The psychology of learning :-)

[Bad Sector]

I've just been told and read a very interesting article about the psychology of learning (http://www.labri.fr/perso/strandh/Teaching/Langages-Enchasses/Common/Strandh-Tutorial/psychology.html) and why some people like to learn and experiment with new things, while others just prefer to stick to whatever they know and try to make the rest follow their own choices.

It's a very interesting read, which reminded me a lot of indiegamer posts (like (http://forums.indiegamer.com/showthread.php?t=11563) these (http://forums.indiegamer.com/showthread.php?t=11562) three (http://forums.indiegamer.com/showthread.php?t=11434)), to which even i fallen victim of the "effect" the article describes :-).

I believe that i'm mostly towards the "perfection-oriented" type of person, when it comes to development (i say "mostly" and "towards development" because -as the article itself says- the division is a simplification of what actually happens), because i really like trying new things and i don't mind failing and starting from scratch as long as i gain something from the process (for example, i rewrote my 3d "Undead" game engine many times from scratch so far and UndeadScript, which technically is an independent project, was written from scratch at least -AFAIR- four times before reaching to this point... and i'm going to rewrite it's compiler from scratch again because the existing has some stinking limitations :-).

Being a totally "performance-oriented" (just use one tool as you know and stick to it) or a "perfection-oriented" (learn new things all the time, towards the never-to-be-found perfection) person, is not practically possible and a middle ground has to be found. From my point of view (which can be totally different from others' of course), being a "performance-oriented"-only person is a bad thing, so i try to be towards the other side. However, real-life is made of these people and demand from you to be such a person, so i try to use some parts of that "psychology" too (hey, sometimes i use windows too, ok? :-P).

Anyway, at the very end, this article just made me understand why some people bash stuff even without knowing about them and prefer to use tools (and libraries, and other things) of much lower quality than what they could use (and even try to make others use them) :-).

I hope that it will make you think a few things about your choice of tools and actions ;-)

[bvanevery]

That article was written from the bias of a perfection-oriented person, to use the article's own terms. In the Myers Briggs Type Indicators it would be the Perceiver vs. Judger axis. Both types of people have their strengths and weaknesses. The Judgers are, frankly, better at getting things done because they're not fooling around with a lot of idle crap that has nothing to do with getting things done.

The whole article is written on the false premise that if you learn new stuff, it's going to make you more efficient in the end. It may or it may not. I just blew 3 years on exotic programming language esoterica and in the end I went back to C++, sadder but wiser, because it did not make me any more efficient at all. The article has a false goal, to make everyone into a Perfectionist / Perceiver. Dumb dumb dumb. People are what they are, and they're gonna stay that way unless events severely force them out of their comfort zone. In my case, a lot of my Perfectionist tendencies were cured because I went bankrupt in the pursuit of them.

A better goal from a managerial standpoint, whether managing yourself or other people, is to recognize the differences between MBTIs, and give input to compensate for the worker's natural weakness. For instance, reminding the Perfectionist that there's a critical path goal to be contended with, or that there should be if she wants to stay profitable. Or attempting to expand the Performance person's horizons with a gentle suggestion that they try a different approach.

[Bad Sector]

While i agree that the article was written from a "perfection-oriented" person, it mentions both the positives and negatives aspects of being a perfection-oriented or a performance-oriented person. I don't think it was written to make people perfection-oriented, because mostly as you say people rarely change without some big shock. The thing is, when they experience this shock, they shouldn't go to the other end.

In fact, from what i think about this article, being in either ends is a bad thing no matter what the end is. However, the article seems to recommend being mostly a "perfection-oriented" person than a "perfomance-oriented" one and personally i agree. Think quality version quantity :-).

In any case, i put this article here not to help the author achieve making people more "performance-oriented", but to make a few people think about the existance of this kind of people. Of course (and the article mentions it) either kind of people will try to convince others to move to their kind, so if you think about that part you'll realize that trying convince people is a moot point and the author does seem to know that.

Btw, what "Myers Briggs Type Indicators" are?

[Jack Norton]

However, the article seems to recommend being mostly a "perfection-oriented" person than a "perfomance-oriented" one and personally i agree. Think quality version quantity :-).

Surely that doesn't apply to successful shareware developers (i.e. that actually finished several titles and live from their earnings). I spoke with so many devs and everyone was saying how bad programmer he is, but in the end people buy finished products and not source code :D

[ChrisP]

Btw, what "Myers Briggs Type Indicators" are?

it's aell-known psychological personality questionnaire. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator

[soniCron]

Think quality version quantity :-). The irony of that sentence speaks volumes... ;)

[bvanevery]

mostly as you say people rarely change without some big shock. The thing is, when they experience this shock, they shouldn't go to the other end.

Unlikely that they're capable of changing that profoundly. I've met people who have radically changed their political opinions, swinging from very conservative to very liberal. They're still Judgers, and possibly Feelers to boot.

In fact, from what i think about this article, being in either ends is a bad thing no matter what the end is. However, the article seems to recommend being mostly a "perfection-oriented" person than a "perfomance-oriented" one and personally i agree. Think quality version quantity :-).

You really didn't understand what I said about different MBTIs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs) having different strengths and weaknesses. For instance, you can cite quality over quantity all you want, but if you can't ship your product you'll either get fired or not make any money.

[Bad Sector]

You really didn't understand what I said about different MBTIs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs) having different strengths and weaknesses. For instance, you can cite quality over quantity all you want, but if you can't ship your product you'll either get fired or not make any money.

I understood, but i still prefer a good game to a bunch of mediocre games :-).

When i made my first commercial game (that was this one (http://www.slashstone.com/more/nikwi)) i didn't add much quality, but i added a lot of enemies and levels, although the type of the game didn't really had much to go. I chose quantity over quality (not intentionally but that's how it came out). It was a failure, not even one single sell. I don't plan to do that mistake again.