Attention and Multi-Tasking

Speaking of attention and multi-tasking, this was by far the most difficult blog for me to write given my short attention span and my incessant clicking on other tabs!

Technology certainly changes our mental habits, our cognitive behaviors and the ways in which we manage intellectual work. I tend towards leaning on the side that would suggest that humans and technology are best when working together and that technology is more of a help than a hinderance.

I must however agree that, “Today’s multitasking tools really do make it harder than before to stay focused during long acts of reading and contemplation. They require a high level of “mindfulness”-paying attention to your own attention” (Thompson, p. 14). Given this, I do find myself printing out academic papers and checking out books from the library more so than reading on my computer. Technology makes is so great that one must develop a skill of focusing on focusing that I have not yet and likely never will achieve. On the other hand, technology helps me to multitask in a manner that I would not be able to if I did not have access to the internet and a laptop. I can be on a phone conference while responding to emails, looking up a reference mentioned on the phone conference and simultaneously drop my mother a “good morning” text through iMessage for iMac without skipping a beat. I can also read some difficult academic theorist like Parson’s, do a quick internet search to translate what on God’s green earth he is talking about, jump back to the original text and check out an online book review to make sure my comprehension of the text is on point. I mean really, it’s GREAT!

 


An ADHD-driven Post

And yet- more word vomit. This is written as it spews from my brain and has no order. Apologies in advance. There is no cohesion.  It’s more like… a rant? No…… yep word vomit is appropriate. Again, apologies. Perhaps, you should not even read this.

You learn quickly that I am a spastic, ADHD, intellectual, and fueled-by-chaos kind of human if you spend more than half a second with me. My paranoia alarms go off with technology, but at the same time I love it. Isaac Asimov didn’t help things any. I have definitely seen and reaped the benefits of using a computer, Google, and the like. On the other hand, I also kind of feel like brain is mushier than it used to be. I also feel an overdependence on technology. It is also not lost on me how, for lack of a better word, pathetic it is that my roommates and I will sit in a room together with the television on and we will be on your phones talking to people outside of the room, playing Candy Crush, or just lingering on the Internet. Then again, my phone has saved me from forgetting numerous meetings, and it also serves as my archive for basically my life. It is almost like it is the physical form of Jonesy’s mental library from Stephen King’s “Dreamcatcher”. For those of you who do not know what I am talking about – Jonesy is a character from a sci-fi/horror novel where his friends and him each gained some sort of mental ability at a young age. Jonesy’s was the coolest. He could go into his brain as if it were a physical library. He could research, throw things away, move file boxes around, and all sorts of other nifty things.

Each of the readings come from a different perspective regarding humans’ cognitive abilities, how technology has come into play, and if it is a good thing that it has. I appreciate where some of the arguments are coming from. For example, one author says this is just another step in the line of development that impacts cognition just like when a writing system came into existence. That, in fact, all we need to do is find a way to manage it and utilize it effectively. Others fear technology is taking over our cognitive abilities making us zombies. Meanwhile, one argues that computers and humans must work as partners for a more optimal result. I am not sure what I cognitively deduce about this, but I know what I feel. I feel that technology has helped us, but I feel it has separated us.

In the “Smarter Than You Think” article, the author says we are more socially aware regarding civic issues in the world. This is true, but at the same time, I am not sure this is making people actually DO anything. They just see the video/read the article, say “wow this is wrong” and keep going on with their lives. In some circumstances, the trolls crawl out of their dark caves and they decide to post their input. The same author brings up the question of if we are losing our humanity due to our reliance on computers. I am wishy-washy with my answer on this. Yes, we are losing our humanity. One need only to look at one case of cyberbullying to see that truth. I think this constant use of technology and exposure to everything, and being always “on” has numbed us to so much. Then again, these articles are focused more on technology’s impact on cognition, not on our affective states so that argument is moot here. I think more so though, that we are losing our cognitive ability to think for ourselves. Yes, we can be “centaurs” and work in partnership with a computer to be more than we can be, but at the same time, we are losing that confidence in ourselves to think independently and form our own thoughts. Instead, we google, read our friends’ posts accepting them as fact, etc. I agree that technology has made it possible for us to think ON it, like writing on paper or the long division example. I definitely depend on that to exist basically. A lot of people seem to inherently trust what they read on the Internet, and that bothers me. Here is where people are more the problem. Then again, is Googling not another form of me looking an answer up in a book?

I was a Communications major in my undergraduate life. I was told by several teachers that we future professionals control the message. This is true for user-generated content on the Internet, but again I know the debate lies more with how we use technology itself to think. I am not qualified to make an assessment with that. Really not. Again, I can only say what I feel. I feel like my generation and those before me started our lives off without these technological advances with the Internet and now we are adapting. Future generations will be born with it, and that is where it will be interesting to observe the cognitive abilities. I think we “older” folk are stuck at a precipice. The new generation’s brains will evolve with technology and know how to use it to think from the start instead of having to mentally reprogram. Whether this is good or not remains to be seen.

Nicholas Carr wrote an article asking if Google is making us stupid. I think that is a fair question in some ways. I do agree with the other readings that technology has helped us advance in some ways, but I also think things like Google have made us overreliant on technology, like we can’t exist with out it. Like we can’t answer a question without it. I have heard the following sentence from so many different people it’s amazing: “I don’t know. I am going to Google it”.

Side note: Nicholas Carr used the character, Hal, as an example in his “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” article. From a movie buff perspective, Hal is a terrifying example to use on readers. Hal makes people want to never trust computers or technology again. Just saying.

Then there’s the conversation as to  what all of this has to do on ADHD and multi-tasking. I see where Carr is coming from when he mentions that he is no longer to make it through 2 or 3 pages of a book. It does not take long for me to be distracted by a shiny object if you will. In fact, as I was writing this, I had to play several games of Candy Crush (I am a grand master of Candy Crush), watch a Youtube clip (not school-related), play with my cats, get a snack (an apple), and check my emails (all junk). On top of that, I am basically incapable of reading over this post again to make sure it is actually logical. Soooooooo, here’s hoping it either makes enough sense for a reader to get through it, oooooor people’s technologically-induced ADHD and multi-tasking habits have them skim this so that they can produce some half-hearted comment at the end. In terms of multi-tasking, it is evident that all I do is multi-task, and I confess I am not nearly as productive because of this and my ADHD. I personally however cannot blame these attributes on technology. I have had these all of my life. Try having a conversation with me, it’s entertaining.

As for other people though, I have noticed a shift in some people. I cannot tell you if it is because of technology or not. There is only a correlation, not a causation. It doesn’t help any that our computers are so multi-faceted and our phones are mobile and as smart as our computers. I can tell you that PhD students are glued to their computers. I wonder if you compared today’s graduate students with those of the past. How would we compare? Is multi-tasking even a thing to compare? I think that is just a habit people develop no matter the era. How are our attention spans? How do our cognitive abilities match up? Can we do what they can do without a computer?

Anyway, basically this post has been about nothing, so hopefully you were doing something else at the time.


How much time do you spend on the internet/day?

Sometimes it feels like our brains are wired to seek short-term stimulation. The internet, TV, and video games have all contributed to this constant need for people to have something “to do”. On an airplane we rely on our book, on the bus we rely on our ipod, even on the toilet we rely on our phones! When I work from home, I always want my television to be on, which probably cuts my attention span in half. But, if I don’t have this extra source of stimulation, I can’t even focus on my task on hand. So it is often a catch-22.

Endless stimulation (or often distractions) prevent us from feeling things like boredom and anxiety. Think of how much time you spend on the internet that isn’t 100% being used for productive work. For instance, if I spend an hour writing a paper, I’ll spend about 15 minutes signing onto Facebook or checking the news. In fact, before I do ANYTHING productive, I’ll hop on Facebook then the news to see what the headlines are for the day. This isn’t necessarily wasted time, but when done multiple times a day, isn’t conducive to a productive work environment.

Here are some questions I’ve thought of for anyone reading this post. I’m curious to see how others perceive their internet use. My answers are below.

  • How much time do you spend on the internet every day?
  • Do you have any habits/rituals of use while using the computer?
  • Do you think you use the internet too much?
  • Do you think internet use has a negative effect on your concentration and attention?
  • Have you ever gone a significant amount of time without technology or the internet and if so, what were the effects on you?

My answers:

  • How much time do you spend on the internet every day? This largely depends on my work schedule, but on average 6-8 hours a day.
  • Do you have any habits/rituals of use while using the computer? See what emails I need to respond to. Effectively avoid these emails. Sign on Facebook and check BBC news before doing anything productive. Finally start work.
  • Do you think you use the internet too much? Absolutely.
  • Do you think internet use has a negative effect on your concentration and attention? Absolutely.
  • Have you ever gone a significant amount of time without technology or the internet and if so, what were the effects on you? The longest time was probably two weeks, and I definitely remember being less stressed and more serene.

Multi-Tasking Has Become A Necessary Skill for A Scholar

When I was a kid, the impressions famous scholars left on me is always quiet and concentrated. I imagine them to sit at a table for the whole afternoon with a book in their hands or wrote a “real” manuscript for hours. After I joined the graduate school, this impression has been gradually disappeared. The professors I have met can rarely spend a whole afternoon on reading or writing. Instead, they are busy in teaching, discussing with students, writing proposals, attending seminars, and replying to tons of emails. It seems to me that the ability for multi-tasking has become a necessary skill for professors. I feel the pressure to speed up too. When I was a master student, my schedule only contains two primary things: taking classes and doing experiments. However, when I have become a senior Ph.D. student, I need to mentor undergraduate students, design research plans for multiple research projects, write several manuscripts, and attend conferences. In addition to the academic jobs, I have to spend time attending job fairs and participating in a variety of service activities in the department.

Accompanied with the improved ability for multi-tasking is the deteriorating ability for focusing. I used to spend a whole evening reading books, writing articles, or watching movies. I really enjoy the time when I can forget everything else and immerse myself in the story of the books or movies. But right now, it is luxurious for spending a whole bunch of time only on one thing. To meet all kinds of deadlines, I need to carefully arrange my time and do multiple work simultaneously. Even so, I frequently cannot find time to sleep. The negative effect it brings is that it is very difficult for me to focus on one thing even when I have plenty of time for it. For example, when I am writing this blog post, I cannot help checking my emails. I suddenly remembered that I need to reserve the instrument for tomorrow’s lab work. Meanwhile, I am also drafting a conference abstract that is due tomorrow. I feel like sitting in a high speed train that never stops.

What changes me? I attribute the reason to appearance of information techniques. If you are a Ph.D. student 30 years ago, the only way that you access to literatures is to go to the libraries. You need to copy these literatures and take them home. Maybe 50 literatures will accompany you for your whole PhD study. However, today we can access and download the newest papers as soon as it come out from the online database subscribed by the university. By this way, the research process significantly accelerates. We have to keep tracking the newly published work and adjust our research plan on a daily basis. In addition to the convenience brought by the technology, it can also be disturbing. Emails allow efficient communications between people. However, hundreds of emails per day can also be a big burden for professors. Many of them are trivial things but also require you to spend a little bit energy dealing with it. The information you get from one email may attract you to a website, which in turn will drag you to another. Thus dealing with hundreds of emails can occupy you a large amount of time. The information bombardment can also shape our minds. Our brains are refreshed anytime that creates opportunities for new ideas.


Connections, interactions, and everything in between

I have seen quite an evolution in the way I study, work, consume information and interact over the years. I belonged to that generation that used typewriters to write term papers, then slowly progressed to WordStar and WordPerfect. I had a blue pager stuck to my waist band in college, and all I could do on my first cell phone was make voice calls. As a kid, our library at home had a set of the Encyclopedia Britannica from the 1970s (which never really got updated), and subscriptions to the National Geographic and Time magazines. It took a letter from my grandmother two months to arrive, and their barrio did not have access to phone lines, so I rarely got a chance to have a relationship with her growing up.

These memories came back as I went through the various readings this week. I could not help but appreciate how far we have come and how technology has changed the way we live. Despite the commentaries about how our current ways may lead to diminished meaningful interaction, I would have to say that my experience has been the opposite. The way I have used technology has made living on the other side of the world, away from family and loved ones, bearable, and allowed me to continue to engage in meaningful interactions with people I hold dear but could not physically be with. I cannot imagine not having FaceTime or Skype and not being able to talk to my family in the Philippines as often as I can for next to nothing through the internet; I would probably survive, but painfully so.

I have to admit, though, that despite the advantages and conveniences that are available through technology, I can still be pretty old school. I still like reading on paper and making handwritten notes (so I still print all my course readings); I resonated a lot with what Clive Thompson shared about physicist Richard Feynman – putting my thoughts and ideas on paper is my thinking process too.  There is a lot to be gained with the vast amount of resources that innovation has made available to us, but how we process that information is still very much a human, cognitive exercise.

My thought process…

My personal preferences and experiences is probably why my favorite lines in all the readings are these lines from Clive Thompson’s piece: “Which is smarter at chess – humans or computers? Neither. It’s the two together, working side by side.” To me, this is very true, and is exactly how I prefer to use not just computers but all the conveniences and technologies that are available to us right now. In a very real way, I see and live Jason Farman’s point that there are “significant ways in which our mobile devices are actually fostering a deeper sense of connection to people and places.” There will always be pros and cons to anything and everything, and it is the way we choose to leverage what emerging technologies have to offer that ultimately makes a difference. If you will it so, technology will work for you and with you.

Multi-tasking: its benefits and limits

According to Sanbonmatsu et al. (2013), when people multi-task, they simultaneously engage in two or more functionally independent tasks and each task has specific goals, mental transformation, and response outputs. You can have an active conversation with your friends when walking across campus. But when the tasks require cognitive processes such as reading, listening, and writing, it is hard to be done at the same time.

In the classroom, students can provide several reasons why they use electronic devices such as computers and tablets in class. The first reason is to take notes. E-notes have become so popular since it is so easy for students to access their notes when they need even a semester or years after that. They can also directly add notes on lecture slides. Therefore, e-notes have a big advantage over paper notes. Besides, these devices are very helpful when students need to look up specific information related to a topic being discussed in class such as new words or examples. Electronic devices are also helpful when students need to share their work with their classmates or review their classmates’ work.

However, when these electronic devices are available, it is tempting to check email, surf the Internet, and update on social media during the class. When students try to listen to their teachers or a discussion and be on the Internet at the same time, they cannot 100% focus on either the classroom environment around them or the online interactions. A study of Kuznekoff and Titsworth (2013) published on Communication Education showed that using mobile phones during class time could affect the learning process. In fact, students who did not use their mobile phones took more detailed notes (62% more information), recalled more information for the lecture, and got a higher grade (one and a half letter grade) on the test compared to students who actively used their phones (for texting and Facebook interactions). The authors explained that when students learn new information, there are several components in the process, including short-term memory, working memory, long-term memory, and metacognition. Since learning is a process, if any components are impaired or interrupted (for example, texting diverts students’ attention from the target task), the information processed in short/working memory may be incomplete, which results in insufficient storage of information in long-term memory.

Actually, when students multitask, they are not doing two (or more) things at once. Instead, they are shifting from one to another. A study of Ophir et al. (2009) suggested that for students who frequently switch their attention from one activity to another (heavy media multi-taskers), they may have more difficulty to filter out irrelevant distraction in the environment than light media multi-taskers.

Personally, I will allow my students to use their computers in class, but I will set up limits on how their computers should be used and explain to them about the learning purposes of these limits.

References:

Jeffrey H. Kuznekoff & Scott Titsworth (2013). The Impact of Mobile Phone Usage on Student Learning, Communication Education, 62:3, 233-252, DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2013.767917

Ophir, E., Nass, C., & Wagner, A. D. (2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(37), 15583–15587.

Sanbonmatsu DM, Strayer DL, Medeiros-Ward N, Watson JM (2013). Who Multi-Tasks and Why? Multi-Tasking Ability, Perceived Multi-Tasking Ability, Impulsivity, and Sensation Seeking. PLoS ONE 8(1): e54402. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054402

Skills, Flow, and Teaching

 “Contrary to what we usually believe, moments like these, the best moments in our lives, are not the passive, receptive, relaxing times—although such experiences can also be enjoyable, if we have worked hard to attain them. The best moments usually occur when a person’s body or mind is stretched to its limits in a voluntary effort to accomplish something difficult and worthwhile. Optimal experience is thus something that we make happen. For a child, it could be placing with trembling fingers the last block on a tower she has built, higher than any she has built so far; for a swimmer, it could be trying to beat his own record; for a violinist, mastering an intricate musical passage. For each person there are thousands of opportunities, challenges to expand ourselves.”
― Mihaly CsikszentmihalyiFlow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience

 

Flow. Chances are you can remember exactly what you were doing the last time you experienced it. You can probably also remember at least a semblance of how it felt. Maybe your breath becomes a little shallower or your heart beats a little faster at the memory. For me, flow has most often occurred when I am playing music or teaching. I started playing the violin in fourth grade and have played it on and off ever since. (I asked my parents for an accordion in third grade. They did not comply. Then I asked to play the bass. The violin was their compromise. Thanks, Mom and Dad!) Even with my inconsistent practice, I have spent a lot of time playing and, along with teaching physics—the other activity I have spent many hours practicing and improving–, it is the activity that has been the most challenging and rewarding in my life. I attribute my musical joy to Jim Lockwood, my middle and high school orchestra director. He chose challenging music that made us play in seventh position (really high notes), move our bows very slowly, and move our fingers very quickly. We practiced. We got better. We experienced joy.

According to Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, we experience more desirable emotions (arousal, flow, and control) when we are engaged in activities which challenge us and for which we have at least moderate skill. When we engage in activities which are not challenging, we tend to be bored or apathetic, and when we take on challenges which outpace our skill level, we tend to feel anxious or worried—uncomfortable states. Developing a new skill always requires time spent in this uncomfortable region of the emotional spectrum, and the only way to experience flow is by going through this process of skill development. The path to flow requires us to endure anxiety and worry. Growth and discomfort are necessary bedfellows.

One of the dangers of the digital world is that it can be used to avoid the discomforts of learning and miss the growth that results. We would all probably agree that there is some set of basic information—facts and understanding–that must be acquired in order for us to communicate and think. We need some net of existing knowledge which we can use to sort, interpret, and arrange new information as we encounter it. We cannot look up everything we need to know. As teachers, we get to define that basic information for our classes. The challenge is to choose a set of information that both creates opportunities and leaves space for application. Learning this basic information requires practice. Sometimes it is possible to use the computer as a crutch instead of wrestling with the practice required to learn. Students who use online resources this way never develop the skills needed to attack challenging problems and never experience the joy of solving them.

 

As teachers, we can encourage and support our students as we lead them through the forest of confusion and discomfort that is a necessary part of learning. Students who fail to practice the hard tasks of learning—reading difficult articles, doing long division, memorizing basic math facts—will lose those skills. Fortunately, our brains can just as easily regain the skills through practice. As teachers, we can define a well-reasoned and insightful set of basic knowledge and provide both opportunities and reasons for the painful and necessary practice needed to master it. We can then create learning experiences in which students can map what they are learning to the ubiquitous expanding digital universe of information. This is where computers can become partners in learning. In this way, students become the “centaurs” that Thompson refers to in his book. In this way, we create a path that increases our students’ skill levels and provides the types of challenges that engender arousal, flow, control, and the addiction of curiosity and learning.

“Shall we accept the change that caused by the Internet?” vs “Shall we accept that the change is caused by ourselves?”

I have a lot to say about this week’s topic, “Attention and multi-tasking”. Frankly, I’ve got lost in the reading obstacle for a long time. I used to be a book reader, either lecture books or literature books. When I was in undergrad college, I often went to the library and read. I was once honored as the top reader of the library who borrowed the most books to read. Now, I’d bet that I would not be in the library for more than ten times for reading. Having easy access to the Internet makes us more dependent on the knowledge provided by the Internet and less dependent on the thinking by our own mind. This is sadly true.

Last week, something went wrong with the net cable in my office. I was very upset about not being able to connect to the Internet. Though actually on that day I could do part of my work that was not related to the Internet. But I just couldn’t calm down and focus on it. Getting used to working with the Internet, I’m easily uncomfortable without the Internet. However, this also causes me easily distracted from work. It’s very disappointing as I clearly see myself changing because of the Internet. Before I read Nicholas Carr’s essay “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”, I though it was totally my own change and fault. Realizing that there are many people struggle about the distraction caused by the Internet, I am lost in thought, in real thought.

Recently, I’m reading a book “Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind” by Yuval Noah Harari. In this book, Harari proposed his thoughts of how did Homo Sapiens evolve from an unexceptional savannah-dwelling primate to become the dominant force on the planet, emerging as the lone survivor out of six distinct, competing hominid species? One of his ideas is really striking to me. He wrote that “because our talent for gossip allows us to build networks in societies too large for personal relationships between everyone, and our imagined realities – such as religion, money, governments, companies, laws and institutes – keep us in line.” I’d say, it is still how we connect with each other in the current century – through gossip and gossip.

The Internet makes us easily gossip with each other, and the anecdotal stories, news, and other information on the Internet provide us with enormous things to gossip. Too many online temptations distract us from concentrating on what we should do if have to do via the Internet. People are social beings in words that people tend to talk with each other about things they find funny, interesting or astonishing. Also, considering the easy access to information online, more and more people tend to surf online so as to keep in line with others around themselves – to know what others know. It is, in fact, a cycle of stimulus. People are eager to find more interesting (either positive or negative) things online and easy to be attracted by things with gimmicky titles. With more and more clicks on these hyperlinks, search engines (Google, Yahoo, etc.) are (re-)programmed to provide more and more information of these types.

This comes to a question. Is it really that the Internet changes our behavior of thinking (reading) or it is ourselves that change how the Internet deliver information to us?

We create the Internet and the Internet creates us. We change the Internet and the Internet changes us. If we want to enjoy all the benefits that the Internet has made to us, we have to endure all the costs as well. No doubt, those who know how to use the Internet will benefit more. Those who are subdued by the Internet will suffer more. There is no one-for-all answer that can determine how the Internet affects us. However, I always believe that education is an effective tool to guide people (from the very beginning of life) to understand and balance the complex relationship of human and the Internet.

 

Reference:

Nicholas Carr; Is Google Making Us Stupid? and the comments (2008)

Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind (2015)

 


Memory as a Social Construct

Q.

You talk a lot about memory in your book. Are we augmenting our memories with computers, or are we replacing them?

A.

I would say we are augmenting them. When I started the book I was genuinely worried that I was losing my memory to Google, but the more I studied the way that everyday memory works, the more I realized how much we already rely on other outside sources — books, Post-it notes, etc. — but also other people to remember things. We are social thinkers, and we are also social rememberers, we use our co-workers, our partners and our friends to help us retrieve the details about things that they they are better at remembering than we are. And they’ve used us in the same way. Memory has always been social. Now we’re using search engines and computers to augment our memories, too.

The above piece is from an interview with Clive Thompson about his book and how he believes that Google is not dulling our ability to memorize things, and I agree…kind of. He goes onto talk about how social media is used as a tool in establishing connections and creating ambient awareness. While reading just the interview, as well as the other pieces from this week, it honestly started to remind me of the Black Mirror episode, “Be Right Back.”

In the episode a young woman loses her husband unexpectedly and shortly thereafter discovers she is pregnant.  While at the funeral, a friend of her’s suggests she try this thing where she can “talk” to “her husband” via a computer program (I think?) that takes all the information he ever shared online and creates his personality from it. I won’t tell you what happens after that, but basically it’s not the same person.

The internet gives us an outlet where we can share and post virtually anything we want. Thompson argues that though most of these are insignificant, they add up over a period of time to help develop memories of people. It has allowed us the opportunity to connect with people who otherwise would’ve been out of our lives months and maybe even years ago. We create these memories or personas of people in our minds based solely off of the content they post online. I won’t go into detail about the “highlight reel” theory but know that it exists and that it does happen.

With being the social creatures we are and the ever developing forms of social interaction that are popping up at an alarming rate, I believe it’s only fair to say that our memories will be shaped more and more by our use of technology. It is up to the user to decide how and when it happens. All I ask is that you continue to have an emotional connection to those memories regardless of the platform that you’re saving them on.


1 2 3 4