers, pilots, businesspeople, and workers ofevery sort. I believe that the dramatic improvementswe have seen inthose few fields over the past hundred years are achievable in prettymuch every field if we apply the lessons that can be learned fromstudyingtheprinciplesofeffectivepractice.

Therearevarioussortsofpracticethatcanbeeffectivetoonedegreeor another, but one particular form—which I named “deliberatepractice” back in the early 1990s—is the gold standard. It is themosteffectiveandpowerful formofpractice thatweknowof,andapplyingthe principles of deliberate practice is the bestway to design practicemethods in any area.Wewill devotemost of the rest of this book toexploringwhatdeliberatepracticeis,whyitissoeffective,andhowbesttoapplyitinvarioussituations.Butbeforewedelveintothedetailsofdeliberatepractice,itwillbebestifwespendalittletimeunderstandingsomemorebasictypesofpractice—thesortsofpracticethatmostpeoplehavealreadyexperiencedinonewayoranother.

THEUSUALAPPROACH

Let’s begin by looking at theway people typically learn a new skill—driving a car, playing the piano, performing long division, drawing ahuman figure, writing code, or pretty much anything, really. For thesakeofhavingaspecificexample,let’ssupposeyouarelearningtoplaytennis.You’veseentennismatchesplayedontelevision,anditlookslikefun,

ormaybeyouhavesomefriendswhoplaytennisandwantyoutojointhem. So you buy a couple of tennis outfits, court shoes, maybe asweatband,andaracketandsomeballs.Nowyou’recommitted,butyoudon’tknowthefirstthingaboutactuallyplayingtennis—youdon’tevenknowhowtoholdtheracket—soyoupayforsomelessonsfromatenniscoachormaybeyoujustaskoneofyourfriendstoshowyouthebasics.Afterthoseinitiallessonsyouknowenoughtogooutonyourownandpractice.You’ll probably spend some timeworkingonyour serve, andyou practice hitting the ball against a wall over and over again untilyou’reprettysureyoucanholdyourowninagameagainstawall.Afterthat yougoback toyour coachor your friend for another lesson, andthen you practice somemore, and then another lesson,more practice,and after a while you’ve reached the point where you feel competentenoughtoplayagainstotherpeople.You’restillnotverygood,butyourfriendsarepatient,andeveryonehasagoodtime.Youkeeppracticingonyourownandgettingalessoneverynowandthen,andovertimethereally embarrassing mistakes—like swinging and missing the ballcompletely or hitting the ball very solidly straight into your doublespartner’s back—becomemore andmore rare. You get better with thevarious strokes, even thebackhand,andoccasionally,wheneverythingcomestogetherjustso,youevenenduphittingtheballlikeapro(orsoyou tell yourself).Youhave reacheda comfort level atwhichyoucanjustgooutandhavefunplayingthegame.Youprettymuchknowwhatyou’redoing,andthestrokeshavebecomeautomatic.Youdon’thavetothinktoomuchaboutanyofit.Soyouplayweekendafterweekendwithyour friends, enjoying the game and the exercise. You have become atennisplayer.Thatis,youhave“learned”tennisinthetraditionalsense,

where the goal is to reach a point at which everything becomesautomatic and an acceptable performance is possible with relativelylittlethought,sothatyoucanjustrelaxandenjoythegame.Atthispoint,evenifyou’renotcompletelysatisfiedwithyourlevelofplay,yourimprovementstalls.Youhavemasteredtheeasystuff.But, as you quickly discover, you still have weaknesses that don’tdisappearnomatterhowoftenyouplaywithyourfriends.Perhaps,forexample,everytimeyouuseabackstroketohitaballthatiscominginchest-highwithabitofspin,youmisstheshot.Youknowthis,andthecagier of your opponents have noticed this too, so it is frustrating.However, because it doesn’t happen very often and you never knowwhenit’scoming,younevergetachancetoconsciouslyworkonit,soyoukeepmissingtheshotinexactlythesamewayasyoumanagetohitothershots—automatically.Weall followprettymuch the samepatternwithany skillwe learn,frombakingapietowritingadescriptiveparagraph.Westartoffwithageneralideaofwhatwewanttodo,getsomeinstructionfromateacheroracoachorabookorawebsite,practiceuntilwereachanacceptablelevel,andthenletitbecomeautomatic.Andthere’snothingwrongwiththat. For much of what we do in life, it’s perfectly fine to reach amiddlinglevelofperformanceandjustleaveitlikethat.IfallyouwanttodoistosafelydriveyourcarfrompointAtopointBortoplaythepiano well enough to plink out “Für Elise,” then this approach tolearningisallyouneed.But there is one very important thing to understand here: once youhave reached this satisfactory skill level and automated yourperformance—your driving, your tennis playing, your baking of pies—you have stopped improving. People oftenmisunderstand this becausetheyassumethatthecontinueddrivingortennisplayingorpiebakingisaformofpracticeandthat if theykeepdoingit theyareboundtogetbetter at it, slowly perhaps, but better nonetheless. They assume thatsomeonewhohasbeendrivingfortwentyyearsmustbeabetterdriverthansomeonewhohasbeendrivingforfive,thatadoctorwhohasbeenpracticingmedicine for twentyyearsmustbeabetterdoctor thanonewhohasbeenpracticingforfive,thatateacherwhohasbeenteachingfortwentyyearsmustbebetterthanonewhohasbeenteachingforfive.But no. Research has shown that, generally speaking, once a person

reaches that level of “acceptable” performance and automaticity, theadditionalyearsof“practice”don’tleadtoimprovement.Ifanything,thedoctorortheteacherorthedriverwho’sbeenat it fortwentyyears islikelytobeabitworsethantheonewho’sbeendoingit foronlyfive,andthereasonisthattheseautomatedabilitiesgraduallydeteriorateintheabsenceofdeliberateeffortstoimprove.Sowhatdoyoudoifyou’renotsatisfiedwiththisautomatedlevelofperformance?Whatifyouareateacherwithtenyearsintheclassroomandyouwant todo something tobetter engageyour students andgetyour lessonsacrossmoreeffectively?Aweekendgolferandyouwouldliketomovebeyondyoureighteenhandicap?Anadvertisingcopywriterandyouwanttoaddalittlewowtoyourwords?ThisisthesamesituationthatSteveFaloonfoundhimselfinafterjustacoupleofsessions.Atthatpointhehadbecomecomfortablewiththetask of hearing a string of digits, holding them in his memory, andrepeating them back to me, and he was performing about as well ascouldbeexpected,givenwhat isknownaboutthe limitationsofshort-termmemory. He could have just kept doingwhat hewas doing andmaxingout at eight orninedigits, session after session.Buthedidn’t,because he was participating in an experiment in which he wasconstantly being challenged to remember just onemore digit than thelast time, andbecausehewasnaturally the sortof guywho liked thissortofchallenge,Stevepushedhimselftogetbetter.Theapproachthathe took,whichwewillcall“purposefulpractice,”turned out to be incredibly successful for him. It isn’t always sosuccessful,aswe shall see,but it ismoreeffective than theusual just-enoughmethod—anditisasteptowarddeliberatepractice,whichisourultimategoal.

PURPOSEFULPRACTICE

Purposefulpracticehasseveralcharacteristicsthatsetitapartfromwhatwemightcall“naivepractice,”whichisessentiallyjustdoingsomethingrepeatedly, and expecting that the repetition alonewill improve one’sperformance.SteveOare,aspecialistinmusiceducationatWichitaStateUniversity,

once offered the following imaginary conversation between a musicinstructorandayoungmusicstudent.It’sthesortofconversationaboutpracticethatmusicinstructorshaveallthetime.Inthiscaseateacheristryingtofigureoutwhyayoungstudenthasnotbeenimproving:

TEACHER:Yourpracticesheetsaysthatyoupracticeanhouraday,butyourplayingtestwasonlyaC.Canyouexplainwhy?STUDENT:Idon’tknowwhathappened!Icouldplaythetestlastnight!TEACHER:Howmanytimesdidyouplayit?STUDENT:Tenortwenty.TEACHER:Howmanytimesdidyouplayitcorrectly?STUDENT:Umm,Idunno…Onceortwice…TEACHER:Hmm…Howdidyoupracticeit?STUDENT:Idunno.Ijustplayedit.

Thisisnaivepracticeinanutshell:Ijustplayedit.Ijustswungthebatand tried to hit the ball. I just listened to the numbers and tried torememberthem.Ijustreadthemathproblemsandtriedtosolvethem.Purposeful practice is, as the term implies, much more purposeful,

thoughtful,andfocusedthanthissortofnaivepractice.Inparticular,ithasthefollowingcharacteristics:Purposeful practice has well-defined, specific goals. Our hypothetical

music studentwould have beenmuchmore successfulwith a practicegoal something like this: “Play the piece all the way through at theproper speedwithoutamistake three times ina row.”Without suchagoal,therewasnowaytojudgewhetherthepracticesessionhadbeenasuccess.InSteve’scasetherewasnolong-rangegoalbecausenoneofusknew

how many digits one could possibly memorize, but he had a veryspecific short-term goal: to remember more digits than he had theprevioussession.Asadistancerunner,Stevewasverycompetitive,evenifhewasonlycompetingwithhimself,andhebroughtthatattitudetotheexperiment.FromtheverybeginningStevewaspushingeachdaytoincreasethenumberofdigitshecouldremember.Purposefulpracticeisallaboutputtingabunchofbabystepstogethertoreachalonger-termgoal.Ifyou’reaweekendgolferandyouwanttodecreaseyourhandicapbyfivestrokes,that’sfineforanoverallpurpose,butitisnotawell-defined,specificgoalthatcanbeusedeffectivelyforyourpractice.Breakitdownandmakeaplan:Whatexactlydoyouneedto do to slice five strokes off your handicap? One goal might be toincreasethenumberofdriveslandinginthefairway.That’sareasonablyspecific goal, but youneed to break it down evenmore:What exactlywillyoudotoincreasethenumberofsuccessfuldrives?Youwillneedtofigureoutwhysomanyofyourdrivesarenotlandinginthefairwayandaddressthatby,forinstance,workingtoreduceyourtendencytohooktheball.Howdoyoudothat?Aninstructorcangiveyouadviceonhowtochangeyourswingmotioninspecificways.Andsoon.Thekeythingis to take that general goal—get better—and turn it into somethingspecific that you can work on with a realistic expectation ofimprovement.Purposeful practice is focused. Unlike the music student that Oaredescribed,SteveFaloonwasfocusedonhistaskfromtheverybeginning,and his focus grew as the experiment went along and he wasmemorizing longerand longer stringsofdigits.Youcangeta senseofthis focus by listening to the tape of session 115, which came abouthalfway through the study. Steve had regularly been rememberingstringsofclosetofortydigits,butfortyitselfwasnotsomethinghecouldyet do with any consistency, and he really wanted to reach fortyregularlyonthisday.Webeganwiththirty-fivedigits,whichwaseasyforhim,andhestartedpumpinghimselfupas thestrings increased inlength. Before I read the thirty-nine-digit string, he gave himself anexcited pep talk, seemingly conscious of nothing but the approachingtask: “We have a big day here! … I haven’t missed one yet, have I?No!…Thiswillbeabannerday!”Hewassilentduringthefortysecondsittookmetoreadoutthenumbers,butthen,ashecarefullywentover

the digits in his head, remembering various groups of them and theorder inwhich they appeared,he couldbarely containhimself.Hehitthetableloudlyanumberoftimes,andheclappedalot,apparentlyincelebration of remembering this or that group of digits orwhere theywentinthestring.Onceheblurtedout,“Absolutelyright!I’mcertain!”Andwhenhefinallyspitthedigitsbackatme,hewasindeedright,sowemovedontoforty.Again,thepeptalk:“Nowthisisthebigone!IfIget past this one, it’s all over! I have to get past this one!”Again thesilenceasIreadthedigits,andthentheexcitednoisesandexclamationsashecogitated. “Wow!…Comeonnow!…All right!…Go!”Hegotthatonerightaswell,andthesession indeedbecameone inwhichheregularlyhitfortydigits,althoughnomore.Now,not everyonewill focusbyholleringandpoundingona table,but Steve’s performance illustrates a key insight from the study ofeffective practice: You seldom improve much without giving the taskyourfullattention.Purposeful practice involves feedback. You have to knowwhether youaredoingsomethingrightand,ifnot,howyou’regoingwrong.InOare’sexample themusic studentgotbelated feedbackat schoolwithaContheperformancetest,butthereseemstohavebeennofeedbackduringpractice—noone listening andpointingoutmistakes,with the studentseemingly clueless about whether there were errors in the practice.(“Howmanytimesdidyouplayitcorrectly?”“Umm,Idunno…Onceortwice…”)In our memory study, Steve got simple, direct feedback after everyattempt—correctorincorrect,successorfailure.Healwaysknewwherehestood.Butperhapsthemoreimportantfeedbackwassomethingthathedidhimself.Hepaid close attention towhich aspects of a stringofdigitscausedhimproblems. Ifhe’dgottenthestringwrong,heusuallyknewexactlywhyandwhichdigitshehadmessedupon.Evenifhegotthe string correct, he could report to me afterward which digits hadgiven him trouble and which had been no problem. By recognizingwherehisweaknesseswere,hecouldswitchhisfocusappropriatelyandcome upwith newmemorization techniques thatwould address thoseweaknesses.Generally speaking, no matter what you’re trying to do, you needfeedback to identify exactly where and how you are falling short.

Withoutfeedback—eitherfromyourselforfromoutsideobservers—youcannotfigureoutwhatyouneedtoimproveonorhowcloseyouaretoachievingyourgoals.Purposeful practice requires getting out of one’s comfort zone. This is

perhaps the most important part of purposeful practice. Oare’s musicstudentshowsnosignofeverpushinghimselfbeyondwhatwasfamiliarand comfortable. Instead, the student’s words seem to imply a ratherdesultoryattemptatpractice,withnoefforttodomorethanwhatwasalreadyeasyforhim.Thatapproachjustdoesn’twork.Ourmemory experiment was set up to keep Steve from getting too

comfortable. As he increased his memory capacity, I would challengehimwithlongerandlongerstringsofdigitssothathewasalwayscloseto his capacity. In particular, by increasing the number of digits eachtime he got a string right, and decreasing the numberwhen he got itwrong,Ikeptthenumberofdigitsrightaroundwhathewascapableofdoingwhilealwayspushinghimtorememberjustonemoredigit.This is a fundamental truth about any sort of practice: If you never

push yourself beyond your comfort zone, youwill never improve. Theamateurpianistwhotookhalfadozenyearsof lessonswhenhewasateenagerbutwhoforthepastthirtyyearshasbeenplayingthesamesetof songs in exactly the same way over and over again may haveaccumulatedtenthousandhoursof“practice”duringthattime,butheisnobetteratplayingthepianothanhewasthirtyyearsago.Indeed,he’sprobablygottenworse.Wehaveespecially strongevidenceof thisphenomenonas itapplies

tophysicians.Researchonmanyspecialtiesshowsthatdoctorswhohavebeeninpracticefortwentyorthirtyyearsdoworseoncertainobjectivemeasuresofperformancethanthosewhoarejusttwoorthreeyearsoutofmedicalschool.Itturnsoutthatmostofwhatdoctorsdointheirday-to-daypracticedoesnothingtoimproveorevenmaintaintheirabilities;little of it challenges themor pushes themout of their comfort zones.For that reason, I participated in a consensus conference in 2015 toidentifynew typesof continuingmedical education thatwill challengedoctorsandhelpthemmaintainandimprovetheirskills.Wewilldiscussthisindetailinchapter5.Perhaps my favorite example of this lesson is the case of Ben

Franklin’s chess skills. Franklin was America’s first famous genius. He

wasascientistwhomadehisreputationwithhisstudiesofelectricity,apopularwriterandpublisherofPoorRichard’sAlmanack,thefounderofthe first public lending library in America, an accomplished diplomat,andtheinventorof,amongotherthings,bifocals,thelightningrod,andtheFranklinstove.Buthisgreatestpassionwaschess.Hewasoneofthefirst chess players inAmerica, andhewas aparticipant in the earliestgame of chess known to have been played here. He played chess formorethanfiftyyears,andashegotolderhespentmoreandmoretimeonit.WhileinEuropeheplayedwithFrançois-AndréDanicanPhilidor,thebestchessplayerofthetime.Anddespitehiswell-knownadvicetobeearlytobedandearlytorise,Franklinregularlyplayedfromaround6:00p.m.untilsunrise.SoBenFranklinwasbrilliant,andhespentthousandsofhoursplayingchess,sometimesagainstthebestplayersofthetime.Didthatmakehimagreatchessplayer?No.Hewasaboveaverage,buthenevergotgoodenoughtocomparewithEurope’sbetterplayers,muchlessthebest.Thisfailingwasasourceofgreatfrustrationtohim,buthehadnoideawhyhe couldn’t get any better. Today we understand: he never pushedhimself, never got out of his comfort zone, never put in the hours ofpurposeful practice it would take to improve. He was like the pianistplayingthesamesongsthesamewayforthirtyyears.Thatisarecipeforstagnation,notimprovement.Gettingoutofyourcomfortzonemeans trying todosomething thatyou couldn’t do before. Sometimes you may find it relatively easy toaccomplish that new thing, and then you keep pushing on. Butsometimesyourunintosomethingthatstopsyoucoldanditseemslikeyou’llneverbeabletodoit.Findingwaysaroundthesebarriersisoneofthehiddenkeystopurposefulpractice.Generallythesolutionisnot“tryharder”butrather“trydifferently.”Itisatechniqueissue,inotherwords.InSteve’scase,onebarriercamewhen he hit twenty-two digits. Hewas grouping them into four four-digitgroups,whichheusedvariousmnemonictrickstoremember,plusasix-digitrehearsalgroupattheendthathewouldrepeatoverandovertohimselfuntilhecouldrememberitbythesoundofthenumbers.Buthecouldn’tfigureouthowtogetpasttwenty-twodigits,becausewhenhetriedtoholdfivefour-digitgroups inhishead,hebecameconfusedabouttheirorder.Heeventuallyhituponthe ideaofusingboththree-

digit groups and four-digit groups, a breakthrough that eventuallyallowedhimtoworkuptousingfourfour-digitgroups,fourthree-digitgroups, and a six-digit rehearsal group, for a maximum of thirty-fourdigits. Then, once he reached that limit, he had to develop anothertechnique. This was a regular pattern throughout the entire memorystudy:Stevewouldimproveuptoapoint,getstuck, lookaroundforadifferentapproachthatcouldhelphimgetpastthebarrier,findit,andthenimprovesteadilyuntilanotherbarrierarose.Thebestwaytogetpastanybarrieristocomeatitfromadifferent

direction, which is one reason it is useful to work with a teacher orcoach. Someone who is already familiar with the sorts of obstaclesyou’relikelytoencountercansuggestwaystoovercomethem.Andsometimes it turnsoutthatabarrier ismorepsychological than

anythingelse.ThefamousviolinteacherDorothyDeLayoncedescribedthetimethatoneofherstudentscametohertohelpincreasehisspeedonaparticularpiecethathewasscheduledtoplayatamusicfestival.Hecouldnotplayitfastenough,hetoldher.Howfast,sheasked,wouldyou like to play it? He answered that hewanted to play it as fast asItzhak Perlman, the world-famous violinist. So DeLay first got arecording of Perlman playing the piece and timed it. Then she set ametronometoaslowspeedandhadherstudentplay thepieceat thatpace,whichwaswellwithinhisabilities.Shehadhimplayitagainandagain, each time speeding up themetronome a bit. And each time henailed it. Finally, after he had gone through the piece flawlessly oncemore, she showedhim the setting on themetronome:Hehad actuallyplayeditfasterthanPerlman.BillChaseandIusedasimilartechniquewithSteveacoupleoftimes

whenhehadhitabarrierandthoughthemightnotbeabletoimprovefurther.Once, I sloweddown the rateatwhich I read thedigits justabit, and the extra time made it possible for Steve to remembersignificantlymoredigits.Thisconvincedhimthat theproblemwasnotthenumberofdigitsbutratherhowquicklyhewasencodingthedigits—that is, coming upwithmnemonics for the various groups of digitsthat made up the entire string—and that he could improve hisperformance ifhe could just speedup the timehe took to commit thedigitstolong-termmemory.Anothertime,IgaveStevestringsthatweretendigitslongerthanany

oftheoneshehadmanagedtorememberuptothatpoint.Hesurprisedhimself by remembering most of the digits in those strings—and, inparticular,rememberingmoretotaldigitsthanhehadeverdonebefore,even though hewasn’t perfect. This convinced him that itwas indeedpossible to remember longer strings of digits. He realized his problemwasnotthathehadreachedthelimitofhismemory,butratherthathewasmessingupononeor twogroupsofdigits in theentirestring.Hedecided that the key tomoving onwas to encode the small groups ofdigitsmorecarefully,andhebeganimprovingagain.Whenever you’re trying to improve at something, you will run into

such obstacles—points at which it seems impossible to progress, or atleastwhereyouhavenoideawhatyoushoulddoinordertoimprove.Thisisnatural.Whatisnotnaturalisatruedead-stopobstacle,onethatis impossible to get around, over, or through. In all of my years ofresearch,Ihavefounditissurprisinglyraretogetclearevidenceinanyfield that apersonhas reached some immutable limitonperformance.Instead,I’vefoundthatpeoplemoreoftenjustgiveupandstoptryingtoimprove.Onecaveathereisthatwhileit isalwayspossibletokeepgoingand

keep improving, it is not always easy. Maintaining the focus and theeffort requiredbypurposefulpractice ishardwork, and it is generallynot fun.So the issueofmotivation inevitablycomesup:Whydo somepeopleengageinthissortofpractice?Whatkeepsthemgoing?Wewillreturntothesevitalquestionsagainandagainthroughoutthebook.In Steve’s case, there were several factors at work. First, he was

gettingpaid.Buthecouldhavealwaysshownupforthesessionsandnottriedparticularlyhardandstillhavegottenpaid,sowhilethatmayhavebeen part of hismotivation, itwas certainly not all of it.Why did hepushhimselfsohardtoimprove?Fromtalkingtohim,Ibelievethatalarge part of itwas that once he started to see improvement after thefirst fewsessions,hereallyenjoyedseeinghismemoryscoresgoup. Itfeltgood,andhewantedtokeepfeelingthatway.Also,afterhereachedacertainlevel inhismemorizationabilities,hebecamesomethingofacelebrity;storiesabouthimappearedinnewspapersandmagazines,andhe made a number of appearances on television, including the Todayshow. This provided another type of positive feedback. Generallyspeaking,meaningful positive feedback is one of the crucial factors in

maintaining motivation. It can be internal feedback, such as thesatisfaction of seeing yourself improve at something, or externalfeedbackprovidedbyothers,butitmakesahugedifferenceinwhetheraperson will be able to maintain the consistent effort necessary toimprovethroughpurposefulpractice.Oneother factorwas thatSteve liked tochallengehimself.Thiswasclearfromhisrecordasacross-countryandtrackrunner.Everyonewhoknewhimwouldtellyouthathetrainedashardasanyonebutthathismotivationwassimplytoimprovehisownperformance,notnecessarilytowinraces.Furthermore,fromyearsofrunningheknewwhatitmeantto train regularly, week after week, month after month, and it seemsunlikelythatthetaskofworkingonhismemorythreetimesaweekforanhoureachtimeseemedparticularlydaunting,giventhatheregularlywent for three-hour runs. Later, after finishing thememoryworkwithSteveanda coupleofother students, Imade it apoint to recruitonlysubjectswhohadtrainedextensivelyasathletes,dancers,musicians,orsingers.Noneofthemeverquitonme.So herewe have purposeful practice in a nutshell: Get outside yourcomfort zone but do it in a focusedway, with clear goals, a plan forreachingthosegoals,andawaytomonitoryourprogress.Oh,andfigureoutawaytomaintainyourmotivation.Thisrecipe isanexcellentstart foranyonewhowishesto improve—butitisstilljustastart.

THELIMITSOFPURPOSEFULPRACTICE

While Bill Chase and I were still carrying out our two-year memorystudywithSteveFaloon—butafterStevehadbeguntosetrecordswithhis digit-span memory—we decided to look for another subject whowouldbewillingtotakeonthesamechallenge.NeitherofusbelievedthatStevehadbeenbornwithsomespecialgift formemorizingdigits,butratherweassumedthat theskillshedevelopedcouldbeattributedcompletely to the training that hewent through, and the bestway toprovethatwastorunthesamestudywithanothersubjectandseeifwegotthesameresult.The first person to volunteer was a graduate student, Renée Elio.

Beforegettingstartedshewastoldthatherpredecessorhaddramaticallyincreased the number of digits he couldmemorize, so she knew suchimprovement was possible—which was more than Steve had knownwhenhestarted—butwetoldRenéenothingabouthowStevehaddoneit.Shewouldhavetocomeupwithherownapproach.Whenshestartedout,sheimprovedatapacethatwasverysimilarto

Steve’s,andshewasabletoincreaseherdigit-spanmemorytoclosetotwentydigitsafteraboutfiftyhoursofpracticesessions.However,unlikeSteve, at thispoint shehit awall that she just couldn’t getpast.Afterspending another fifty hours or so without improving, she decided todrop out of the training sessions. She had increased her memory fordigitstothepointthatitwasfarbetterthananyuntrainedperson—andcomparablewithsomemnemonists—butshefellfarshortofwhatStevehadaccomplished.What was the difference? Steve had succeeded by developing a

collection of mental structures—various mnemonics, many of thembasedonrunningtimes,plusasystemforkeepingtrackoftheorderofthe mnemonics—that allowed him to use his long-term memory tosidesteptheusuallimitationsofshort-termmemoryandrememberlongstrings of digits. When he heard the digits 907, for instance, heconceptualizedthemasaprettygoodtwo-miletime—9:07,or9minutes,7 seconds—and they were no longer random numbers that he had tocommit to short-term memory but rather something he was already

familiarwith.Asweshallsee,thekeytoimprovedmentalperformanceofalmostanysortisthedevelopmentofmentalstructuresthatmakeitpossible to avoid the limitations of short-term memory and dealeffectivelywith large amounts of information at once. Steve had donethis.Renée, not knowing how Steve had done it, had developed acompletely different approach to memorizing the digits. Where Stevehad memorized groups of three and four digits mainly in terms ofrunning times, Renée employed an elaborate set of mnemonics thatreliedonsuchthingsasdays,dates,andtimesofday.OnekeydifferencebetweenSteveandRenéewas thatStevehadalwaysdecidedaheadoftimewhatpatternhewoulduseinmemorizingthedigits,breakingthestringsintothree-andfour-digitsetsplusagroupattheendwithfourtosixdigitsthathewouldrepeattohimselfoverandoveruntilhehadthesound of it in his memory. For twenty-seven digits, for instance, hewouldorganizethedigitsintothreesetsoffourdigitseach,threesetsofthreedigitseach,andthenasix-digitgroupat theend.Wereferredtothispre-fixedpatternasa“retrievalstructure,”and itallowedStevetofocusonmemorizingthethree-andfour-digitsetsindividuallyandthenkeep inmindwhere in the retrieval structure each of these individualsetsfit.Thisprovedtobeaverypowerfulapproach,asitallowedhimtoencodeeachsetofthreeorfourdigitsasarunningtimeorsomeothermnemonic,put it inhis long-termmemory,andthennothavetothinkaboutitagainuntilhewentbackattheendtorecallallofthedigitsinthestring.Renée, by contrast, devised her mnemonics on the fly, decidingaccording to the digits she heard what mnemonic she would use toremember them. For a string like 4778245 she might remember it asApril7,1978at2:45,butifthestringwas4778295,shewouldhavetouseApril7,1978andthenstartanewdate:February9…Withoutthesortof consistency thatSteve’s approachoffered, she couldnotmastermorethantwentydigits.After that experience Bill and I decided to look for another subjectwhowould be as similar to Steve as possible in terms of the way hewould memorize the digit strings. Thus we recruited another runner,Dario Donatelli, a member of the CarnegieMellon long-distance teamandoneofSteve’strainingpartners.StevehadtoldDariothatwewere

lookingforsomeonewhowouldcommittobeingalong-termparticipantinourmemory-trainingstudy,andDarioagreed.This time, instead of letting Dario figure it out for himself, we hadSteve teachDariohismethod forencodingdigits.With thisheadstart,Dariowasable to improvemuchmorequickly thanStevehad,at leastinitially.Hegottotwentydigitsinsignificantlyfewertrainingsessions,buthebegantoslowdownafterthat,andoncehereachedthirtydigitsit seemed that he was no longer gettingmuch benefit from followingSteve’smethod,andhisprogress languished.AtthatpointDariobegandevelopinghisownversionofSteve’smethod.Hecameupwithslightlydifferentwaysofencodingthestringsofthreeandfourdigits,and,moreimportantly,hedesignedasignificantlydifferentretrievalstructurethatworked much better for him. Still, when we tested how Dario wasmemorizingthedigits,wefoundthathewasrelyingonmentalprocessesthatwereverymuchliketheonesthatStevehaddeveloped,usinglong-term memory to sidestep the limitations of short-term memory. Afterseveral years of training,Dariowould eventually be able to remembermorethanonehundreddigits,orabouttwentymorethanSteve.AtthispointDariohadbecome,likeStevebeforehim,thebestatthisparticularskillthattheworldhadeverknown.Thereisanimportantlessonhere:Althoughitisgenerallypossibletoimprove to a certain degree with focused practice and staying out ofyourcomfortzone,that’snotallthereistoit.Tryinghardisn’tenough.Pushing yourself to your limits isn’t enough. There are other, equallyimportantaspectstopracticeandtrainingthatareoftenoverlooked.Oneparticularapproachtopracticeandtraininghasproventobethemostpowerfulandeffectivewaytoimproveone’sabilitiesineveryareathathasbeenstudied.Thisapproachisdeliberatepractice,andwewilldescribeit indetailshortly.Butfirstwe’lltakeacloserlookatwhatisbehindtheamazingsortsofimprovementthatarepossiblewiththerightsortofpractice.

2

HarnessingAdaptability

IF YOU’RE A BODYBUILDER or just someone lifting weights to add somemuscle, it is easy to track the results as you challenge your biceps,triceps, quadriceps, pecs, delts, lats, traps, abs, glutes, calves, andhamstrings.Atapemeasureworks,oryoucansimplylookinthemirrorandadmire yourprogress. If you’re runningorbikingor swimming toincreaseyourendurance,youcantrackyourprogressbyyourheartrate,your breathing, and how long you can keep going until yourmusclesfalterduetolacticacidbuildup.Butifyourchallengeismental—becomingproficientatcalculus,say,

orlearninghowtoplayamusicalinstrumentorspeakanewlanguage—it’sdifferent.There isnoeasyway toobserve the resulting changes inyour brain as it adapts to the increasing demands being placed on it.There is no soreness in your cortex the day after a particularly toughtrainingsession.Youdon’thavetogooutandbuynewhatsbecausetheold ones are now too small. You don’t develop a six-pack on yourforehead.Andbecauseyoucan’tseeanychangesinyourbrain,it’seasytoassumethattherereallyisn’tmuchgoingon.That would be a mistake, however. There is a growing body of

evidencethatboththestructureandthefunctionofthebrainchangeinresponse tovarious sortsofmental training, inmuch the samewayasyour muscles and cardiovascular system respond to physical training.With thehelpof suchbrain-imaging techniquesasmagnetic resonanceimaging (MRI), neuroscientists have begun to study how the brains ofpeople with particular skills differ from the brains of people withoutthoseskillsandtoexplorewhichsortsoftrainingproducewhichtypesof

changes. Although there is still a tremendous amount to learn in thisarea,wealreadyknowenough tohavea clear ideaofhowpurposefulpracticeanddeliberatepracticeworktoincreasebothourphysicalandmentalcapabilitiesandmakeitpossibletodothingsthatwenevercouldbefore.Muchofwhatweknowabouthowthebodyadaptstotrainingcomesfrom studies of runners, weightlifters, and various other athletes.Interestinglyenough,however,someofthebeststudiestodateofhowthebrainchangesinresponsetoextendedtrainingwerecarriedoutnotwithmusicians or chess players ormathematicians—someof themoretraditionalsubjectsinstudiesoftheeffectsofpracticeonperformance—butinsteadwithtaxidrivers.

THEBRAINSOFLONDONCABBIES

FewcitiesintheworldcanbaffleaGPSsystemlikeLondoncan.Tostartwith, there isnogridof thoroughfaresthatcanbeusedfororientationandroutingasyouwillfindinManhattanorParisorTokyo.Insteadthecity’smajorstreetsaresetatoddanglestoeachother.Theycurveandtheysquiggle.One-waystreetsabound,therearetrafficcirclesanddeadends all over, and through themiddle of everything runs the ThamesRiver, spanned by a dozen bridges in central London, at least one ofwhich—and sometimes more—will likely have to be crossed during atrip of any length through the city.And the erratic numbering systemdoesn’talways tellyouexactlywhere to findaparticularaddressevenwhenyou’vefoundtherightstreet.Thusthebestadviceforvisitorsistoforgetaboutrentingacarwitha

navigational system and instead rely on the city’s cabbies. They’reubiquitous—sometwenty-fivethousandofthemdrivingaroundintheirbig,black,boxycarsthataretheautomotiveequivalentofsensibleshoes—andtheyareastonishinglygoodatgettingyoufrompointAtopointBin the most efficient way possible, taking into account not only thelengthsofthevariouspossiblepaths,butthetimeofday,theexpectedtraffic,temporaryroadworkandroadclosings,andanyotherdetailsthatmight be relevant to the trip. Nor do points A and B have to betraditionalstreetaddresses.Supposeyou’dliketorevisitthatfunkylittlehatshopinCharingCrosswhosenameyoudon’tquiterecall—Lord’sorLearorsomethinglikethat—butyoudorememberthatthereisalittleshop next door that sells cupcakes.Well, thatwill be enough. Tell allthattoyourcabbie,andassoonasisautomotivelypossibleyouwillfindyourselfinfrontofLairdLondon,23ANewRow.As youmight imagine, given the challenges of finding one’sway in

London,not justanyonecanbeacabbie. Indeed,tobecomealicensedLondontaxidriveronemustpassaseriesofexaminationsthathavebeendescribedas,collectively,themostdifficulttestintheworld.Thetestisadministered by Transport for London, and that agency describes “theKnowledge”—whataprospectivedrivermustlearn—asfollows:

Toachievetherequiredstandardtobelicensedasan“AllLondon”taxidriveryouwillneed

athoroughknowledge,primarily,oftheareawithinasix-mileradiusofCharingCross.Youwill need to know: all the streets; housing estates; parks and open spaces; governmentofficesanddepartments;financialandcommercialcentres;diplomaticpremises;townhalls;registry offices; hospitals; places of worship; sports stadiums and leisure centres; airlineoffices; stations; hotels; clubs; theatres; cinemas;museums; art galleries; schools; collegesand universities; police stations and headquarters buildings; civil, criminal and coroner’scourts;prisons;andplacesof interesttotourists. Infact,anywhereataxipassengermightasktobetaken.

That area within six miles of Charing Cross contains approximatelytwenty-five thousandstreets.Butaprospectivecabbiemustbe familiarwithmore than just streets and buildings. Any landmark is fair game.According to a 2014 story about London taxi drivers in theNewYorkTimesMagazine,oneprospectivedriverwasaskedaboutthelocationofastatueoftwomicewithapieceofcheese;thestatue,onthefaçadeofabuilding,wasjustonefoottall.Moretothepoint,prospectivetaxidriversmustdemonstratethattheycanget fromonepoint in thecity toanotherasefficientlyaspossible.Testsconsistofaseriesof“runs”inwhichtheexaminergivestwopointsinLondonandtheexamineemustprovidethepreciselocationofeachofthepointsandthendescribethebestroutebetweenthem,turnbyturn,naming each street in the sequence. Each run earns a numerical scorebasedonitsaccuracy,andastheprospectivedriveraccumulatespoints,the tests get harder and harder, with the endpoints becoming moreobscureandtherouteslonger,morecomplicated,andmoreconvoluted.Halformoreoftheprospectivedriversendupdroppingout,butthosewhostaywith itandearn their licenseshave internalizedLondon toadegree that Google Maps, with its satellite images, camera cars, andunfathomable memory and processing power, can only vaguelyapproximate.To master the Knowledge, prospective cabbies—who are known as“Knowledge boys” and, occasionally, “Knowledge girls”—spend yearsdriving fromplace toplace inLondon,makingnotesofwhat iswhereandhowtogetfromheretothere.Thefirststepistomasteralistof320runs in the guidebook provided to taxi-driver candidates. For a givenrun, a candidate will generally first figure out the shortest route byphysically traveling the various possible routes, usually bymotorbike,

andthenwillexploretheareasaroundthebeginningandtheendoftherun.Thismeanswanderingaroundwithinaquartermileorsoofeachofthoseplaces,takingnotesonwhichbuildingsandwhichlandmarksarein the vicinity. After having repeated this process 320 times, theprospectivecabbiehasaccumulatedafoundationalsetof320bestroutesaroundLondonandhasalsoexplored—andtakennoteson—prettymucheverybitofthecoreareawithinsixmilesofCharingCross.Itisastart,butsuccessfulcandidateskeepchallengingthemselvestodeterminethebestroutesformanyotherrunsthatarenotonthelistandtotakenoteofbuildingsandlandmarksthat theymighthavemissedbeforeorthatmight have recently appeared. Indeed, even after passing all the testsandgettinglicensed,LondontaxidriverscontinuetoincreaseandhonetheirknowledgeofLondon’sstreets.The resulting memory and navigational skills are nothing short ofastonishing, and so London taxi drivers have proved irresistible topsychologists interested in learningand,particularly, inthe learningofnavigationalskills.Byfarthemostin-depthstudiesofthecabbies—andthe ones that have themost to tell us about how training affects thebrain—have been carried out by Eleanor Maguire, a neuroscientist atUniversityCollegeLondon.In one of her earliest works on the taxi drivers, published in 2000,Maguire used magnetic resonance imaging to look at the brains ofsixteenmaletaxidriversandcomparethemwiththebrainsoffiftyothermalesofsimilarageswhowerenottaxidrivers.Shelookedinparticularat thehippocampus, thatseahorse-shapedpartof thebrain involved inthedevelopmentofmemories.Thehippocampusisparticularlyengagedbyspatialnavigationandinrememberingthelocationofthingsinspace.(Each person actually has two hippocampi, one on each side of thebrain.)For instance, speciesofbirds that store food indifferentplacesandthusmustbeabletorememberthelocationofthesevariouscacheshave relatively larger hippocampi than closely related birds that don’tstore food in different places. More to the point, the size of thehippocampus isquite flexible inat least somespeciesofbirdsandcangrow by as much as 30 percent in response to a bird’s food-storingexperiences.Butwouldthesamethingbetrueinhumans?Maguire found that a particular part of the hippocampus—theposterior,orrear,part—waslargerinthetaxidriversthanintheother

subjects.Furthermore, themore timethatapersonhadspentasa taxidriver, the larger theposteriorhippocampiwere. InanotherstudythatMaguire carried out a few years later, she compared the brains ofLondon taxidriverswithLondonbusdrivers.Like the taxidrivers, thebus drivers spent their days driving around London; the differencebetween themwas that the bus drivers repeated the same routes overandoverandthusneverhadtofigureoutthebestwaytogetfrompointA to pointB.Maguire found that theposterior hippocampi of the taxidriversweresignificantlylargerthanthesamepartsofthebraininthebusdrivers.Theclearimplicationwasthatwhateverwasresponsibleforthedifferenceinthesizeoftheposteriorhippocampiwasnotrelatedtothedriving itselfbut ratherwasrelatedspecifically to thenavigationalskillsthatthejobrequired.Thatstill leftonelooseend,however:perhapsthetaxidriversinthe

studieshadstartedoutwithlargerposteriorhippocampithatgavetheman advantage in finding their way around London, and the extensivetestingtheywentthroughwasnothingmorethanaweeding-outprocessthat zeroed in on those prospective drivers whowere naturally betterequippedtobeabletolearntheirwayaroundthemazethatisLondon.Maguire addressed this issue quite simply and powerfully: she

followedagroupofprospective taxidrivers fromthetimetheystartedtrainingfortheirlicensesuntilthepointatwhichallofthemhadeitherpassed the testsandbecome licensedcabbiesorelsehadgivenupandgoneon todo somethingelse. Inparticular, she recruited seventy-nineprospectivedrivers—allof themmale—whowere juststartingtraining,aswellasanotherthirty-onemalesofsimilaragestoserveascontrols.Whenshescannedalltheirbrains,shefoundnodifferenceinthesizesofthe posterior hippocampi between the prospective drivers and thecontrols.Fouryearslatersherevisitedthetwogroupsofsubjects.Bythistime

forty-oneofthetraineeshadbecomelicensedLondontaxidrivers,whilethirty-eight had stopped training or failed their tests. So at this pointthere were three groups to compare: the new taxi drivers who hadlearned enough about London’s streets to pass the series of tests, thetraineeswhohadnot learned enough to pass, and the groupwhohadnot ever trained at all. Once again Maguire scanned their brains andcalculatedthesizeoftheposteriorhippocampiineach.

What she found would have been no surprise if she had beenmeasuring biceps in bodybuilders, but shewasn’t—shewasmeasuringthesizesofdifferentpartsofthebrain—andsotheresultwasstartling.Thevolumeof theposteriorhippocampihadgottensignificantly largerin the group of trainees who had continued their training and hadbecome licensed taxi drivers. By contrast, therewas no change in thesizeoftheposteriorhippocampiamongtheprospectivetaxidriverswhohad failed to become licensed (either because they simply stoppedtrainingorbecausetheycouldnotpassthetests)oramongthesubjectswhohadneverhadanythingtodowiththetaxitrainingprogram.TheyearsspentmasteringtheKnowledgehadenlargedpreciselythatpartofthebrainthatisresponsiblefornavigatingfromoneplacetoanother.Maguire’s study, whichwas published in 2011, is perhaps themostdramaticevidencewehavethatthehumanbraingrowsandchangesinresponse to intense training. Furthermore, the clear implication of herstudy is that the extra neurons and other tissue in the posteriorhippocampiofthelicensedcabbiesunderlietheirincreasednavigationalcapabilities.YoucanthinkabouttheposteriorhippocampiofaLondontaxidriverastheneuralequivalentofthemassivelydevelopedarmsandshoulders of amale gymnast. Years ofwork on the rings and pommelhorse andparallel bars and floor exercises havebuiltmuscles that areexquisitely suited for the sorts of movements he performs on thosedifferentpiecesofapparatus—and,indeed,thatmakeitpossibleforhimtodoallsortsofgymnasticsmovesthatweresimplynotwithinhisreachwhenhebegantraining.Theposteriorhippocampiofthetaxidriversareequally“bulkedup,”butwithbraintissue,notmusclefiber.

ADAPTABILITY

Until the firstdecadeof the twenty-firstcentury,most scientistswouldhave flatoutdenied that something likewhatMaguirehas seen in thebrainsofLondoncabbieswasevenpossible.Thegeneralbeliefwasthatonce a person reached adulthood, the wiring of his or her brain waspretty much fixed. Sure, everyone understood that there had to betweakshereandtherewhenyoulearnedsomethingnew,butthesewerethought to be little more than the strengthening of some neuralconnectionsandtheweakeningofothers,because theoverall structureofthebrainanditsvariousneuralnetworkswerefixed.Thisideawenthandinhandwiththebeliefthatindividualdifferencesinabilitieswereduemainly to genetically determined differences in the brain’swiringandthatlearningwasjustawayoffulfillingone’sgeneticpotential.Onecommonmetaphordepictedthebrainasacomputer: learningwas likeloadingsomedataorinstallingnewsoftware—itallowedyoutodosomethings you couldn’t do before, but your ultimate performance wouldalwaysbelimitedbysuchthingsasthenumberofbytesinyourrandom-access memory (RAM) and the power of your central processing unit(CPU).By contrast, the body’s adaptability has always been easier to

recognize, as we’ve noted. One of my favorite examples of physicaladaptability involves pushups. If you’re a relatively fit male in yourtwenties,youmaybeable todo40or50; ifyoucando100,youcanimpressyour friends andprobablywina fewbets. Sowhatmightyouguess is theworld record forpushups—500or1,000? In1980MinoruYoshidaofJapandid10,507pushupsnonstop.Afterthat,GuinnessWorldRecordsstoppedacceptingsubmissionsforthenumberofpushupsdonewith no rest periods and switched to the most pushups performed intwenty-fourhourswithrestingallowed.In1993CharlesServiziooftheUnited States set what remains the world record in that category bydoing46,001pushupsin21hoursand21minutes.Orconsiderpull-ups.Evenrelativelyfitguyscangenerallydoonly10

or15,althoughifyou’vereallybeenworkingout,youmayhaveworkedyourwayupto40or50.In2014JanKarešoftheCzechRepublicdid

4,654intwelvehours.In short, the human body is incredibly adaptable. It is not just theskeletalmuscles,butalsotheheart,thelungs,thecirculatorysystem,thebody’s energy stores, and more—everything that goes into physicalstrength and stamina. Theremay be limits, but there is no indicationthatwehavereachedthemyet.FromMaguire’sworkandthatofothers,we’renowlearningthatthebrainhasaverysimilardegreeandvarietyofadaptability.Some of the earliest observations of this sort of adaptability—or“plasticity,” as neuroscientists would say—appeared in studies of howthebrainsofblindordeafpeople“rewire”themselvestofindnewusesforthepartsofthebrainthatarenormallydedicatedtoprocessingsightsorsoundsbutthatinthesepeoplehavenothingtodo.Mostblindpeoplecannot seebecauseofproblemswith theireyesoropticnerve,but thevisualcortexandotherpartsofthebrainarestillfullyfunctional;they’rejust not getting any input from the eyes. If the brain actually werehardwired like a computer, thesevisual regionswould sit forever idle.Wenowknow,however,thatthebrainreroutessomeofitsneuronssothat these otherwise-unused areas are put towork doing other things,particularly things related to the remaining senses,whichblindpeoplemustrelyontogetinform