How can slow thinkers learn to respond to questions?

Question

I'm a postdoctoral researcher in STEM and I've always been a slow thinker. I need to slowly process research issues, theory or ideas with pencil & paper or on a whiteboard. I often need to have visual aids (drawings and writing) to help me think. Insights on relatively easy things, like understanding bugs in my code, come to me only the next day (after a good night's sleep). Insights into more complex theory can come to me only after weeks, months or even years... I've always had a sense that my colleagues process things faster than me.

But every once in a while I'm in a situation where I need to answer a question that requires quick thinking: at conferences, at group meetings, when having quick chats with collaborators. Those questions usually appear with the following pattern: I present a piece of a mathematical formulation that I've been developing to solve a problem and someone asks me:

But wouldn't this formulation be equivalent to XYZ?

I find that I can't answer those questions even though I know what XYZ is. It would require me to sit with a piece of paper and convince myself that indeed my formulation is equivalent to XYZ or that it's not. So I usually just answer: "I'm not sure, I'd have to think about this." Sometimes I might have a vague hunch about the answer and I answer: "I don't think so, but I'd have to think some more about this." Other question types that get me stuck are things like:

Isn't [insert name of a mathematical tool] what you need to solve your problem?

On the spot, I have no idea! Even though I've heard of the [mathematical tool] before. I have to go back to my desk and think for a day or two if this is what I need.

At least if I've never heard of these things it would be normal to answer "I don't know." Instead, this really is being hampered by my own brain's processing capabilities...

This is sometimes hurting my progress because if it's my advisor asking these questions during our weekly meetings then we often can't progress any further with the conversation. I have to go back to my desk and come back to my advisor a week later with an answer.

Although I've been doing well in research so far despite my slow processing (as long as I get enough time, I can figure stuff out in the end), I'm worried that as I progress in academia and still can't think on the spot, this will start to look unprofessional. For instance, I've been observing my advisors and they always seem to have some answer to questions that they get. I think I've never heard my advisor say "I don't know" to a conference question.

Can slow thinking start to look bad in my future academic path, say when I need to give an interview talk for a grant? What are some strategies then that slow-thinking academics use to become better at answering questions that require thinking on the spot?

Answer 1

I've had similar feelings before, and these are some things that have helped me.

First, as others have said, there is no problem with saying, "I don't know." It's better to be honest than to make something up that is wrong.

In a conference talk or seminar, one approach is to give yourself a moment before responding. You can use filler phrases like, "That's a good question," or even simply pause, before starting to respond. There is nothing wrong with this. Sometimes simply having a moment to relax can help you appreciate the question and calm your nerves. Many times, you will have thought more about the topic than your audience, just because it is your research. So you may be able to connect the question to material you have prepared, either backup slides or even something you are planning to talk about later in your talk. Keep in mind as well that sometimes an appropriate way to answer a question is to not take it literally, but to identify a kernel of confusion in the question, and address that. (On Stack Exchange one version of this is called a "frame challenge.") Generally, being able to connect a question to material you have previously prepared is a useful skill and is often relevant for addressing questions. Going along with this, of course, is that it does help to try to anticipate questions and either plan to address them in the talk or prepare answers as backup slides or notes that you can refer to if asked.

In a research collaboration setting, there is a bit less pressure to "show off." If someone is asking you whether "technique A will solve problem X," and you don't know, you can always turn it around and ask the questioner to explain in more detail how they would use technique A. This could help spark a discussion. Another skill to develop is to proceed with, "I don't know but let's suppose that this can help," and see where that leads. Oftentimes, especially in informal discussions, questions aren't meant as "exams" and it's not important to get all of the details exactly right in the moment — just assuming an answer and talking through the consequences can be useful. For example, it may reveal a contradiction that suggests the answer won't work out the way you assumed, it may clarify the important property you need to show, it might open up a new direction you hadn't thought of. If the question needs a solid answer, and you don't know off the top of your head, then I don't think it is a weakness to say that you need time to think about it — it sounds like a potential new research direction has been identified and you need to explore it.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the audience asking the question should inform your answer as well. Someone may ask a question that brings up a bunch of technical issues for you. But maybe the person asking is not an expert in your exact topic and is looking for a more general, high level answer. Your answer should address where they are at. Sometimes, you can "unfreeze" yourself by realizing you have internally taken several logical steps past what the question is actually asking (probably because you are so familiar with the material) and bringing yourself back to where the question is and answering in a more basic way.

Finally, keep in mind that you can say something interesting without giving a direct answer. Just explaining your thought process can lead to an interesting answer. So for example, "Yes, that approach makes sense conceptually, although there are technical issues X, Y, Z that I would need to think about," can help your listener understand where you are coming from, more than, "I don't know."

Answer 2

For me, it is helpful to explain a problem to others. While I'm explaining it, new ideas emerge and the solution finally arises in my head. Not always, mind you, but expressing problems in language will definitely help to solve them.

Of course, it will be best to explain the problem to a peer who might ask helpful questions, but if none is around, you might as well talk to your pet, or, missing any companion, a potted plant or the wall. In short: Please do not expect to have the fully formed answer in your head as soon as you are being asked, but trust that your mind will come to the answer while you speak.

My advice: Start your answer with explaining the steps which you need to undertake to test if formulation X is equivalent to Y. Continue, and you will get new ideas while you speak. When in front of an audience, you can win some time by saying first "let me think about that" or simply repeating the question in your own words. That alone will already help your mind to grasp the problem and prepare a proper answer.

Sure, this does not work all the time, and a honest "I need to think more about that" is better than a confident but wrong Yes or No. But with your explanation you demonstrate already that you understand the question and master the concepts, so it will be a win for you in any case.

Answer 3

When I give conference talks, and it's time for questions, I often remind the audience:

And remember, a question is when you want more information from me

This reminder is necessary because SO MANY questions are not that. People want to tell you something (I agree with you, I am working on that too, I think your stuff is related to my stuff) and they do so disguised as a question. I'm not telling you to start issuing this reminder, though, because I think some of those "not really a question" have value for you. I think you would do well to adopt a more generous variant of "I'm not sure, I'd have to think about this" such as:

Thankyou! I never considered [combining those two, expressing it like that, using that tool] even though I am familiar with it. I am going to give that some thought after I get back from this.

Optionally

I would love to followup with you about this next week [get their contact info if you don't have it, or ask them to use yours which should be on the slide being projected behind you.]

In some contexts, you can also let the question be the start of a conversation (not when there's a lineup at the microphone at the end of a talk, but during a hallway track or a free ranging meeting of a team):

Interesting. I didn't consider that. Can you elaborate?

Let them lead you through the thought process instead of going away to work it all out for yourself before saying anything.

If you are a little more generous with "thankyou!" "what an interesting idea!" "that's a great suggestion" and so on, you will probably get a lot more useful ideas and suggestions from people. If you aren't willing to even say these fairly bland and noncommittal things until you've given several days of thought to what the person has said, you're probably holding your praise a little too tightly.

For your supervisor, you take a note that you need to try the thing that's just been suggested, and you carry on with your discussion. You should not be utterly blocked on the one single suggestion that has been made or question that has been asked. On the rare occasion that you are, then I guess the meeting ends and you head off to get unblocked.

Answer 4

Just to reiterate some points others have made: not-so-many people are adept at "solving problems" in real time, either during timed exams or when giving talks. The only reliable way to do such a thing is to have already thought about it, and just remember the conclusion.

True, you cannot anticipate every possible question, perhaps especially hostile/prankish ones, but you can (and this would be good, anyway!) look at stuff "adjacent" to your specific project... pre-emptively... the same way that good-faith questioners who're engaged with your presentation will wonder about.

Answer 5

Perhaps it is just that you want to be sure before you give a definite answer and if the thing asked about has any complexity that is quite hard to do.

Complex question require thought and thought takes time. It is unlikely that you can think of everything to anticipate every situation, but for those situations in which you are likely to be asked hard questions, such as job interviews, try to anticipate the questions and prepare in advance.

When asked such questions, those that require analysis, maybe the best answer is "Maybe, give me a bit of time to think about that. I'll get back to you."

I'm assuming that you don't have to puzzle out "all" questions. I have a recall problem due to aging, where I often can't think of the names of things or concepts, but I know those concepts very well. I doesn't sound like you have a problem like that, but, rather, that you'd rather think and then give the right answer rather than rattle off something that turns out to be wrong. Caution, not indecision.

Answer 6

To address a specific case from your question:

This is sometimes hurting my progress because if it's my advisor asking these questions during our weekly meetings then we often can't progress any further with the conversation. I have to go back to my desk and come back to my advisor a week later with an answer.

This shouldn't be too much of a problem if you have multiple strands of work on the go. That bit of the conversation gets put to one side and you move on to something else.

However if this is the main or only important topic, I would look to get some feedback sooner - a quick read and a quick email while it's still in the adviser's mind. This does of course assume that they actual read the email soon, but you may also be able to discuss it with someone else.

If you circulate meeting notes (after a complicated technical meeting with a student I ask them to summarise in an email; this is quite a common approach) you can slip a couple of questions in there, but draw attention to them in the subject line

Answer 7

There's nothing wrong with responding "I'll have to think about that".

It's helpful to also add some "I've heard about that" or "that sounds like it might be a good idea", if applicable.

If you're responding that to a question while the presenting at a conference, you could add something like "feel free to reach out via email if you want to discuss it further" (assuming your email address is shown in some easily accessible place, like on your slides). Or say that they can talk to you about it right after the presentation, if you'll be available.

If your advisor asks this, or a peer or collaborator asks it in a group meetings or chat, you might be better served with responding with something like:

"That sounds like it might have potential. Could you elaborate a bit on why you say that?"

The Q&A section of a presentation wouldn't really be the place to have in-depth back-and-forth discussions of ideas, or to get more input from the audience beyond some questions, follow-ups and notes. But in a working environment, it's much more appropriate to ask people to explain why they suggest something, especially if progress is contingent on that.

---

If your advisor asks this, and you have to go look into that, and you're blocked from making progress for a week until you can talk to your advisor again, that might be a bit of an XY problem. You want to know how to respond to that question, but the real problem may be with only meeting once a week.

One might solve this by:

• Scheduling a follow-up meeting for tomorrow during the meeting with your advisor, to continue the discussion after you're looked into it.
• Discuss things further via email or other means of communication.
• Send some initial notes via email, which they can respond to via email, and you can look into what they say before your meeting.
• Make a plan with your advisor for whichever outcome (if and when that makes sense). If they ask about using some tool: If it's viable, you can start using it. If it's not viable, you might continue without it.

You'll have to figure out for yourself which of these would work for you (if any of these work for you - it's also possible to be stuck in a dysfunctional system without being able to do much about it).