Mentions
Extended reach
Total likes
Video views
AI synopsis
Several discussions emphasize the small capacity of short-term memory, with participants referencing key studies such as Cowan (2001) and descriptions of the 'magical number 4'. The tone varies from technical and analytical to casual curiosity, with words like 'reconsideration' and 'surprisingly small' underscoring the significance of the research. These discussions reflect both respect for the data and interest in its implications for understanding human cognition.
Most discussions support the idea that short-term memory capacity is limited to around four items, as reflected in phrases like 'reconsideration of mental storage capacity' and references to the 'magical number 4'.
Participants demonstrate high curiosity, referencing historical studies from the 1950s and 2000s, and showing enthusiasm for revisiting established theories.
Many discussions include technical details, citations, and comparisons between numbers like 4 and 7, indicating deep engagement with the research methods and implications.
While some see this reconsideration as potentially influential in cognitive science, the general tone suggests the findings may reinforce existing beliefs rather than radically shifting understanding.
First and foremost, our short term memory has a surprisingly small capacity. We can usually only retain 4 'things' in our head at any one time. And if something new enters it, something else gets jettisoned to allow room for it. https://t.co/y5AAI2jgLs /2
言葉や手順などを覚えるのにチャンク(作業記憶の情報量や塊)をネルソン・コーワン氏のマジカルナンバー４±１やジョージ・ミラー氏の７±２が参照点になると考える。 ibid. Nelson Cowan (2001), The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity
その後の研究で、現在は、マジカルナンバーは”4±1個”といわれています。（下記論文参照、2001年） The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity | Behavioral and Brain Sciences | Cambridge Core この40年の間に、最大6桁も違うとは、、、ストーリー性を持って記憶できる場合ならば7±2個、ランダムで意味付けが行えない場合は4±1個と考えたほうがしっくりとします。
@tasorito 面白い 下の論文を読むと”ゆり”でよいのだろう しかし小1で既に先生の答えに納得しないこの息子さんは将来有望な子では？ 普通”こんなもんか”とか思っちゃいそう “The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity” (Behav Brain Sci 2001;24(1):87-114.)
The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity https://t.co/nH0HFJIMn0 より
@prerationalist It’s been revised down to 4 ± 1! Also note growing popularity of variable encoding models of WM that push back against the idea of discrete “slots”. https://t.co/qCjrLUFpbM
Discover three essential brain hacks to overcome writer's block and achieve high word counts. Inspired by Brandon Sanderson's routines, these strategies focus on creating consistent habits, efficient sprints, and…
This video discusses the limitations of short-term memory, emphasizing a capacity of about four chunks of information, influenced by factors like overload and experiment design, based on recent research and cognitive…
This video revisits the idea that short-term memory can hold about four chunks of information, emphasizing the influence of overload, experiment design, and the distinction from other memory processes. It highlights the…
So apparently the magical number 7 is now the magical number 4. https://t.co/EjuVe8Ch3x https://t.co/rIVZRs7naE
[1] - https://t.co/InAgWRIUVz
その後の研究で、現在は、マジカルナンバーは”4±1個”といわれています。（下記論文参照、2001年） The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity | Behavioral and Brain Sciences | Cambridge Core この40年の間に、最大6桁も違うとは、、、ストーリー性を持って記憶できる場合ならば7±2個、ランダムで意味付けが行えない場合は4±1個と考えたほうがしっくりとします。
@tasorito 面白い 下の論文を読むと”ゆり”でよいのだろう しかし小1で既に先生の答えに納得しないこの息子さんは将来有望な子では？ 普通”こんなもんか”とか思っちゃいそう “The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity” (Behav Brain Sci 2001;24(1):87-114.)
@TBagsMusings @visakanv Yes! Millar back in the 50s but I got my number wrong. This is the follow on that reviewed all the literature and landed on 3-5 as a limit https://t.co/HV1zp6dN7X
@Maguro_Maznaga 人間の短期記憶は一度に3~5個のものしか覚えられない、という論文があります。 https://t.co/X1pAfFABEo その3~5個で何の情報を覚えるかにもよりますが、普段生活してる中で、その短期記憶リソースをどのくらいゲームに割けるでしょうかね？
@aidan_mclau Actually, something between 4 (Cowan, 2001) and 7 +/- 2 (Miller, 1956). 4 for real retrieval and processing, 9 if we do adopt something like a context window in current LLMs. Sources: https://t.co/zW2PyX7E7A https://t.co/WYmBovJwam
ただ、その後2001年に3〜5とする説がでている。 https://t.co/dG5sDZSvb6
言葉や手順などを覚えるのにチャンク(作業記憶の情報量や塊)をネルソン・コーワン氏のマジカルナンバー４±１やジョージ・ミラー氏の７±２が参照点になると考える。 ibid. Nelson Cowan (2001), The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity
@BernardJBaars Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(4), 87–186. https://t.co/iEm2Za61Wi
Baddeley conducted a long series of studies on human memory and information processing. Others, including Nelson Cowan, followed in his footsteps. Read more about it here: https://t.co/WkfRMelyfP
@HayaZumi よくマジックナンバー7と言われてるけど実際は4だよね～という話になっています https://t.co/jOC984VDhT
For more, I write a weekly newsletter (https://t.co/sNQuUSImLy) Here's the memory paper: (https://t.co/ni1BmaK4dy) The Jonah Berger quote is from Contagious (https://t.co/4uEitaZpOG) The Jeff Bezos quote is from the 2009 Amazon shareholder letter (https://t.co/o6zbe9nHLD)
RT @garwboy: First and foremost, our short term memory has a surprisingly small capacity. We can usually only retain 4 'things' in our head…
@bitNomad @DanielSchimpke 2/ Plus the cognition overhead to store more than 4 in short-term memory is real (https://t.co/LfOZbDTr6W) and to me is the biggest advantage (low number of folders, very few levels). Before I had easily 10+ nested folders, today I have 2-3.
RT @dioscuri: @prerationalist It’s been revised down to 4 ± 1! Also note growing popularity of variable encoding models of WM that push bac…
@prerationalist It’s been revised down to 4 ± 1! Also note growing popularity of variable encoding models of WM that push back against the idea of discrete “slots”. https://t.co/qCjrLUFpbM
関連して、magical number 7 じゃないのかよｗ The magical number 4 in short-term memory: a reconsideration of mental storage capacity https://t.co/xyAFzDSp4u
@ceptional @STWorg @AndrewRAConway and https://t.co/maSL4VXLvd
@PanossaYT @ncasenmare I'm a little late to the party but here it is: https://t.co/76e7H3ByDt
@rinkuzu24 そんなことはない。論文にも「人間の短期記憶は一度に3~5個のことしか覚えられない。」と書かれている。その3~5個で何の情報を覚えるかにもよるが、普段生活してる中で、その短期記憶リソースをどのくらいゲームに割けるかって話でな。 https://t.co/X1pAfFB9tW
https://t.co/Z4PdywQsAd
Cowan, Nelson. "The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity." Behavioral and brain sciences, 24.1 (2001): 87-114.
@vgr I’d forgotten it but I have some notes on the Wikipedia article Due to atrophy from second brain dependence I think my memory buffer has declined to 4 though: https://t.co/Bz8ovUlUdx
The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity https://t.co/nH0HFJIMn0 より
RT @garwboy: First and foremost, our short term memory has a surprisingly small capacity. We can usually only retain 4 'things' in our head…
First and foremost, our short term memory has a surprisingly small capacity. We can usually only retain 4 'things' in our head at any one time. And if something new enters it, something else gets jettisoned to allow room for it. https://t.co/y5AAI2jgLs /2
ワーキングメモリに関していえば、平均的なヒトで、せいぜい4バイトである(Cowan, 2001)。 Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87-185
The magical number 4 in #short #term #memory: A reconsideration of #mental #storage capacity https://t.co/R5Cjzjwbgo
人間の脳は3から4の物事しかいっぺんに考えられない。 エビデンスを踏まえてのお願いだが コーディングしてるときは限界ギリギリなので話しかけないで欲しいw https://t.co/7DN4Lnav4W
Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87–185. #True #Allyship https://t.co/a5w22uR8Nb
人が一度に短期記憶に留めておける数、いわゆる「マジカルナンバー」は、現在ではコーワン教授のいう4±1が定説のようですね。 でも個人的には2±1かなぁという気がしている。4はしんどい。 https://t.co/dmDAzksu9v
Referencia Miller: https://t.co/1vhUXdnumH Referencia Cowan: https://t.co/LFnea7wYCv
@mengwong @berndruecker @matti_sg @DMerigoux @RoundTableLaw @craigaatkinson @mattwadd @mireillemoret @laurence_diver @robholmesnz @Tom_Bcgh @ColinGavaghan @nullary @lilianedwards @lawgeeknz @piacandrews @nardwebster @scott_pm @mchardcastle @TimdeSousa @BR3NDA @tjharrop @gthurstonnz @BlawxAI @Camunda RE: "Xalgo's preferences appear to be (ternary) Booleans in the cells" That might be inadvertent bias due to my being on the low end of mental storage capacity https://t.co/aqBWYqLjDX
@_9km https://t.co/Q9fLEWV5EJ これかな？
DT
し
Dわ
HN
J
G
RW
金
AS
ノ
DW
M
た
MD
AS
SS
AH
F
NC
E
W
TF
A
YJ
NR
M
JE
か脂
UD
JP
ﾚ