When training is not well

Maybe you think you'll get better at developing memorizing things if you practice a lot. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.

In 1927, a scientist tested 187 university students on their ability to memorize poetry, the meaning of Turkish words, dates of historical events, and other things.

Then some students practiced memorizing things. Others learned techniques for remembering things. And the rest did nothing at all related to memory.

When the scientist tested the students again, the group that had learned techniques for memorizing things did much better on the test than the others. The students who had practiced memorizing things and the students who had done nothing at all did about the same on the test as they did before.

Scientists have discovered that you don't get better at memorizing things just by doing it more. But you can get better by learning some clever tricks that help you out.

Try to develop your memory by using memory games from this site Eidetic memory game and Good memory game. Also you can develop your 3D imagery by using 3D technical drawing puzzle.

Surprise of eidetic memory

When researchers tested average adults for recognition rather than specific recall, they were wildly surprised to discover that photographs are so loaded with objective information and subjective meaning that an eidetic memory isn’t needed to recall if an image has been seen before.

It had been long established that people with average memories could be asked to recall a list of four digits and read them back accurately a few minutes later, but as the number was increased and the recall time was extended to an hour, most failed. A resulting scientific paper was wryly titled, “The Magic Number Seven, plus or minus two,” summarizing the normal recall variance of between five and nine digits. Phone numbers are a case in point. Some people easily recall these seven-digit numbers, while others forever look them up. We normally deal with area codes as add-on separate entities.

The imagery surprise came when a researcher tried to test how many slides average adults could recognize a week after a projection session of one every five seconds. His colleagues predicted accurate results of no more than twenty from projected pairings with previously unseen images that randomly alternated position. He kept expanding his tests until he established that average adults could recognize at least 10,000 images after a week with an accuracy that did not fall off as the number of images to be remembered rose. He found no upper limit.