Andrew Huberman· PhD
So to answer your question in a roundabout way, I would say, yes, it's shorter sessions that are very high quality.
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.
So to answer your question in a roundabout way, I would say, yes, it's shorter sessions that are very high quality.
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.
No, it's it's not a volumedriven exercise. It's a quality driven exercise. It is about rehearsal of accurate movement, accurate movement mechanics.
And I think the best athletes in my experience are the ones that consciously and cognitively are aware of it at every moment of the training session. A a three-hour session versus a 90-minute session. You know, we'll we'll take the 90-minute session any day when it comes to skill acquisition because that's going to be driven by quality over quantity.