Technology and the Distracted Mind

Abstract

Increasingly ubiquitous technology such as smartphones, tablets, and dashboard screens contribute to distraction, which is an interference in the individual's ability to maintain focus on one or more intentional tasks. While the results of distraction on attentional control are the same regardless of the source, the ubiquity of these technologies has created more opportunities for distraction and has normalized multitasking in previously unusual or unheard of contexts. Two of the most common areas of concern are the effects of technological distractions on education and driving.

Overview

Distraction has always been a cause for concern, but in the twenty-first century concerns were raised over the effects and impacts of distraction as a result of newly ubiquitous and often attention-dominating technologies. While computers and video game consoles had become commonplace by the end of the twentieth century, and televisions decades before that, the relevant innovations of the twenty-first century were portability and integration. Where once computer use might be relegated to office desks and video games to the living room, increasingly cheap electronics components made possible laptops, computer tablets, smartphones, smart watches, and advanced portable gaming consoles. Touchscreens became integrated in car dashboards and back seats, and Bluetooth headsets became more common for connecting to smartphones while on the go.

While even passively listening to music during another task results in distraction, one of the areas of concern in the conversation about distraction and technology is the effect of multitasking—that is, performing multiple ongoing tasks at once, each of which requires some degree of active engagement, such as talking on the phone, entering a destination into a dashboard GPS system, and driving a car at the same time. Multitasking quickly became normalized. People commonly play games, text, or browse the web on their phones while holding conversations, sitting in meetings, or attending class. Many studies have shown that technology and overstimulation have contributed to distraction in the classroom, and the link between distracted driving and increased accidents is strong enough to have resulted in new driving laws throughout the United States (though these studies also show that even listening to the radio is sufficiently distracting to impact reaction speeds).

Neurologically, the presence of distracting stimuli decreases the capacity for focused attention, something confirmed by brain studies. Attention is the bridge between perception and memory; when attention is disrupted, long-term recall of information pertaining to the putative object of attention is also reduced. In a classroom, distraction is exacerbated in the case of large classes, where individual interaction between instructor and student—a more vivid stimulus than listening to a lecture or watching a PowerPoint presentation—is less frequent.

Under some circumstances, distraction is useful and even medically recommended. This is the basis for playing music in dentists' offices and for the use of music and meditation in pain management. Tinnitus, a condition causing the patient to hear a constant or frequent irritating sound, has no cure or medical treatment, and so is treated through distraction, by playing external sounds (music, television, white noise machines, even a fan) to pull the patient's attention away from the internal sound.

Further Insights

The executive functions of the brain are the cognitive processes that control behavior. The executive functions that deal with shifting attention from one task to another are task switching, the unconscious shifting of attention, and cognitive shifting, the conscious shifting of attention. These shifting processes are adaptations to dynamic environments, allowing humans (and many animals) to multi-task by relying on memory and other cognitive capacities to keep track of one's "place" in the progress of various tasks at once, and to respond to changing circumstances rather than repeat a set subroutine of behaviors. There are various theories about how switching processes, especially task switching, work.

Being able to multitask does not mean being able to perform each task with the same level of attention, focus, and care as one would if it were the only object of attention. For trivial tasks this may not matter: watching TV while drinking a glass of water does not appreciably impact either task. Watching TV while doing a crossword puzzle, on the other hand, means switching attention back and forth between the two—maybe doing the crossword at the commercial breaks, or tuning out for seconds at a time while brainstorming answers to 8-Across.

Interruption science, a branch of human factors psychology, is the study of the effects of distraction, and the manner and extent to which distraction contributes to errors and poor performance or extends the length of time it takes to complete a task. Studies of workplace interruptions—which include non-technological distractions such as conversations with coworkers or the interruption of a new task requiring attention—find that after a sufficient interruption requiring conscious attention (cognitive shifting), it takes thirty minutes for the worker to become completely re-engaged with their original task. When considering an office environment, this may not seem consequential; the worst results may seem to be low productivity. However, distractions at work can result in a range of undesirable outcomes; the aggregate costs of lower productivity can be substantial, and in certain occupations distractions can have disastrous effects, as in aviation (both among the ground control and the flight crew), medicine, operating heavy machinery or working with dangerous tools, or working with animals.

A person's ability to ignore distractions, whether internal or external, is governed by attentional control, also known as executive attention. Neuropsychological studies have shown that attentional control is one of the functions of the anterior cingulate cortex of the brain, a collar-shaped section in the front that is involved in both autonomic functions like maintaining heart rate and higher-level functions like impulse control, decision-making, and the evaluation of social processes. Attention involves systems of alertness (the individual's awareness of the stimulus), orientation (the information received through sensory inputs pertaining to the stimulus), and executive control, which includes attentional control and decision-making (whether conscious or unconscious) about dividing attention among multiple stimuli. The functions of attention have been observed in carefully designed psychological tests as well as event-related functional magnetic resonance images, in which activity in different areas of the brain in response to stimuli can be observed by mapping the change in the blood flow required to provide energy to different areas.

Attentional control develops over time. Infants, who are on the one hand easily distracted in many circumstances, are on the other hand subject to sticky attention, a phenomenon in which they become fixated on a stimulus and are unable divert their attention from it until it is removed from their awareness. Older children develop stronger attentional control over time, though the brain as a whole is one of the last parts of the body to complete development, with its "adolescence" ending around age twenty-three. The biological immaturity of the young brain has some unavoidable consequences for teaching students, including college students. There is also evidence that attentional control may flag in later years, after age sixty.

Attentional control is impacted by anxiety, stress, and specific disorders and conditions, including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), Alzheimer's disease, schizophrenia, and mood disorders. Attentional bias, on the other hand, is a phenomenon that can happen to anyone. With attentional bias, certain kinds of stimuli are favored over others. For example, one of the mechanisms of recurring trauma in people who suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder is the tendency to favor negative, triggering stimuli over positive stimuli. Victims of assault or who have survived serious accidents may also be in a periodic state of hypervigilance, in which attentional bias directs disproportionate attention to potential signs of danger, resulting in the individual's exaggerated startle response when surprised or exposed to loud noises.

Attentional bias can also over-favor positive stimuli—that is, it can make it more difficult to focus on homework or classwork instead of answering texts and messages or simple but reward-driven games like Candy Crush, in which completing each level activates the reward center of the brain with a small but real sense of accomplishment, motivating the brain to want to complete the next level and feel that reward again.

Issues

By 2024, about 97 percent of American adults owned a cell phone of some kind. Both cellphone and smartphone ownership were most common among younger people. Even in areas with economic and geographic disparities—rural Americans and Americans earning less than $30,000 are significantly less likely to own a smartphone—the overall numbers are high. Further, nearly half of Americans own a tablet computer.

A vast array of studies have examined how cell phones, smartphones, and tablet computers have impacted American society in the twenty-first century, from disrupting business models to changing parenting styles. Smartphone and tablet use in classrooms pose new challenges to instructors, on the one hand offering new opportunities—apps can be used as pedagogical tools, while students can easily record lectures—and on the other hand creating an obvious source of distraction. Some studies have found that young cell phone users, including students, check their phones an average of every 15 minutes, for a total of 4 1/2 hours of usage a day. This inevitably leads to increased multitasking, since rarely does this cell phone usage consist of a session focused solely on the phone as an input. Furthermore, the user is likely multitasking even within the phone, swiping between different apps or conversations. Other studies have found that teenagers can become anxious or agitated after a brief period of having their phones taken away (such as in class).

One study on cell phone usage in classrooms (Berry & Westfall, 2015) found that while only 8 percent of students turned their phones off during class, 80 percent of instructors reported no problems with cell phone noise (app sounds, ringing, vibration) during class. Half of students reported at least one interruption per class session caused by a cell phone, and three quarters of students reported having been admonished in at least one class for nonverbal phone activity (such as texting, e-mailing, or app use). More than 80 percent of students said they checked their phone at least once per class, and more than 20 percent said they check their phone five or more times per class. The same study found a statistically significant, though small, correlation between frequent phone use and lower GPA scores (about 0.08 points), which remained the same across genders and ages.

The strongest finding in the study, however, was related not to phone usage impacting student performance, but to instructor stress, with most instructors reporting that they found in-class phone use to be rude and disrespectful, and some reporting that they believed it interfered with their efficacy. Policies including verbal warnings, stronger public reprimands, private reprimands, nonverbal reprimands, and phone confiscations were examined, with verbal reprimands rated as the most effective as well as the one most respected by students.

Researchers like Adam Gazzaley (Gazzaley, 2016) have raised concerns about the impact on attentional control of normalized technological distractions. Twenty-first century high school and college students demonstrate difficulty studying for sustained periods of time without interruption, for example, typically remaining focused on one source of material for no more than fifteen to twenty minutes before taking a break for unrelated cell phone, tablet, or computer usage.

One source of concern many theorists raise is the rapidity with which cell phones and tablets permeated society in contrast with earlier technologies; the desktop computer existed for over a generation before it became commonplace, for example, and wired telephones took longer than that, even with government assistance to bring telephone wires to rural communities accelerating the process by several decades. On the other hand, it is not always clear why this is cause for alarm, except insofar as it creates a generation gap between younger Americans who grew up with a now commonplace technology, and older Americans who had to acclimate to that technology in adulthood instead of easing into it. In which case, perhaps the real area of concern is in how older Americans interact with younger ones, rather than supposing that there is something wrong with them. Even given the link between screen usage and interrupted studying, it is far from clear whether this results in worse outcomes—that is, whether "cellphone-addicted" students actually learn less and perform worse on their exams. Changes in social norms are not necessarily problematic.

According to a 2015 study on distracted driving (Overton et al., 2015), the proportional role of texting and other screen usage in incidents resulting from distracted driving increased rapidly following the introduction of mobile devices in the twenty-first century. While distracted driving encompasses numerous sources of distraction, the ubiquity of screens and the normalization of the "always connected" feeling that they bring has created a new category of distracted driving which has received greater attention than eating or listening to music. More than 100,000 crashes in 2013 involved at least one driver who was texting. While a texting driver is not necessarily the one at fault and other risk factors, such as substance use, may be contributing factors in accident cases, texting drivers are 23 times more likely to be in an accident than other drivers, and in a study of police accident reports, cell phone distraction was ruled the cause of 18 percent of fatal crashes, with drivers under forty being the most likely to be in such an accident (Overton et al., 2015).

Driving suffers from cell phone distraction both because of the manual manipulation involved, leaving one hand (or no hands) free for operating the vehicle, and because multitasking leads to poorer task performance and slower reaction speeds in response to rapidly changing circumstances. The former cause is at the heart of many distracted driving laws that mandate the use of Bluetooth hands-free devices for cell phone usage, such measures do not address the second cause.

Terms & Concepts

Attention: Attention or focus is a cognitive process of conscious and selective concentration on a specific source of information, by filtering out extraneous information; an oft-used example is listening to a specific conversation in a crowded room filled with multiple overlapping speakers (the "cocktail party problem").

Cognitive Shifting: Cognitive shifting is an executive function of the brain involved in consciously moving attention from one task to another.

Distracted Driving: Driving in a state of distraction; while distracted driving laws typically target cell phone conversations, texting, and smartphone usage, studies of distracted driving encompass eating or drinking while driving, listening to music, focusing on the GPS system or stereo, and interacting with children or other passengers.

Distraction: The diversion of attention from its intended object, whether from an internal or external source, such that the reception of information from/about the object is reduced.

Screen: In this context, "screen" is shorthand for the several devices that all provide access to similar programs and online services: smartphones, tablet computers, desktop and laptop computers, and to some degree, televisions, especially streaming-enabled or smart televisions; where parents of previous generations often limited children's television time, for example, twenty-first century parents are less likely to single television out than to limit screen time in general.

Task Switching: Task switching is an executive function of the brain that unconsciously moves attention from one task to another, in contrast with cognitive shifting. Task shifting is an important automatic process, and likely evolved early in the history of human ancestors; it allows a hunter to pay attention both to the prey it stalks and the possible arrival of dangerous predators or competitors, for instance.

Bibliography

Basch, C. H., Ethan, D., Rajan, S., & Basch, C. E. (2014). Technology-related distracted walking behaviours in Manhattan's most dangerous intersections. Injury Prevention, 20(5), 343–346.

Berry, M. J., & Westfall, A. (2015). Dial D for distraction: The making and breaking of cell phone policies in the college classroom. College Teaching, 63(2), 62–71. Retrieved November 1, 2017, from EBSCO Online Database Education Source.

Ethan, D. D., Basch, C., Johnson, G., Hammond, R., Chow, C., & Varsos, V. (2016). An analysis of technology-related distracted biking behaviors and helmet use among cyclists in New York City. Journal of Community Health, 41(1), 138–145. Retrieved November 1, 2017, from EBSCO Online Database Education Source.

Gazzeley, A., and Rosen, L. (2016). The distracted mind: Ancient brains in a high-tech world. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Johnson, D. (2010). Taming the chaos. Learning & Leading With Technology, 38(3), 20–23. Retrieved November 1, 2017, from EBSCO Online Database Education Source.

O'Mara, S. (2016). The distracted mind: Ancient brains in a high-tech world. Times Higher Education, (2283), 48. Retrieved January 1, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Education Source.

Overton, T. L., Rives, T. E., Hecht, C., Shafi, S., & Gandhi, R. R. (2015). Distracted driving: prevalence, problems, and prevention. International Journal of Injury Control & Safety Promotion, 22(3), 187–192.

Rosen, L. D. (2017). The distracted student mind — enhancing its focus and attention. Phi Delta Kappan, 99(2), 8–14. Retrieved January 1, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Education Source.

Suggested Reading

Ditzler, C., Hong, E., & Strudler, N. (2016). How tablets are utilized in the classroom. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48(3), 181–193. Retrieved November 1, 2017, from EBSCO Online Database Education Source.

McRae, P. (2016). Why are students growing tired, anxious and distracted?. ATA News, 50(12), 4. Retrieved January 1, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Education Source.

Shapiro, R. E. (2015). Don't blame the technology. Litigation, 41(4), 59–61.

Tian, Y., & Robinson, J. D. (2017). Predictors of cell phone use in distracted driving: Extending the theory of planned behavior. Health Communication, 32(9), 1066–1075.

Yan, Z. Z. (2018). Child and adolescent use of mobile phones: An unparalleled complex developmental phenomenon. Child Development, 89(1), 5–16. Retrieved January 1, 2018 from EBSCO Online Database Education Source.