Slashdot Mirror


Life Interrupted

sch7572 writes "Seattle Times carried this story which may be of interest to those addicted to checking Slashdot for new stories every minute. Scientists are concerned that the Information Age is nurturing 'cognitive overload,' an umbrella term for the malaise people feel as a result of distraction, stress, multitasking, and data congestion related to increasingly sophisticated technologies. People multitask because it is expected, encouraged, and considered vital, yet cognitive scientist David Meyer reports that truly effective multitasking is beyond people's capabilities."

36 of 406 comments (clear)

  1. Arrrrrgggg! by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can't...handle...another...story...about how modern society and technology is stressing us out...too much stress...ughhh...must wrap head in duct tape before it explodes...

    1. Re:Arrrrrgggg! by networkBoy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      According to the article we should focus on only one task at a time and not switch between tasks.

      This leaves me with two /.ish things to say:
      1) I will then focus all my attention on this thread until such time as I deem the task complete
      or
      2) As I focus myself on this threa . . . Oh look a new thingy to work on!

      This leads me to wonder if ADD / ADHD are actually coping mechanisms of the human mind? It kind of makes sense, as our brains are programmed for task switching at an early age with most kids being babysat by the TV and commercials being 30 seconds in length. Anybody know how long the feature program is between commercial breaks? 12 minutes perhaps?
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    2. Re:Arrrrrgggg! by smoking2000 · · Score: 3, Funny

      must wrap head in duct tape before it explodes

      I think I saw that on MacGuyver once

    3. Re:Arrrrrgggg! by Paco04101 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Did anyone here actually RTFA?
      Did you see how long that thing was ???!!

    4. Re:Arrrrrgggg! by AlOfIt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I really don't spend much time on TV but when I'm ready for sleep I sometimes surf the cable offerings. I've noticed because of my ability to multitask that some cable channels have about 7 minutes between commercials.

      That is why I hate TV. If you took the commercials out of commercial TV it would be a big improvement to even the worst shows.

  2. First Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm NOT checking every minute, just discovered this site.

    1. Re:First Post by dcrocha · · Score: 5, Funny

      Neither am I. I wrote a program that parses the page and sends the new stories to my mobile phone, where the message is instructed to interrupt anything i'm doing at the moment in the phone, like playing Snake or talking to my mom. This program also prints a copy of the story so I can read it at home in bedtime.

    2. Re:First Post by Lxy · · Score: 3, Funny

      This program also prints a copy of the story so I can read it at home in bedtime

      Holy crap! This guy reads TFA! Mod him up!

      --

      There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
      :wq
  3. The article... by bje2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    i tried to RTFA, but between my e-mail, the internet radio i'm listening to, ESPN.com, and my actual work, I didn't have enough concentration...

    --

    "Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true." - Homer Simpson
  4. Psh by neoform · · Score: 3, Funny

    I caan read sleashdot storees, louk at pron and recompile mi kernel ot the same tyme. no porblemms heere.

    --
    MABASPLOOM!
  5. It's called Evolution by WormholeFiend · · Score: 4, Insightful

    cognitive scientist David Meyer reports that truly effective multitasking is beyond people's capabilities

    Not yet, but I think eventually it might not be beyond our capabilities, just like learning how to produce heat from wood, and now from splitting atoms.

    1. Re:It's called Evolution by killmenow · · Score: 5, Insightful
      They start chatting at the watercooler, and soon after are dating, get married, and have multitasking children, and so on.
      Which leads to this.
    2. Re:It's called Evolution by arivanov · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Let's look at your examples:
      • Taking notes for a person who is in the custom of taking them can be a nearly automatic activity. It is not as such a demanding task in most cases. Half of the girls in my class in the university could do something else while taking perfectly annotated and readable notes. Some guys could do that as well, but I as most of them preferred to photocopy some of the stellar work done by the ladies :-)
      • Answering to a teacher question. Well... What question? When a lame teacher tries to use a question to catch a student that he/she is not paying attention that question is usually about some factlet which has been presented in the last 5 minutes. Recalling this is easy. Ask any husband with more then 5 years of marital experience. Or wife for that matter.
      • Writing fiction stories - dunno. Depends what fiction. But let's say that this is the primary task as far as your friend is concerned.
      • So overall - one primary, one secondary and good responce in handling interruptions. Sounds like the description of 75% of good students (at least in Europe) to me. Most people tend to lose it after leaving the Uni, but it is not something that requires an superbrain.

      As a comparison I will give you another example - I do not know a single person who is capable of simultaneously doing the mathematical models of two fundamentally different problems in different subject matter fields at the same time (and I know some very good mathematicians). Same for similar activities in physics, same for high efficiency algorithms and other high level (non-mundane) programming, so on so fourth. I do not think that it is possible to train in this. There are tasks where the human brain works at the limit of its capacity and there is no way anyone in his sane mind can multitask while doing them.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
  6. data congestion by SpongeBobLinuxPants · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't see this as a problem. I can remember all the IP numbers of our servers and almost everyone's password... dammit I forgot to wear pants again to work.

  7. No To Interruptions by Nurgled · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For a while now I've been anti-interruption. I shun any kind of unsolicited alert about events such as new email arriving, a friend signing on to an IM network or the phone ringing. I find I enjoy activities a lot more now that I can see them through to completion without beeping and flashing alerts interrupting me at arbitrary moments.

  8. Sure it is, anybody can multitask by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Right now I'm at work, downloading porn through p2p, hiding from my boss, checking slashdot, posting, eating breakfast, and I'm chatting with a buddy on an instant messenger program. And I'm chewing gum!

    But all those moms in SUVs with cell phones glued to their ear while they whack their kids scare me!

  9. Its true.... I've experienced it. by jhines0042 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I spent some time working in the support department for one of my previous companies. After a full day of answering phones, answering questions, problem solving, and tracking things down, I would come home and be absolutely exhausted. All of the constant context switching was very bad for my mental health. Sure, I was able to do the job, but it totally numbed my brain out and made me a tired, frustrated person.

    Now as a software engineer I try to work on only one thing at a time. If I try to do more than that then all of my efforts fall behind. If I can focus on one task though, it gets done and done right.

    --
    42 - So long and thanks for all the fish.
  10. So what do we do? by mOoZik · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't multi-task because I HAVE to, but often because I WANT to. I monitor a couple of dozen sites and I enjoy reading them. I like learning new stuff, constantly expanding my understanding of the world and of myself. Maybe it works for some and not others, but I wouldn't have it any other way. It just seems boring to me to do one thing at a time, not to mention a complete waste of precious time.

    1. Re:So what do we do? by Znork · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Unfortunately, wanting to does not protect your brain from damage caused by prolonged exposure to stress hormones. Those getting hit by stress burnout are often the ones that want to and enjoy what they do.

  11. Note he said effective multitasking by Saven+Marek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People multitask because it is expected, encouraged, and considered vital, yet cognitive scientist David Meyer reports that truly effective multitasking is beyond people's capabilities."


    I suspect this is where the problem lies. The difference between "effective multitasking" and "bumming on the internet" is the crucial point. Both are attempting jumping from one task to another, the first for a pupose say doing your job. The second doesnt have a purpose or a structure so it has no more purpose than doing it itself.

    It is almost as if you are addicted to performing a task (browsing the internet) and the performing of the task becomes the goal, instead of working towards, something at the end.

    Net Online Anime Gallery's

  12. Nonsense! by AthenianGadfly · · Score: 4, Funny
    The post implies that I'm splitting my attention between Slashdot and something else. The key here is to concentrate wholeheartedly on the refresh button, thus avoiding stress from multitasking.

    At least, I assume that's what the article says - I would have RTFA, but then I might miss the next comment posted here.

  13. Protect Your Time by wwest4 · · Score: 4, Informative


    In fact, multitasking -- a computing term that involves doing, or trying to do, more than one thing at once -- has cemented itself into our daily lives and is intensely studied. Research has shown it to be consistently counterproductive, often foolish, unhealthy in the long run, and in the case of gabbing on the cell phone while driving, relatively dangerous. Yet it is also expected, encouraged and basically essential.


    Amen. Now we need the actual studies so that we can cite them for our bosses and clients so they can stop expecting it.

    Once you have some sympathy from your PHB: The best defense, in this case, is a good offense. Declare office hours. Partition your time into usable, contiguous chunks dedicated to single tasks, and stick to the plan. You'll be glad you did.

  14. Older people by Schezar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I find it interesting that, at least in the studies I've read about this, that it affects mostly adults, and younger people are largely immune to it.

    The young techno-elite grew (and are growing) up immersed in this sea of information, and are adapting to it. The older generations, having grown up in a much slower-paced environment, have difficulty adapting to the rapid change in the information channels available to them.

    Personally, I love having this information available. I crave it. I'm constantly aware of the state of the world around me. When something of note happens to one of my friends, that knowledge circulates throughout our social circle almost immediately.

    For anyone who's read Snow Crash, there are people referred to as "Gargoyles." They are connected to the net 100% of the time, interacting with it through wearable computing and visual overlays, streaming and feeding information as fast as possible concurrently with their physical life.

    The idea might scare some people, but I find it fascinating.

    I suppose it's simply that older people, not being used to this mass of information, are not ready to cope with the fact that most information is useless. Part of the ability to accept the input is the ability to filter the wheat from the chaff.

    I read slashdot several times a day, but I don't read every comment or every article. I read the ones that will be useful to me in some way. I'm connected to the net most of the time, but I ignore an incoming IM if I'm busy doing something else.

    People who aren't used to this environment have trouble ingoring things. You know the type. People who insist on answering the phone no matter how busy they are at that moment. People who check their email immediately whenever they reveive a "new mail" notification. These people can't cope with the available information, and are overwhelmed by it.

    --
    GeekNights!
    Late Night Radio for Geeks!
    1. Re:Older people by sphealey · · Score: 4, Insightful
      [...]The older generations, having grown up in a much slower-paced environment, have difficulty adapting to the rapid change in the information channels available to them.[...]I suppose it's simply that older people, not being used to this mass of information, are not ready to cope with the fact that most information is useless. Part of the ability to accept the input is the ability to filter the wheat from the chaff.[...]
      I suppose that is possible.

      However, speaking (sadly enough) as a member of the "older generation" who actually implmented some of the changes in technology and communication you discuss in the far-distant 1980s and 90s, let me offer this: I used to work in industrial facilities designed and built in the 1920-1940 time period. Along with my "young people", "progressive" coworkers I spent a lot of time, effort, and money "upgrading" these facilities to what we considered "better" technology. All fully computerized of course.

      Looking back on what we did, I now realize that those engineers from the 1940s were a lot smarter than we were, and thought about the problems they were assigned a lot more deeply than we did (you see this all the time in VoIP today). The "improvements" that we installed to replace that "archiac" technology were not, in retrospect, necessarily improvements, and may not have done anyone any good.

      E-mail is another good example. I have been using it since the late 1970s. During the 1985-1995 time frame it may have actually been a net productivity gain. Today? Probably the biggest productivity destroyer out there.

      Be careful what you wish for. You may get it.

      sPh

    2. Re:Older people by orac2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ind it interesting that, at least in the studies I've read about this, that it affects mostly adults, and younger people are largely immune to it.

      Hmm, first, which studies?

      Secondly, and more to the point, "younger people are largely immune to it" so far. Youth implies a shorter exposure to the hazards of multitasking, not neccesarily a greater inherent resistance to it's ill effects.

      In fact, Human Resource departments and therapists are seeing more and more people are burning out in their mid-twenties. Stress releated conditions, such as ulcers, hypertension, etc, normally seen in middle age, are becoming increasingly common in younger and younger individuals.

      So you can't state "younger people are largely immune" until you have actually seen them grow older without ill effect, and the early evidence is not on your side.

      suppose it's simply that older people, not being used to this mass of information

      It's been decades since an average person could first easily recieve vastly more information in a day than they could ever process. (For an interesting historical sidetrip, look up the 19th century origins of the hypothysised medical condition "neurasthesia," attributed to the prevalance of the telegraph and telephone and how they sped up the pace of life. Even if neurasthesia is a bogus condition, it tells you something about how long information overload has been an issue.) Don't fall victim to an intellectual version of the same "immortality syndrome" that convinces teenagers they can engage in any reckless physical behavior they choose, because they, unlike all the old people, will never die.

      --
      "Just once, I'd like to meet an alien menace that wasn't immune to bullets." -- The Brigadier, Dr. Who
  15. Single Mothers by NotYourMother · · Score: 3, Funny

    Have been effectively multitasking for years. Unless of course they are addicted to crack.

    --
    My cup is empty , I am bereft, my coffee, my sanity, I have none left.
  16. I learned multitasking with Dune2 by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you knew how to manage your base while fighting, you would be more effective in battle. This carried over to Starcraft and Warcraft3 where I was vastly superior to other players. Its critical to multitask in games like that, but its helped me learn how to multitask other things.

    One thing multitasking isn't good for is programming complex things while doing other things. When we're programming, we need to use our memory to keep track of all the variables and threads going on. If we start doing others things, we can be distracted because our brain has trouble with the memory and it impairs our coding.

    Another thing that's not good to multitask is driving with a cell phone. If you get too caught up in the conversation, your attention can be diverted from the road. You can normally drive like a zombie, but in times of emergency response you could be screwed. Also if someone does something stupid to cause a wreck, people may blame your cell phone even if you weren't at fault.

  17. I don't see how this applies to Slashdot readers by Mr.+Cancelled · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not like we read the stories...

    Just look at the comments people leave. It's pretty obvious that the average Slashdotters attention span is about that of a -Oh look a bunny!

  18. Depends on the kind of work by asliarun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think the article is generalizing too much. Firstly, multi-tasking is the wrong word to use as we're not simultaneously doing two or more activities, but are doing it in a round-robin, pre-emptive, or time-sharing kind of way. Again, one's ability to successfully pull this off depends on one's temperament, prioritization ability, and the kind of work involved. Repetitive work can easily be done in this way, for example, simply because after sufficient practise, the work itself becomes mechanical and doesn't need any cognitive ability. On the other hand, work that requires genuine thinking effort is done best without interruption, especially when one is in the "flow" or "zone". Again, if a person has the mental discipline to ignore other interruptions or re-priorotize the distractions, it's not too much of a problem.

    In another vein, we've always had distractions, and the ones posed by technology are just a new form of it. What separates an efficient individual from an inefficient one is the ability to block out these distractions when needed, and only focus on the goal at hand. The rest is all FUD that these so-called cognitive experts throw in to justify their existence. I'm fedup of these experts extrapolating some extreme cases and generalizing them to create non-existent issues.

    Cognitive overload. Bah. We've always had cognitive overload. Only the jingo is new. I think i should change my profession and start bullshitting my way into some real money.

  19. I'm looking for a new job because of this by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've told management: "I don't want to run an instant messenger, it hurts my productivity and is very stressful"

    They replied: "It's the way we're doing business as a team"

    Now I'm looking for a job elsewhere, because exactly as described in the article, I'm exhausted at the end of the day, I have a backlog of projects like you wouldn't imagine, it's stupid.

    I've found myself reluctant to focus on complex tasks because I expect to be interrupted. Interruptions from instant messaging are often emergencies which occupy a whole day with stupid little updates and inappropriate prioritization. It seems the A-hole bugging you on IM is more important than the person silently and patiently waiting for the scheduled deadline.

    I forget things, I can't read a document to completion or properly compose replies to email. Infact... right now, I'm avoiding a complex task... my IM will crackle to life any second with some stupid emergency. It feels futile to even get started when it takes an hour just to set things up to start working on it. Four times in the past two weeks, my instant messenger has dragged me into some emergency which has prevented me from working on it.

    I'm trying to push management back to a usenet-style system for "I need help!" emergencies and a careful analysis of timelines and responsibility (i.e. fault and impact) before anyone picks up a phone. There's nothing wrong with interrupting people if there's an emergency, but management should be able to prevent it from reaching that point.

    (Hey look, I got an instant message! and it should only take about two hours to deal with. Glad I didn't get started on that project.)

  20. RTFA (You Are A Crack Addict) by Seekerofknowledge · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you had RTFA you would know that you are a dellusioned individual. You "WANT to" because you are addicted to the dopamine that is released each time you learn "new stuff" or "expand [your] understanding of the world".

    Tell me, do you feel down, or groggy, or in any way sad, when you do not monitor your couple of dozen sites? What happens when you go for a day or two without internet access? These would be withdrawal symptoms.

    So, you show a prime example of the problem -- no, in fact your are the very epidome. You think you are using every conceivable second of your life to the fullest. You have this push to experience everything immediately and constantly. But for what reason? Why do they have to all occur simultaneously? More importantly, how did you come about the decision that doing only one thing at a time is "complete waste of precious time"!?

    Logically following your views to their conclusion would mean that the moment you focus on anything it becomes a waste of time. This is so absolutely flawed, I am now speechless.

    Please take an objective view of yourself, and discover what your motives (if any) are for feeling the way you do. Then please respond and tell me how they are not in any way related to your dopamine addiction.

    1. Re:RTFA (You Are A Crack Addict) by Twanfox · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Here's a few reasons why multitasking is generally necessary for some aspects of life:

      1) 24 hours in the day, approx 8 of which are downtime/sleep. Most of us also portion out 9 or so to earning our keep, and a couple hours get lost due to necessary evils (travel, taking a breather, movement in general). That usually leaves about 5 hours of time during which you can do your own thing. You can push that figure upwards (scrape off hours of sleep, skip work, arrange things so that your wasted couple of hours are more like 30 minutes). However, when you think about it, 5 hours really isn't that long a time to do much during the week.

      2) Multiple interests. Myself, I love to play music (piano, clarinet, guitar -- still learning the last one), play video games (PC, PS2), program applications, maintain my network, watch some TV shows, etc. Not the least of those interests is keeping up with friends and going out to do things with them. Now, of course there is the whole 'priority' thing going on here of which I want to do more, but regardless, the list is fairly expansive.

      These two things lead to a problem. How do I do as many things as I want to do in the limited time that I have available? It's true that my 'weekday' listing only allows roughly 5 hours of free time to myself, and that it ignores the roughly 14 hours I get on a weekend day, it still shows that the time that I have available to me to do all the things I want to do is limited. Some things take more time than I can allow for on a weekday. Some things that I want to do are low priority because they're new and atypical, yet I still really want to do them.

      This can be summed up very easily in a bastardized phrase I learned from Economics. Limited Resources for Unlimited Wants. I want to do far more than I have time for, if I were to do them back to back. As some of those wants are even time dependant (keeping up with friends is a good one for that), if those are not done, then the opportunity is lost. The only answer that I can come up with is multitasking. Be it combining tasks into one (a simple method) or doing multiple tasks at once (true multitasking), that seems to me to be the only way to attend to as many of the wants as I can for the given time period.

      Even with multitasking, I know I will not have time for everything I want to do, but at least I will be able to do more of them and not miss out on time-dependant tasks. I personally do not see this view as delusional or logically flawed. My approach to the problem may be different than the one you may choose, but it is still valid.

      P.S. Dispite being a different individual than the parent of your post, while doing one thing at a time is not (to me) a 'complete waste of precious time', it is not using that time to it's fullest, either. If you have the capacity to do multiple things at once, and you do not do that, it can be viewed as wasting time.

  21. Donald Knuth knows this by ssclift · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm reminded of a note on Dr. Donald Knuth's web page. Dr. Knuth apparently ditched e-mail in 1990 after 15 years of use.

    Email is a wonderful thing for people whose role in life is to be on top of things. But not for me; my role is to be on the bottom of things. What I do takes long hours of studying and uninterruptible concentration.

  22. My ADD son told me this joke... by rah1420 · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... which was published in the October Readers' Digest.

    Q: "How many ADD kids does it take to change a lightbulb?"

    A: "Let's go ride bikes."

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
  23. Terminal Ennui by chip+of+known+space · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have something better: Terminal Ennui . There's cognitive overload, but that's not the real problem. The real problem today is that because of cognitive overload, we're made too objectively aware of the world. The traditional motivation to struggle to become the best at something is basically short-circuited today, as well can instantly see not only many other people doing the same things we're doing, but maybe better. Or, we can all too well see it having *already been done*. Leaving the sensation that there's no point in trying to do much of anything at all. Cognitive overload is just a precursor. Terminal ennui.

  24. Re:Neoliberal Tyranny of Enforced Competition by lamz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When our technological dreams began becoming reality, some pundits predicted we would be swamped by leisure time. That didn't happen. We're working longer and harder, and seem more stressed over downsizing and outsourcing and expectations than ever.

    But why should that be so? The answer is not "globalization", which is just the latest leftist term for "capitalism." (I guess "neo-liberal" is an even newer term, since this is the first time I've seen it used.) The answer is much simpler: taxes. All productivity gains, and then some, are eaten up by excessive taxation.

    In Canada, almost 50% of every dollar we make goes to the government. (The U.S. is in a similar, although slightly better, situation.)

    It's simple math that explains why families changed from single-parent earners to double-parent earners. If you take away half of a family's income, then twice as many people in that family have to work. (Theoretically, one person could work twice as many hours, or get paid twice as much, but those alternate solutions are very unlikely.)

    Stop blaming Wal-Mart, Boeing, McDonalds, etc. for the problems that are actually caused by the government, and we can start finding actual solutions to our problems.

    --

    Mike van Lammeren
    It will challenge your head, your brain, and your mind.