The Distraction of Receiving a Cell Phone Notification

bigstock-teenage-girl-sending-text-mess-59962661

At this point, most people have heard about the danger of using cell phones during tasks like driving and even walking. The distraction caused by using a cell phone to be on social media or to text while doing work or studying is also obvious. This is because while people believe that they are multitasking while using their phone while studying, this is not the case at all. The strict definition of the term multitasking is that multiple activities are being performed simultaneously without a break in either task, such as singing while playing the guitar, and this is relatively uncommon to be able to do (David, Kim, Brickman, Ran, & Curtis, 2015). More likely is that people are task switching, which is when there is a temporary disengagement in one activity to perform the other, which is what we are doing when we text and drive, or check our phone while studying (David et. al, 2017). The cost in performance due to task switching has been shown repeatedly, in all types of activities, which is why driving becomes more dangerous and studying becomes more difficult.

However, the hindrance of a cell phone is not limited to the cost of task switching when one is using it. The sound of somebody else’s cell phone ringing can decrease performance, such as decreased attention and note-taking to the material during a lecture (End, Worthman, Mathews, & Wetterau, 2010). Even just the presence of a cell phone, whether it’s yours or somebody else’s, leads to worse performance on tasks that require attention, especially complex and difficult tasks (Thornton, Faires, Robbins, & Rollins, 2014).

The amount of attention that cell phones take up in our minds, even when we are not necessarily using them, is obvious. This is why psychologists at Florida State University wanted to test the attentional cost of receiving a notification. All of the public statements say to wait to respond when you receive a text or a call while driving. But it’s possible that even though you are not using your phone, that receiving a text and waiting to answer to it also has a cost. This may be because you are using your prospective memory: the memory that you use to remember to do something in the future, like respond to somebody’s text message. The attentional required in trying to remember to do something in the future could take away from the task at hand. Also, receiving a notification might lead to thoughts that are unrelated to the task being performed, like what the message may contain and who it is from, and these thoughts unrelated to the task can distract from the task itself (Stothart, Mitchum, & Yehnert, 2015).

An experiment performed at Florida State University in 2015 showed that this was true: when you receive a notification, even without looking at it or responding to it, it takes away some of your attention. The experiment that they performed used the SART, or the Sustained Attention to Response Task to measure attention. This task requires a great deal of attention and focus, as a number flashes on the screen, and a response is required quickly. For all numbers except three, the subject presses the space bar, and if the number is three, the subject does not press anything (Stothart, Mitchum, & Yehnert, 2015).

figure-1-the-sustained-attention-to-response-task-sart-adapted-for-functional

 

The participants all performed a block of the SART where they did not receive any notifications, and then during the second block, one condition received text messages, another received phone calls, and the third did not receive notifications again. The subjects did not know that their phones had anything to do with the study, so they were not told not to look at them or to turn them on. This also meant that they did not know that the researchers were going to be texting or calling them, so the subjects believed that the notification was personally relevant to them, which increased the chance of the subject to let their mind wander about who the notification was from, and what it was about (Stothart, Mitchum, & Yehnert, 2015).

There are two measurements of the SART that have been shown to be related to distraction, or a wandering mind during the task. The first is the measure of commission errors, which is when the space bar was pressed when it was not supposed to because the number 3 was on the screen. The second way to measure distraction is by observing that the response times are so quick, that it is clear the subject is not actually looking at the number on the screen, but is just pressing the space bar because that is likely the correct response. Both of these measurements were higher in the blocks where the participants received text messages and phone calls, compared to the first block, where the participants did not receive any notifications (Stothart, Mitchum, & Yehnert, 2015).

These results make it clear that receiving a notification does lead to distraction on a task that requires constant attention like the SART. And while it may seem that a notification is distracting because one has to take the time away from the task to look at the phone, the researchers purposely excluded the data of any subject that looked at their phone when they received a notification. And it was not just the sound of the phone ringing that distracted subjects, as the probability of committing an error was the same for the trials when the phone was not ringing as when it was in the phone call condition. Therefore, in this case, the participants were not distracted by looking at their phone, or distracted by the noise of a notification, but from the thoughts that come from hearing a notification and the mind wandering that occurs after you receive a notification (Stothart, Mitchum, & Yehnert, 2015).

This experiment has important implications for what was previously believed about the presence of cell phones during tasks that require focus. For example, it’s been believed that as long as you are not using your phone while you’re driving or studying, that it’s okay to have it near you. However, this study showed that even knowing that you have a notification caused a decrease in performance similar to that of texting while driving (Stothart, Mitchum, & Yehnert). This means that when one is driving, studying, or trying to pay attention in lecture, your phone should be away and on silent. If you are in class, and your phone is in your pocket, even just a small buzz can lead to a distraction that can distract from lecture. It is clear that the scope of how distracting a cell phone can be goes well beyond just having to switch tasks, its presence and noise can be much more detrimental than we realize.

References:

David, P., Kim, J., Brickman, J. S., Ran, W., & Curtis, C. M. (2015). Mobile phone distraction while studying. New Media and Society, 17(10). 1661-1679.

End, C.M., Worthman, S., Mathews, M., & Wetterau, K. (2010). Costly cell phones: The impact of cell phone rings on academic performance. Teaching of Psychology, 37, 55-57.

Stothart, C., Mitchum, A., & Yehnert, C. (2015). The attentional cost of receiving a cell phone notification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41(4), 893-897.

Thornton, B., Faires, A., Robbins, M., & Rollins, E. (2014). The mere presence of a cell phone may be distracting: Implications for attention and task performance. Social Psychology45(6), 479-488.

Author

Anna Aylward

The Myth of Multitasking

Multitasking

This month we will be exploring the topic of multitasking – and how to avoid it. This first blog on multitasking is an overview of what multitasking is and the research behind it. Other blogs in this series will highlight activities that you can use in the classroom, other resources, and some research highlights.

Placeholder Image

The Myth of Multitasking

Listening to the radio while driving to work. Watching TV while folding laundry. Taking notes during a lecture. These are all examples of situations when people think they are multitasking, or doing several tasks at once. What’s actually happening, however, is that you are rapidly switching your attention between several different tasks (Rodgers & Monsell, 1995). You aren’t doing multiple things at once; you’re doing multiple things in quick succession, requiring you to switch your attention each time. And there’s a cost each time.

The Cost of Switching Attention

multitasking-or-attention-switching

When you switch your attention between tasks it takes time and effort. Each time you switch to a new task your brain has to:

  1. Stop the current task,
  2. Search for information about the new task,
  3. Find the new task parameters, and
  4. Engage in the new task.

Our brains can go these steps so quickly and efficiently that we barely notice the time and effort it takes to shift our attention. The more often we do it however, the more mistakes we make (Monsell, 2003). Not only do we tend to make mistakes when we switch between tasks, the more complex the tasks are, the bigger the mistakes (Rubinstein, Myer, & Evans, 2001). For example, folding laundry while watching TV are two simple tasks. While you switch between watching or listening a show and folding laundry you may make some small mistakes, but overall you can probably do both without noticing a difference. But let’s say that instead of doing laundry you’re writing a paper while watching your favorite TV show. Writing a paper is a little more complex than folding laundry. When you shift your attention from the TV show to the paper you have to stop focusing on the characters on screen, search for information about the new task (“What was I about to say here?”), find the new task parameters (“Oh, right, I was going to give another example…”), and engage in the new task. This takes time and effort each time. Not only will you make mistakes on your paper while switching your attention back and forth, you probably won’t even notice that you made the mistakes. Furthermore, it will take you longer to write the paper than if you had written it without the show on in the background.

“Can You Get Better at Multitasking?” And “Aren’t some people better at Multitasking?”

The short answer to both of these questions is: Yes. The long answer is: But why would you want to? Your ability to do what we perceive as multitasking (remember that you aren’t actually doing multiple things at once, it just feels that way since our brains can switch attention so quickly and efficiently) depends on how easy or hard the tasks are that you’re doing, your experience with those tasks, and your cognitive processing ability.

The cost of switching your attention is less when the tasks you’re working on are easier. You can have more experience with a complex task that makes it easier. Driving is good example of this. When you first learned how to drive a car it was much more difficult to remember where to put your hands on the wheel, when to push the gas and when to push the break, when to put on your turn signal, and when to look in your review mirror. Some experienced drivers still have trouble remembering to use their turn signal. Driving is complicated. But with practice all of these complex behaviors became automatic. Driving becomes easier because of your experience with it, making it easier to drive and listen to music or talk to your passenger about the trip you’re taking. The cost of switching your attention between checking your mirrors, easing off the gas, and reading a street sign is much lower once you have become practiced at it.

Are some fortunate people just better at task switching? Definitely. Do they still make mistakes and take longer to do tasks? Yes. Even if you were one of the lucky people who are able to hold several pieces of information in mind and switch almost effortlessly between tasks, you would still benefit from doing one task at a time. One of the reasons people try to multitask is because they think it makes them more productive. However, as we’ve seen, multitasking leads to more mistakes and a longer time to complete tasks. It feels like you’re being more productive for two reasons. First, you don’t always notice the mistakes you make. These mistakes could range from simple typos, uneven folding, or not seeing another car in an intersection. Second, you feel accomplished after multitasking. The association of a good feeling with doing an otherwise undesirable task, makes it more likely that you’ll continue to multitask in the future (Wang & Tchernev, 2012).

o-multi-task-facebook

Multitasking in the Classroom

There are several ways that multitasking happens in the classroom, but here I want to talk about just two. The first way is through media multitasking. With cell phones, laptops, and tablets it is becoming easier than ever before for students to multitask during class. When students use multimedia during lecture their learning is worse than students who take notes using traditional pen and paper (Wood, Zivakova, Gentile, Archer, De Pasquale, & Nosko, 2011). Despite the fact that most students have grown up using these technologies, research shows that they are no better at media multitasking than those who are less technologically inclined (Ophir, Nass, & Wagner, 2009). We will be diving deeper into media multitasking, specifically cell phones in the classroom, in a later post.

tech_distraction

Another culprit of multitasking in classroom is the standard lecture. In a typical lecture the teacher puts up slide and explains it while the class takes notes. In order to stay on top of this lecture the student has to read the slide, listen to the teacher, and write down the information in their own words. That’s at least 3 tasks that the student has to attempt to multitask. Having to shift their attention between the slide, the teacher, and their notes leads to inattention, errors, and impaired learning. In one experiment Loh, Tan, & Lim (2016) compared students who were undistracted (and only doing one task), distracted students, and students who were multitasking – listening and reading a set of information similar to a typical lecture presentation. At test the undistracted students got 93% correct, the distracted students got 89% correct, and the multitasking students averaged around 74% correct.

A simple fix for multitasking during a lecture is to pause to allow your students to take notes either before or after presenting the information on the screen. You should also be mindful of how much text is on the slides. Less text means less time reading while you are talking (i.e. multitasking). However, if you need to present a lot of text, maybe a famous quote or an interesting example that you will be exploring in the lecture, then allow time for the students to read the full text before talking about it.

References:

Loh, K. K., Tan, B. Z. H., & Lim, S. W. H. (2016). Media multitasking predicts video-recorded lecture performance through mind wandering tendencies. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 943 – 947.

Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(3), 134-140.

Ophire, E., Nass, C., & Wagner, A. D. (2009). Cognitive Control in media multitaskers. PNAS, 106 (37), 12283-12287.

Rodgers, R.D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124 (2), 207-231.

Rubenstein, J. S., Myer, D. E., & Evans, J. E. (2001). Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Human Performance, 27(4), 763-797.

Wang, Z, & Tchernev, J. M. (2012). The “myth” of media multitasking: reciprocal dynamics of media multitasking, personal needs, and gratifications. Journal of Communication, 62, 493 – 513.

Wood, Zivakova, Gentile, Archer, De Pasquale, & Nosko. (2011). Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with technology on real-time classroom learning. Computers & Education, 58, 365-374.

Author

Althea Bauernschmidt

 

 

Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑