So, I have always believed that variety is the key to learning and retention.  And now there’s some research that backs that up.

[...] there are effective approaches to learning, at least for those who are motivated. In recent years, cognitive scientists have shown that a few simple techniques can reliably improve what matters most: how much a student learns from studying.

The findings can help anyone, from a fourth grader doing long division to a retiree taking on a new language. But they directly contradict much of the common wisdom about good study habits, and they have not caught on.

For instance, instead of sticking to one study location, simply alternating the room where a person studies improves retention. So does studying distinct but related skills or concepts in one sitting, rather than focusing intensely on a single thing.

via Mind – Research Upends Traditional Thinking on Study Habits – NYTimes.com.

I’ve been using the two techniques in bold above for a a long time in my work and personal life.  By having many diverse projects in the air at once I find it’s easier to both keep interested and see each project through to completion, but also to learn, invent and retain new information, techniques, or ideas.

Finding the right balance of focus vs. multi-tasking vs. relaxing is a science all its own.  But once you find your perfect ratio, your productivity and happiness will skyrocket.

Ryan Fehr and Michele Gelfand at the University of Maryland have drawn on research in other disciplines, including sociology and law, to explore the idea that apologies come in three forms and that their impact varies according to the character of the victim

The three apology types or components are: compensation (e.g. I’m sorry I broke your window, I’ll pay to have it repaired); empathy (e.g. I’m sorry I slept with your best friend, you must feel like you can’t trust either of us ever again); and acknowledgement of violated rules/norms (e.g. I’m sorry I advised the CIA how to torture people, I’ve broken our profession’s pledge to do no harm).

The message, the researchers said, is that when apologising you should consider your audience. ‘This need to meta-cognize about what a victim is looking for in an apology is particularly important when victims’ and offenders’ worldviews diverge,’ they added. Of course, if in doubt about the character of your victim or victims, the researchers said that ‘detailed apologies with multiple components are in general more likely to touch upon what is important to a victim than brief, perfunctory apologies. Offenders should therefore offer apologies with multiple components whenever possible.’

via BPS Research Digest: How to apologise.

I could see research like this leading to additional analysis modules in our Talent Scan product, since we already measure for things similar to empathy, individualism and teamwork to help companies communicate and understand their employees. Not a far leap to helping companies apologize to their employees (and maybe even customers) when things go bad.