The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
So when we start to look at, well, people who aren't sprinters, who are accomplished, but who are more long-distance runners, that's what we find that they do, is that they're using that narrowed attention strategy strategically, and it increases in use, they use it more often as the race progresses, and they really start to do this major switch [laughing] at about the halfway point of say like a 10-kilometer run.
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.
So at first, longer-distance runners are not using that narrowed strategy, they're looking more expansively, because I think that that, well, first of all, distraction [laughing] is a thing, it's useful.
And what we found is that those people who have better pace, faster pace, better time, they use that narrowed strategy more often than this more expansive or open scope of attention.
Now, when they're running a short distance, that target might literally be the finish line, the line that they're trying to cross. If it's a longer distance, they set sub goals, like, you know, the person, the shorts on the person up ahead that they're trying to beat. Or they choose some sort of stable landmark, like a sign that that they would pass by.