# Study: How accurate is visual memory?



## pjk (Mar 9, 2009)

I just finished watching a show that is on in the United States on Sundays called "60 Minutes". I'm not sure how popular it is elsewhere in the world, but it is somewhat popular in the US, and it is a show I really enjoy watching. Tonight, they had a really interesting story on visual memory. They talk about the effectiveness of eyewitness testimony is in the US judicial system. I'd highly suggest watching the 2 part piece on it (each piece is 15 minutes). Part 1 simply introduces a story of eyewitness testimony, and part 2 talks about the visual memory portion of it. Part 2 is the more relevant part to this, but I'd suggest watching part 1 first in order to understand the situation. You can watch them on the 60 Minutes website here:
http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/60minutes/main3415.shtml

Here are links to the two parts if you can't find them on the homepage:
Eyewitnesses Testimony Part 1
Eyewitnesses Testimony Part 2

The reason I'm posting this in blindfold is due to the relevance of memory it has to BLD cubing. Let me know what you think about the videos. I thought they were quite interesting.


----------



## byu (Mar 9, 2009)

How accurate is visual memory?
I'd say 90%. That's my BLD consistency rate with pure visual memory.


----------



## Zarxrax (Mar 9, 2009)

I think visual memory is fairly accurate in the short term, but it is very poor for building longer term memories. For BLD I think it could work fine but of course there are other memory methods which may or may not work better.


----------



## abr71310 (Mar 9, 2009)

For multi-BLD i think it'd be pointless, you'd get mixed up between cubes if you weren't experienced (like me).


----------



## byu (Mar 9, 2009)

abr71310 said:


> For multi-BLD i think it'd be pointless, you'd get mixed up between cubes if you weren't experienced (like me).



Are you saying you're experienced or not experienced?

I got a 3/3 Multi-BLD recently using pure visual.


----------



## Bob (Mar 9, 2009)

byu said:


> How accurate is visual memory?
> I'd say 90%. That's my BLD consistency rate with pure visual memory.



Not according to this page:
http://www.worldcubeassociation.org/results/p.php?i=2009YUBR01

...unless you significantly changed how you memorize the cube since less than a month ago.


----------



## byu (Mar 9, 2009)

Haha, the first comp I used a very strange memo method.
Second competition my cube popped on 2/3 solves, otherwise they would both have been successes.


----------



## Lucas Garron (Mar 9, 2009)

My visual memo is highly accurate, if slow. I have often recognized execution errors on DNFs, but very rarely have I been able to account for mistakes with memo errors, even on big cubes BLD.


----------



## TheBB (Mar 9, 2009)

My visual memo is very accurate, and getting much faster.

Visual memo of the cube and eyewitness recollections of a crime scene are two different things indeed, and can't really be compared. It's well known that eyewitnesses have very spotty records with regard to details... if 60 minutes just figured this out they should hire someone new.


----------



## mazei (Mar 9, 2009)

My corners are never wrong so far when I use visual memo. Wrongs on corners are usually due to execution or remembering it wrongly, as in when corner 1 is suppose to go to 2 but looked at as suppose to go to 3 but I think this is just astigmatism kicking in.


----------



## pjk (Mar 9, 2009)

TheBB said:


> Visual memo of the cube and eyewitness recollections of a crime scene are two different things indeed, and can't really be compared. It's well known that eyewitnesses have very spotty records with regard to details... if 60 minutes just figured this out they should hire someone new.


I don't see why they can't be compared: they are both visual, and use the same aspects of the brain. And yes, it has been known for awhile that eyewitnesses have spotty memory, but I've never seen such a well done study on it until watching that. Of course BLD is typicall short term, while eyewitnesses experience long term. However, I think the idea can definitely be translated from long to short term memory. I find it quite amazing how the mind can be tricked so easily. For example, if you're memorizing a cube visually, and you look up and see other objects of similar color and shape, perhaps that would affect how "well" you memorize. Of course, if you practice like that, it would certainly help improve the accuracy the memorization.


----------



## Gparker (Mar 9, 2009)

yea, for single i use part visual with letters and its really effective, but for multi, i use letters and images


----------



## riffz (Mar 9, 2009)

I thought my visual memory was good, but under the pressure of the TOW 2009, I DNFed 3 times :s


----------



## TheBB (Mar 9, 2009)

pjk said:


> I don't see why they can't be compared: they are both visual, and use the same aspects of the brain.


Well, when I do visual memo I memorize paths of stickers, a highly specialized form of "visual" memo, and I don't think it's very visual at all. I don't memorize how the cube _looks_, after all.

Also, _do_ they use the same "aspects" of the brain? (Related note, what is an "aspect of the brain"?)


----------



## tim (Mar 9, 2009)

pjk said:


> TheBB said:
> 
> 
> > Visual memo of the cube and eyewitness recollections of a crime scene are two different things indeed, and can't really be compared. It's well known that eyewitnesses have very spotty records with regard to details... if 60 minutes just figured this out they should hire someone new.
> ...



Ok, i don't have any proof here, but i seriously doubt it. Visual memo of the cube is usually referred to "seeing paths" which isn't the same thing as memorizing things you see in your daily environment.

Nevermind, i didn't see TheBB's post.


----------



## pjk (Mar 10, 2009)

tim said:


> pjk said:
> 
> 
> > TheBB said:
> ...


I may be wrong; I don't have any proof either. I do think they can be compared regardless. Even if you remember paths and not colors, could your memory perhaps be distorted if you look at something similar to your paths during memorization? What is the best way to eliminate DNF's due to memorization errors, caused by "forgetting"? I can often memorize a cube visually quite fast, but then within 30 seconds I seem to have no recollection of what I remembered. I believe that practice will resolve this, but for now, what is causing me to forget? Opening my eyes after memo'ing and seeing a picture on the wall that interferes with my existing memorization in my head? I find this similar to how the eyewitness' memory becomes tricked as shown in the videos I posted, and I think that we can learn from this.


----------



## tim (Mar 10, 2009)

pjk said:


> I can often memorize a cube visually quite fast, but then within 30 seconds I seem to have no recollection of what I remembered. I believe that practice will resolve this, but for now, what is causing me to forget?



Similarities, no repetition, too abstract information, too short memorization time, ... There are several reasons.


----------



## Gparker (Mar 10, 2009)

tim said:


> pjk said:
> 
> 
> > I can often memorize a cube visually quite fast, but then within 30 seconds I seem to have no recollection of what I remembered. I believe that practice will resolve this, but for now, what is causing me to forget?
> ...



does that ever happen to you?


----------



## tim (Mar 10, 2009)

Gparker said:


> tim said:
> 
> 
> > pjk said:
> ...



What do you mean? These are reasons why people forget information. I try to avoid all these points while memorizing.


----------



## Lucas Garron (Mar 10, 2009)

tim said:


> Gparker said:
> 
> 
> > tim said:
> ...


Hmm, so what can't you avoid?
My visual memo is quite persistent, and it's been like that since my first BLD solve. I can reconstruct most of a solve any time within an hour if I haven't been doing other BLD solves.
Nevertheless, I try not to keep memo in my head intentionally, to help minimize confusion.


----------



## pjk (Mar 10, 2009)

tim said:


> Similarities, no repetition, too abstract information, too short memorization time, ... There are several reasons.


Are you sure the memo time has anything to do with it? Since you memo'ed it once, that means the information exists somewhere in your brain, it is just a matter of recalling it. Yes, time will create the paths to that information which will make it easier to recall, but is this necessary for each solve?



Lucas Garron said:


> tim said:
> 
> 
> > Gparker said:
> ...


If your visual memo is quite persistent, perhaps you should try memo'ing faster. When I first started using visual memo, I would take a long time to memo, and I would be very persistent as well, and be able to recall a solve from the last 24 hours (depending on how many solves I did that day). I then began to push myself to the point where I'd think I would forget, and I ended up knocking my memo times way down, and I wasn't as persistent. Practice will obviously improve this.

Do you guys think that if you were glancing at a computer every 3 seconds which had a rotating cube on it that was scrambled identical to one you were memo'ing for a BLD solve, it would make it easier to recall the memo of the cube with shorter memo time? If so, why? If not, why not?


----------



## tim (Mar 10, 2009)

pjk said:


> tim said:
> 
> 
> > Similarities, no repetition, too abstract information, too short memorization time, ... There are several reasons.
> ...



I don't know if that's true for visual memo, since i use proper memo methods . And for images that's definitely true.


----------

