Why Overheard Cell Phone Chats Are Annoying

__roo writes "American researchers think they have found the answer to the question of why overhearing cell phone chats are annoying. According to scientists at Cornell University, when only half of the conversation is overheard, it drains more attention and concentration than when overhearing two people talking. According to one researcher, 'We have less control to move away our attention from half a conversation (or halfalogue) than when listening to a dialogue. Since halfalogues really are more distracting and you can't tune them out, this could explain why people are irritated.' Their study will be published in the journal Psychological Science."

Comments

It couldn't possibly be because

[sh00z]

people talk so damn loud on their cell phones, could it?

Re:It couldn't possibly be because

[thrawn_aj]

Pointing out a fact isn't racist, kid.

Pointing out a behaviour difference, by race, is.

Wrong again. Political correctness run amok. I weep for our future. Racism: definition. Racism is (among other things), believing that the race is responsible for the behavior. Correlation is not causation. I was pointing out a correlation. You will note that I mentioned ethnicity as another aspect (from what I've seen, it tends to be even more important).

It's demanding that something be done about it that might slip into racism. Besides, how do you know I'm not talking about my own race?

I think you mistake "racism" with "hating other races".

My mistake was falling for your accusatory tone and getting defensive. Shows how institutionalized this crap has become.

If you took the time to learn about other cultures,

You didn't speak of culture, you spoke of race. Had you replaced race by culture, I'd have agreed with you.

Sure I did. That's what "ethnicity" implies. Of course, hyper-sensitive language sanitizers like you seem to have mastered the art of selective text comprehension. I will admit though that I didn't think it through well enough and that since actual genetic differences (which is, as I now understand it, the only meaning of race) obviously aren't relevant in this matter, any correlations aren't really all that significant either. There should exist at least the possibility of causation before a correlation should be emphasized. Ethnicity would have fully covered the matter and, not unimportantly, saved me from this foolishness.

Sadly, while a perceived mistake (even on /.) is usually called out as such and I usually (I hope) concede and correct it, in this case, you read through a wall of text, saw the word 'racial' and puked a crude little accusation in quite a trollish manner. Excellent job.

If I hadn't stated the non-white disclaimer, there would have been a dozen trolls like this.

Because many people mistake racism with "white people's prejudices against black people".

Well, at least you don't make obvious mistake. There's hope yet (though not too much).

Re:interesting research

[BasilBrush]

But who says your personal preferences outweigh those of another?

It's not a one to one trade off. It's more like one person enjoying the phone call, 30 people being annoyed by it. It's just plain rude.

Re:Hemilogue

[asylumx]

Yeah, I think this is a classic case of a malamanteau.

Re:Paying researchers

[enjerth]

I knew it, I'll go one bit further than their study goes. It's because your mind tries to fill the gaps in the conversation. It's not simply because you only hear one side of the conversation that it disrupts your concentration, but specifically, your mind is busy trying to imagine what's going on on the other end of the call.

Re:Common sense..

[Redlazer]

Which completely and totally removes any and all need to do a study.

If only they would have asked you first.