Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
Comment Permalink
P1
0
0

I think you should have different entries for each one of the top nootropics, instead of a single one. I expect the effect on productivity to vary a lot between them.

Reply
See in context
Effective Self Help
by Ben Williamson
6 min read 11

104

CommunityProductivityPersonal developmentCollections and resourcesEffective altruism lifestyleResource tradeoffs
Frontpage

As part of Effective Self-Help’s research into the most effective ways people can improve their wellbeing and productivity, we’ve compiled more than 100 practical productivity recommendations from 40 different articles written by the EA community.

The result is this database on Airtable. Please take a look and see what you find useful!

To the best of our knowledge, this table includes the recommendations made in every prior post offering productivity advice written on the EA Forum, LessWrong, or by someone connected to the effective altruism and rationality communities. You can view the list of articles included here. Let us know if there are articles we’ve missed.

 

A small taste of the discoveries awaiting you…

Link here: https://airtable.com/shrxxQ805blyYMyLH 

This database is intended as a living document and remains a work in progress. We would love to hear your thoughts on how we can make this most useful, whether in the comments or via a private message. 

In the next fortnight, we will publish a preliminary report into increasing productivity, synthesising and more thoroughly evaluating many of the recommendations included in this database.

The rest of this post provides an explanation of how the database works, why we made it, and a few of its potential limitations.

 

How does this table work?

As a whole, the table has 110 recommendations across 9 categories. If you’re unfamiliar with using Airtable, we recommend this short explainer. Key points to note are the following:

  • Many of the cells contain more information than is visible at the top level. Click on a given cell and then the arrow in the top right to see everything written there.
  • Airtable allows for easy filtering and sorting. Most usefully, you can:
    • organise the results by category (including filtering out any your not interested in)
    • rank them by cost (either per-month or one-off)


We’ve split the recommendations into the following rough categories:

  • Mental/Physical health
  • Working efficiently (helps you work faster)
  • Working effectively (helps you prioritise better/ work on the most important thing)
  • Distraction blocker (helps minimise time spent off-task)
  • Extensions (software or browser add-ons)
  • Security (file and account backups/ safety)
  • Coaching/ Training
  • Finances
  • Misc.

 

Why did we build this table?

Productivity as a mechanism for increasing impact

If you’re reading this article on the EA Forum, it’s a fairly safe bet that you’re either currently working on one of the world’s most pressing problems or hold serious aspirations to do so in the future. By increasing your productivity, you can increase the value of your output (and the size of your output) for a given day/week/year of work. In doing so, you increase the endline impact of your work.
 

Theory of Change: Recommendation implemented -> Increased work output (more work done per day and/or value of output increased) -> Increased impact.
 

While the gains we can expect from many of these changes are very small, many also seem very cheap and easy to implement. Stacked together, implementing several recommendations could produce notable increases in your productivity, and by consequence, your impact. For a rough estimate of how this may translate into impact, see this Guesstimate model. For a note of caution on translating increased productivity directly into increased impact, see this comment.

 

Productivity is trainable

“In low-complexity jobs, the top 1% averages 52% more [productivity] than the average employee. For medium-complexity jobs this figure is 85%, and for high-complexity jobs it is 127%” (Hunter et al., 1990)  

We believe these significant differences in productivity are largely trainable. Given that very few people recieve any formal education in working effectively and efficiently, it seems highly likely that there are low-hanging fruit for improving their productivity. This database is an attempt to identify those low-hanging fruit. 


 

A few potential issues worth noting

The database is off-puttingly long/ dense/ hard to navigate

Fair enough! The database is definitely a work in progress and could likely be better organised. Let us know in the comments if you have ideas for how we could improve it.

We’re also currently finalising a report highlighting what appear to be the most useful and/or cost-effective recommendations to implement aimed at increasing your productivity. You can sign up to our newsletter if you’d like to ensure you see this once it’s published. Otherwise, keep your eyes peeled for us publishing this on the Forum in about two weeks’ time!

 

How do I know which recommendations are most worthwhile?

We hope to add quick estimates of cost-effectiveness ($ per hour saved) for each recommendation in the near future. 

For now, we’d encourage you to apply a rough, intuitive version of the ITN framework:

  • Importance: how big a difference does it seem like this would make to my productivity?
  • Tractability: how cheap and/or easy would it be for me to do this?
  • Neglectedness: how weak/ strong am I already at optimising in this area?

 

The database does not include every recommendation made in each article we reviewed. 

This is for two primary reasons:

  1. Avoiding duplication
  2. Focusing on productivity
  • Many of the recommendations made in these articles are for products that may bring small increases to your happiness/ satisfaction but are we feel are unlikely to increase your productivity.
  • Hopefully, this narrower focus helps make the database more useful. At the very least, it made it substantially easier to complete. We encourage you to take a look at the articles we reviewed for themselves. You can find them linked in the database or in this spreadsheet.

 

Product links have generally been taken directly from the article where we found the recommendation. This means they are predominantly a mixture of US and UK websites and/or currencies.

We’d love to provide links tailored to specific countries so that implementing the recommendations is as simple as possible. Sadly, this just isn’t currently feasible with the time we have available.

 

The costs (per month and/or one-off) are inaccurate

For similar reasons as above, many of the product costs are only rough estimates. These are generally based on the first product we found or on the specific product recommended in the original article. Given this, please take the figures with a good few grains of salt.
 

Why have you just included articles written by people involved in EA/ Rationality/ similar?

About 90% of the articles included are from people involved in or adjacent to the EA and Rationality communities. Needless to say, there are almost certainly very high-quality recommendations from people unrelated to these communities that we are missing. However, we made this choice for a couple of key reasons: 

  1. Scope. Limiting this to EA/ Rationality authors kept building this database to a manageable task size.
  2. Tailored value. If we accept the premise that people in EA and Rationality often think and act similarly to each other, it seems reasonable that you, dear reader, may benefit most from recommendations made from within these communities.

Perhaps with more time and resources, the database could be expanded to include recommendations from a much wider and more diverse range of sources.

 

Who are Effective Self-Help, anyway?

We’re a small research organisation set up in November 2021 to offer more effective productivity and wellbeing advice. Up to now, we’ve been funded by pilot grants from the EA Infrastructure Fund. Take a look at our website or this post introducing the project for more information about what we do, what we hope to do, and why.

 

A final request…

If you find a recommendation you like and want to quickly help with our work, please fill out this 1-minute form letting us know what you’re planning to/ have already done. We can then send you a follow-up email in a month with a separate super-short form to estimate how useful this practice has been to you. 

Understanding the real-world effectiveness of providing resources and recommendations like these is hard. Collecting data on how useful any of our recommendations are to you makes this easier.

 

Acknowledgements

Thank you to everyone whose articles I have drawn the recommendations in this database from, and the many helpful commenters on these articles. This includes (in no particular order): 

Max Carpendale; Sam Bowman; Ryan Carey; Dwarkesh Patel; Rosie Campbell; Michael Aird; Melissa Neiman; Rachel Moskowitz; Mark Xu; Patrick Stadler; Neil Bowerman; Akash Wasil; Milan Cvitkovic; Will Bradshaw; Rob Wiblin; Arden Koehler; Daniel Frank; Katja Grace; Darmani; Michelle Hutchinson; Lynette Bye; Joey Savoie; Peter Wildeford; Daniel Kestenholz; Adam Zerner; Kat Woods; Elizabeth Van Nostrand; Aaron Bergman; Alexey Guzey; Jose Ricon; Philip Storry; Scott Alexander; Gavin Leech; David Megins-Nicholas; Yuri Akapov.
 

Thanks as well to Manon Gouiran and Simon Newstead for their help in reviewing this database, and to Michael Aird for first prompting my interest in building this.


 

104

0
0

Reactions

0
0
Previous:
ESH - A guide to forming habits you'll keep
3 comments38 karma
Next:
Effective Self-Help - A guide to improving your subjective wellbeing
7 comments128 karma
Mentioned in
Comments11


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
Lorenzo Buonanno🔸10
0
0

Thanks for making this!

I would recommend ublock origin instead of adblock plus: it blocks more things, is faster, and just works better.

It's also the recommended ad blocker in the LW post you link to, so not sure where the recommendation for adblock plus comes from,

Reply
Abby Babby6
0
0

This is cool! Thanks for compiling. I really love Focusmate, glad to see it included. 

I wonder if it would be possible to allow people to vote for different recommendations so you could sort by # of endorsements? Just as a quick way to see which tools have been useful to the most people. 

Reply
Ben Williamson2
0
0

Thanks!

And yes, I completely agree that a voting system would be a nice addition. To the best of my knowledge and research, I couldn’t find any way of doing this through Airtable.

Would happily add this though if someone can tell me how.

Reply
Babel4
0
0

Don't know how to use Airtable, but a quick googling led me to this. The last reply (by kuovonne) in the linked thread seems useful.

Reply
Ben Williamson1
0
0

Cheers for this! Think I’d skimmed the top of that thread and missed the last reply you highlighted.

Looks a little clunky but worth adding.

Reply
Marcel D2
0
0

In your section on “which recommendations are most worthwhile?” you mention using the ITN framework. While this is probably makes for efficient communication since many readers are familiar with it, I have some qualms with applying the ITN framework to actual decisions. Per the framing you described (which I get is meant to be simple and intuitive, but nonetheless), neglectedness seems obsolesced by importance, and tractability would probably also be obsolesced except that it tries taking into account implementation costs (while not addressing other potential disadvantages?).

Personally, if more people were familiar with it, I would probably recommend an approach more like the COILS framework that I’ve written about:

  1. How efficient at X would I be without using this framework, or how prone to making Y mistake would I be without this framework?
  2. What does my expected usage/implementation of this framework look like (given cognitive or familiarity constraints)?
  3. How efficient would I be at X or prone to making Y mistake while using this framework?
  4. How good is an improvement in X / reduction in Y.

In reality, your description of the ITN framework seems a bit different from normal interpretations, which leads to it looking more like COILS. However, my loose sense is that it’s probably better to formally recognize the limitations of ITN for certain contexts (e.g., specific decisions) and explicitly identify/use alternate frameworks, rather than using “sort-of-ITN.”

Reply
Charles He2
0
0

This looks great. Thanks for making this!

Reply
Ian Turner1
0
0

I love the idea of this but I wish the recommendations were more evidence-based. For example I was a bit disappointed to see blue-light blocking glasses on the list given that

A recent study suggested that blue light-blocking glasses do not improve symptoms of digital eye strain. The American Academy of Ophthalmology does not recommend blue light-blocking glasses because of the lack of scientific evidence that blue light is damaging to the eyes.

Reply
Spencer R. Ericson 🔸1
0
0

Here is some info related to recommendations #1 and #9 about lighting. https://meaningness.com/sad-light-led-lux David Chapman has put quite a bit of research into maximizing lux per dollar. I intend to try a similar setup to him with some Jeep lights and a voltage transformer to get 40,000-60,000 lux in my room. I'm going to add a smart plug so I can use an Apple Shortcuts automation to have the lights turn on with my wake-up alarm.

Reply
P1
0
0

I think you should have different entries for each one of the top nootropics, instead of a single one. I expect the effect on productivity to vary a lot between them.

Reply
Curated and popular this week
Paul Present
 ·  · 28m read
 · 
Note: I am not a malaria expert. This is my best-faith attempt at answering a question that was bothering me, but this field is a large and complex field, and I’ve almost certainly misunderstood something somewhere along the way. Summary While the world made incredible progress in reducing malaria cases from 2000 to 2015, the past 10 years have seen malaria cases stop declining and start rising. I investigated potential reasons behind this increase through reading the existing literature and looking at publicly available data, and I identified three key factors explaining the rise: 1. Population Growth: Africa's population has increased by approximately 75% since 2000. This alone explains most of the increase in absolute case numbers, while cases per capita have remained relatively flat since 2015. 2. Stagnant Funding: After rapid growth starting in 2000, funding for malaria prevention plateaued around 2010. 3. Insecticide Resistance: Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to the insecticides used in bednets over the past 20 years. This has made older models of bednets less effective, although they still have some effect. Newer models of bednets developed in response to insecticide resistance are more effective but still not widely deployed.  I very crudely estimate that without any of these factors, there would be 55% fewer malaria cases in the world than what we see today. I think all three of these factors are roughly equally important in explaining the difference.  Alternative explanations like removal of PFAS, climate change, or invasive mosquito species don't appear to be major contributors.  Overall this investigation made me more convinced that bednets are an effective global health intervention.  Introduction In 2015, malaria rates were down, and EAs were celebrating. Giving What We Can posted this incredible gif showing the decrease in malaria cases across Africa since 2000: Giving What We Can said that > The reduction in malaria has be
Ronen Bar
 ·  · 10m read
 · 
"Part one of our challenge is to solve the technical alignment problem, and that’s what everybody focuses on, but part two is: to whose values do you align the system once you’re capable of doing that, and that may turn out to be an even harder problem", Sam Altman, OpenAI CEO (Link).  In this post, I argue that: 1. "To whose values do you align the system" is a critically neglected space I termed “Moral Alignment.” Only a few organizations work for non-humans in this field, with a total budget of 4-5 million USD (not accounting for academic work). The scale of this space couldn’t be any bigger - the intersection between the most revolutionary technology ever and all sentient beings. While tractability remains uncertain, there is some promising positive evidence (See “The Tractability Open Question” section). 2. Given the first point, our movement must attract more resources, talent, and funding to address it. The goal is to value align AI with caring about all sentient beings: humans, animals, and potential future digital minds. In other words, I argue we should invest much more in promoting a sentient-centric AI. The problem What is Moral Alignment? AI alignment focuses on ensuring AI systems act according to human intentions, emphasizing controllability and corrigibility (adaptability to changing human preferences). However, traditional alignment often ignores the ethical implications for all sentient beings. Moral Alignment, as part of the broader AI alignment and AI safety spaces, is a field focused on the values we aim to instill in AI. I argue that our goal should be to ensure AI is a positive force for all sentient beings. Currently, as far as I know, no overarching organization, terms, or community unifies Moral Alignment (MA) as a field with a clear umbrella identity. While specific groups focus individually on animals, humans, or digital minds, such as AI for Animals, which does excellent community-building work around AI and animal welfare while
Max Taylor
 ·  · 9m read
 · 
Many thanks to Constance Li, Rachel Mason, Ronen Bar, Sam Tucker-Davis, and Yip Fai Tse for providing valuable feedback. This post does not necessarily reflect the views of my employer. Artificial General Intelligence (basically, ‘AI that is as good as, or better than, humans at most intellectual tasks’) seems increasingly likely to be developed in the next 5-10 years. As others have written, this has major implications for EA priorities, including animal advocacy, but it’s hard to know how this should shape our strategy. This post sets out a few starting points and I’m really interested in hearing others’ ideas, even if they’re very uncertain and half-baked. Is AGI coming in the next 5-10 years? This is very well covered elsewhere but basically it looks increasingly likely, e.g.: * The Metaculus and Manifold forecasting platforms predict we’ll see AGI in 2030 and 2031, respectively. * The heads of Anthropic and OpenAI think we’ll see it by 2027 and 2035, respectively. * A 2024 survey of AI researchers put a 50% chance of AGI by 2047, but this is 13 years earlier than predicted in the 2023 version of the survey. * These predictions seem feasible given the explosive rate of change we’ve been seeing in computing power available to models, algorithmic efficiencies, and actual model performance (e.g., look at how far Large Language Models and AI image generators have come just in the last three years). * Based on this, organisations (both new ones, like Forethought, and existing ones, like 80,000 Hours) are taking the prospect of near-term AGI increasingly seriously. What could AGI mean for animals? AGI’s implications for animals depend heavily on who controls the AGI models. For example: * AGI might be controlled by a handful of AI companies and/or governments, either in alliance or in competition. * For example, maybe two government-owned companies separately develop AGI then restrict others from developing it. * These actors’ use of AGI might be dr
Recent opportunities in Community
46
EA Global Referral Program
Ivan Burduk
· · 2m read
7
7
10
EAGxNordics in Norway: apply now
Amalie Farestvedt 🔸
· · 3m read
1
1
24
Out of This Box: The Last Musical (Written by Humans) - Crowdfunding!
GuyP
· · 7m read
0
0
View more