In the early 20th century, a group of psychological experts came to the Berlin Academy of Arts, a historic art academy in the heart of West Berlin, to conduct a study of violin players.
They then published a research paper in Psychological Reviews. With the help of the academy's music professors, the researchers found some very good violinists -- students the professor believes will become professional violinists in the future, the paper says.
This group of people is named the elite group.
For comparison, the researchers selected another group of students who were likely to become music teachers in the future from the school's School of Education. It is worth mentioning that they are also keen on playing the violin, but as the professor of the college said, there is still a certain gap between their abilities and the students in the elite group.
This group of people is named the general group.
Three researchers conducted in-depth interviews with all subjects. and distributed diaries to them. The diary is divided into 50-minute intervals 24 hours a day, and students are asked to record their schedule in detail.
The researchers sought to use the experimental data obtained to answer a fundamental question: Why did the elite group outperform the average group?
An obvious guess is that students in elite groups are more focused on improving their skills. Compared with the more enjoyment-oriented attitude of the ordinary group students, the elite group students are willing to accept the baptism of tiger mother teaching, and spend more time practicing to achieve a higher level of performance.
However, the experimental data are diametrically opposed to the above conjectures.
How is the decryption elite made?
First to refute the argument: elites spend more time on music. Because the time diary showed that the average time spent on music was the same for both groups of students, about 50 hours per week. The difference is how they use their time. The elite group spent three times as much time on deliberate practice as the average group. The so-called deliberate practice is to consciously improve one's ability in an uncomfortable state according to clear instructions.
This is probably not unexpected, since the importance of deliberate practice is often repeated.
But the researchers didn't stop there.
On this basis, they also conducted research on students' specific study arrangements. They found that the average student's study time spanned the entire day. A graph included in the report shows how students' study time compares to their waking hours. The graph shows that the average student's value has been stable.
In contrast, the practice time of elite students is relatively concentrated, and there are two obvious peaks on the graph: one in the morning and one in the afternoon.
事实上，越优秀的学生，展示出来的峰值越明显。而其中，精英中的精英，那些教授们认为以后会直接进入德国顶级交响乐团的学生，完全贴合这一分布规律，他们的练习日程明显地分成两部分。
这种把练习与娱乐放松完全割裂开来的模式对演奏者日常生活的诸多方面也产生了影响。
以睡眠时间为例，精英组学生比普通组学生平均每晚多睡一个小时。
再以自我放松为例，作为主观轻松感的重要指标，研究人员要求学生们估计他们每周花在休闲娱乐上面的时间。
结果显示：精英学生明显比普通学生感到轻松，而最优秀的学生心理最为轻松。
勤奋与辛苦不是一回事
总结研究结果——
普通组花在练习上的时间与精英组相同。（每周大约50小时）
但他们练习的方式不同。（前者花在关键的刻意练习上的时间是精英学生的三分之一都不到）
更重要的是，普通小组将练习时间零散分布而不是集中在某个时间段。尽管他们的练习量与精英组学生相同，却并没有得到更多的休息时间同时还感到压力重重，因此更不用提他们与后者在小提琴演奏上的差距了。
我在研究成功人士过程中也一再发现这种现象，对优等生的研究也是如此。鉴于这一现象的频繁出现，我特地给它取了个名字：悠闲的罗德学者悖论。
这项研究也证明了这一悖论。研究中的实验数据证实了勤奋与辛苦之间的区别：
勤奋是经过思考的练习。虽然练习过程很枯燥，好在你每天不需要在上面花太多时间（比如精英组学生平均每天花3.5小时，分两个时间段练习）。通过量化在技艺上的进步，你能收获一种强烈的满足感也可找到继续练习的动力。因此，尽管艰难的工作确实很难，但也不会使你精力耗尽，它也完全可以融入在轻松自在美好的日常生活中。
相比之下，辛苦则会让人精疲力竭。它让你整天处于一种莫名的忙碌状态，就像上述柏林艺术学院研究中普通小组的学生那样，你会感到疲惫不堪且压力重重。而且，正如我们所了解的，这种忙碌与成就关系不大。
从这项研究结果中我们也得到了一个重要结论：不管你是学生还是已经参与工作，如果你想自己的生活更有成就，那么忙碌与疲惫就是你的劲敌。若你长期感到紧张有压力而且总是工作到很晚，那很有可能你做错了。比起精英，你更像柏林艺术大学的普通学生一样在辛苦工作，而不是勤奋工作。
无论是我自己的研究还是上面提到的研究都指向了同一个简单却看似离经叛道的解决方法：少做事，但是一旦做就得先经过思考后并报以绝对的长时间专注，而不是零零散散的去做。在你完成了相应的任务后，就可放轻松用心享受美好的时光了。