Andrew Huberman· PhD
testing yourself once twice maybe three times prior to the ultimate test of your knowledge of that material is Far and Away the best way to lock that material into those neural circuits
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
testing yourself once twice maybe three times prior to the ultimate test of your knowledge of that material is Far and Away the best way to lock that material into those neural circuits
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
after one exposure to new material taking more tests on that material even if you don't perform that well on those tests as long as you're able to see the accurate answers to those tests and compare your answers to those answers will lead to better performance on the ultimate test and retention of that material at some later time
taking tests on that material not just once but ideally two or three times that's what really locks the material into your neural circuits that's what's going to lead to the most pervasive change the most durable change we should say in your neural circuits that carry that material that hold that material in your mind what we call Neural encoding