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.
And our work found that too, that people can do that, we have them say out loud, "What is it that's captured your attention?" And of course, "Sometimes something in the periphery, like movement, captures our gaze and we are pulled there for an instant, but then we can refocus up again and adopt that narrowed attention."
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.
You can tell people about what these Olympic athletes are doing, you can tell them about what the New York Road Runners runners are doing, and just using the same language that I just used with you, right? "Imagine that there's a spotlight shining just on a target, choose something up ahead, the stop sign two blocks up that you can just see, and imagine that you have blinders on so that you're not really paying attention to the people that are passing by, or the buildings, or the garbage cans, or the trucks that are on the road, tune those out and focus in on that target, until you hit it, and then choose another one, right? Sort of recalibrate, choose the next goal."
So, that's what we're teaching people to use, and that's what seems to be effective to maintain that focus rather than sort of being pulled to engage with peripheral vision.
And what we found is that those people that we trained, just everyday normal people doing this this moderately challenging exercise, they were able to move 27% faster. They could do the exercise more quickly, and they said it hurt 17% less.