How many ways can you skin a cat?

Posted for Troy Price:

Many firearms trainers quote "Hicks Law" as the reason to train to a finite number of techniques when using firearms, with no variation. Hick's Law generally states that the more options that you have the longer it takes to choose an option and execute it.

The trainers' (there have been more than a few from multiple different organizations that I have witnessed) reasoning usually includes the precept that the more ways that an individual knows to perform a specific task the longer it will take them to perform that task or the more options a person has the longer it takes to respond. While this could potentially true if the individual in question has not mastered any singular technique, I want to point out some flaws in using Hick's Law to justify a singular methodology of training or technique.

Hick's experiments (and the previous experiments of Fitt and Donder) used a known stimuli to trigger a known response: see a light or sequence of lights (Morse Code), press a button or see a colored light press a colored button. Where the options came in was that the numbers of buttons to be pushed went from two to 10-15 depending on which experiment.Issues:The response to be performed was to push a button; the choice of button was increased but not the task of pushing the button. In a threat/conflict scenario your options are not that limited. You can run, punch, stab, subdue, or any number of other choices (and those are just fight/flight choices). When it comes to clearing weapons malfunctions the desired end result is the same every time; be able to continue the fight not to specifically clear the weapon. This can be done by clearing the weapon, choosing another weapon, etc. etcHick's experiments found that after a specific number of options had been reached reaction times were the same no matter how many more options were presented (that number was generally 4). This somewhat rules out the logic that the more options you have the longer it will take you to respond ad infinitum.

Hick's experiments did not take into account the option of no action being taken. This has to do specifically with the algorithm that demonstrates Hick's Law but can be used to illustrate the absence of multiple courses of action or the actions of other individuals (ex: when I am in public with my friends they are usually as well armed as I am and potentially solve the problem before I do - not saying this should be a consideration but it is a variable that is unexplained by Hick's Law)Hick's experiments found a correlation between intelligence (measured by IQ) and response time.

His conclusion was (no surprise here) that the more intelligent an individual is the faster their brain processes information. This can be extrapolated to demonstrate that the better you process information the faster you can choose from multiple options. (ex. the more skills you have mastered and continue to practice the faster you will be able to choose).

Hick's experiments showed that between the introduction of options 2-4 there was measurable increase in response time. The problem with this is that between each experiment the options were moved or switched around. The person executing had to evaluate each option because its location was unknown. In solving a threat/conflict you should know, and have practiced if not mastered, each and every one of your available options. In choosing an otion that you have mastered there is no "unknown location variable" as created in Hick's experiments.

Bottom Line:
If someone quotes you Hick's Law, or any other physic/behavioral law, as a reason for learning to perform a task/technique in a singular fashion you might want to be wary.

Conclusion: Go train. Learn several different ways to perform the same task. Choose what works best for you and master it. Remember the other techniques and practice them.

Why? Because you may be forced to do it that way due to the dynamics of a situation.