Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Study Finds Technology Hurting Attention Spans
jones_supa writes: Conducting both surveys and EEG scans, Microsoft has published a study suggesting that the average attention span has fallen precipitously since the start of the century. While people could focus on a task for 12 seconds back in 2000, that figure dropped to 8 seconds in 2013 (about one second less than a goldfish). Reportedly, a lot of that reduction stems from a combination of smartphones and an avalanche of content. The study found also a sunny side: while presence of technology is hurting attention spans overall, it also appears to improve person's abilities to both multitask and concentrate in short bursts.
when?
I blame Microsoft Internet Explorer. The timing lines up perfectly.
I have a really cleaver proof that this is not possible, which regrettably does not fit within this 8 seconds to typ
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
As in "the ability to do 5 things in parallel with crappier results than doing 5 things sequentially."
Multitasking efficiently and effectively is a myth.
What kind of goldfish? An African one, or a European? Or a demented goldfish living in a bowl of cheap tequila?
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
I like how this study is coming from the perpetrator of Metro tiles being foisted on anything and everything Microsoft (the non-touchscreen Windows OS, XBox, even Microsoft support websites, to a certain extent).
Oh, but the upside is that we're better multitaskers... very slightly, since we're so accustomed to seeing about 55 different tiles with two-word captions and stock image tile backgrounds. Unfortunately, that counts very little, as it doesn't make up for the depth one can reach with dedicated concentration on a single topic at a time.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
What was the question?
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
That seems to be in agreement with ... oh look! A squirrel! That can't be a kitty cat doing that?
I need to read the article, but it seems like 12 seconds is really, really short, let alone 8 seconds.
Seriously? People can't concentrate for more than 12 seconds?
I feel very stongly about
oh wait, shiny thing !
This is my opinion based on what little I know and understand of the rumors and lies Thanks, Randal
Makes me wonder how I managed a 16 hour surgery the other day without ever getting bored or distracted (kind of hard to do when the patient is trying so hard to die on your table). I guess that sort of thing is not accounted for in terms of length of attention span, or if it is, then god help us because between the anesthesiologist, my colleague, myself and the instrument nurse I think we skewed the average for the year and the "real" value is on the order of a second or so...
Seriously this kind of study is just BS, a make believe study designed to prove some particular point or other the marketing department wants to make. I'll wait for the peer reviewed version (and even then I'll reserve judgement).
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
I can't even remember the last time it was discussed here
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
You know this sort of thing... wait pop up, OK now where was I? oh yeah this sort of ... wait IM...
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
TL;DR
Binky
I think I saw this story already.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Technology has switched the child mind from being content with getting an answer in one day, to getting the answer in one minute, but on the other hand it allows children to focus there interests more in depth at certain areas and focus into them. For instance if a child like to program, then you'll notice they'll have a great attention span well they program. Where as a child into music would have there attention span put towards that. I wouldn't say that technology has shortened the attention span of children, it's merely refocused from a broad horizon down to more narrow sight lines.
Not a what or a when, but a note to the webmasters ...
Now that the human beings' attention span is one second less than that of the goldfish, you have to choices left -
1. Re-design your site so that it can attract the attention of the visitors in less than 8 seconds
...
... or
2. Dedicate your site to the goldfish
... they want us to pay more attention to them.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
[swims back and forth] "click." TFA here I come. Don't tell anyone.
[opens and closes mouth] Oh Gawd, it's Engadget [enables golly gee-whiz filter]
"...dropped to 8 seconds in 2013 -- about one second less than a goldfish"
Now that's... Huh? Sorry, I missed that. [eats a bubble]
"Thankfully, it's not all bad. While tech is hurting attention spans overall, it also..."
Yeah something good right? Not in the mood for good news. I'll click on something blue.
Oh it's the actual study! "Click". [swims back and forth] Oops, advertising.microsoft.com? Hello.
It's about Canadians. [spits out bubble] That's nice. What a nice couple.
[something something] "and where the true scarce commodity is increasingly human attention"
Glad I'm a goldfish then. We're still not at the research report yet. "Click." Oops, a dialog.
"Download the Canadian attention spans research report (2.0M)
Download the infographic (173K)"
Now why would I just want to get the infographic...? Oh!
I get it! THIS IS the attention span test! "Click: the report"
[plays on bubble Ferris wheel as PDF loads]
That woman is either taking a picture or is trying to scroll text by moving the computer up and down.
She had to stand up to scroll to the top of the page. License plate "71"?. Hmmm. [scroll]
"Think digital is killing attention spans? Think again."
I read this twice, so my opinion is back to what it originally was.
[yadda yadda] "Good news! It's not as bad as you think."
[continuous sirens in the distance] Tornado warning! [rain/branches beat on window]
Maybe it IS as bad as I think. [wind shrieks] Confound this nuisance. [lightning strikes!]
[Power goes out] [minutes pass] [sirens stop] [power comes on]
"AMI BIOS" "Select profile" "Welcome" "starting wlnotify.dll"
[sleeps with eyes wide open CLICK HERE FOR IMPORTANT INFO ]
[open browser] [access slashdot] "Welcome to AT&T (The Fucking Modem)" What the fuck.
[looks at lights] DSL not up. It's NAT-ting my browser traffic to itself. F'king UVERSE.
"Click to run diagnostics." Okay. Click. "Enter modem access code." FUCK.
[fortunately fishbowl is next to modem and curvature magnifies tiny sticker] [enters 10 digit number]
"Ethernet/DSL/PTM: Pass Authentication:Fail" Their computer rebooting after 10 minutes?
I thought nothing was slower than XP. [5 minutes pass] [reload] "Authentication: Pass"
[tabs remembered by voodoo magick] First thing that's gone right. [glances up]
MUSICAL SOUNDTRACK BEGINS FUCK! OH NOOOOOOOOES!
(every icon next to every browser tab has been replaced by an AT&T DEATHSTAR logo.
the only reason this is not in all caps is slashdot's lameness filter. shhhh. don't wake up the lameness filter)
On no, AT&T Is in my mind. I can feel it. Do I have NATty favicon corruption?
[warily, with nervous dread} "192.168.1.254/favicon.ico" [ENTER] [hideous 32x32 AT&T icon fills screen]
[exit viewer] NOO! What brain-dead thweep would serve favicon from a NAT-redirected router?
[slaps Firefox around] It's all your fault! I should downgrade you to 1992! Favicon support!
[AT&T logo still icon on all tabbed sites] THAT LOGO, it keeps winking and blinking at me! I'm insane!
[thrashes about, bumps on glass] Do we have a potion for this? Yesss. A potion [rustles about in bubble castle]
[opens js console]
var fS = Components.classes["@mozilla.org/browser/favicon-service;1"].getService(Components.interfaces.nsIFaviconService);
[squeak] (have old js console it always squeaks)
fS.expireAllFavicons(); [squeak]
[whoosh!] [all icons missing] Already, an
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
Did you post this during the surgery? Ultimate example of multitasking (or recklessness).
No, you don't understand. This study is the run-up point to draft legislation that will pour Ritalin into the nations water supply. Fluoridation set the precedent.
I know which stock I will be purchasing tomorrow.
Your attention span has been altered by your precious bodily fluids being polluted by the Commies. Here is proof of the conspiracy! remember to deny your essence to women, then your attention span will return to normal. Naturally if you are using computer to stimulate your senses all bets are off. As far as Ritalin is concerned it can easily be replaced by an XBOX in every living room a cell phone in every pocket and thousands of true believers walking down the street playing this
This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
Microsoft is doing the study.....Uh (checking facebook)... Nevermind.
BSD?
Certainly not, but perhaps low adoption rate of BSD and Linux on the desktop indicates that the average computer user does not have the attention span necessary to use real operating systems. Thus you have finger painting kindergarten software and OSes like Win8, Android and IOS dominating a market of consumers with lower attention spans than Goldfish. Most of whom could be out classed running Linux or BSD by a trained Rhesus Macaque or properly trained PE teacher for that matter!
This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
You seem to be a doctor, and not a bad one, and I wouldn't mind you being the doctor to operate on me (god willing, as few operations as possible, better zero needed during my life span),
but I would on the other hand not want you to be one of my co-scientists in a research project. Because 'attention span' in this context is not the notion that you operate for 8 seconds only before you fiddle with the nurse's lower back for 8 seconds, look out of the window for eight seconds, think of your wife for eight seconds, and so forth.
Of course, we all can attend to things for much longer. What is meant is the time you spent looking at the dailies shown in the shop of your clinic, finding out what the headlines were, and decide if you wanted to buy one. 8 seconds. And that blonde nurse in the elevator that you never saw before, could she spontaneously be the object of your desire? 8 seconds. Reading this post of mine:
You seem to be a doctor, and not a bad one, and I wouldn't mind you being the doctor to operate on me (god willing, as few operations as possible, better zero needed during my life span),
but I would on the other hand not want you to be one of my co-scientists in a research project. Because 'attention span' in this context is not the notion that you operate for 8 seconds only before you fiddle with the nurse's lower back for 8 seconds, look out of the window for eight seconds, think of your wife for eight seconds, and so forth.
Of course, we all can attend to things for
8 seconds
This could be the right conclusion. It's hard to tell from the paper itself, which is a bit light in experimental detail; and it comes with an 'executive summary' which is even lighter still, and referenced by articles which have almost no content left. Maybe it is an inevitable reaction of the users to the torrent of fractal summaries of summaries we get today.
Could Microsoft's "popup dialogue" windows and being forced to reboot in the middle of work be a factor?
I suspect this is a lot to do with the definition of task. When I switch to FTP or e-mail at work, it's because that's part of the job I'm doing, not to do something wholly unrelated.
In a classic Unix system, a 'task' might mean three or four programs piped together for each command.
So Microsoft is saying that if they were better at writing software, my attention span would be better? Because I blame all the workflows interrupted by a blue screen... Shit, just saw one yesterday. Apparently running Firefox, Chrome, and a DX11 game at the same time is a bit hard on the nvidia driver. It doesn't crash immediately, just randomly.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
How this fits in with their "Anyone can learn to code" initiatives.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I got as far as "Microsoft Study..." and lost interest.
I need to read the article, but it seems like 12 seconds is really, really short, let alone 8 seconds.
Is it just me, or did anyone actually look at the original Microsoft report and find it nearly impossible to read efficiently? It's over 50 pages of "infographic" nonsense, with too many random distractions -- changes in font size, colors, random meaningless clip art, etc. It seems to be structured to be "skimmable," but it's not. It's like a really bad Powerpoint presentation with way too many words and too many details, all dressed up in wacky graphics and colors.
I kept waiting to find out what the methodology was, e.g., how they determined the "8 seconds" thing or whatever. It's still not clear to me, though the closest they get to explaining methodology is buried in a 2-page appendix at the very end.
This kind of layout would be great for a document that effectively summarized information in a couple pages. It doesn't work AT ALL for a 50-page document.
If this were an actual published research study in a journal, I could have read a report that would probably take up 2 or 3 pages and give me a much more useful and organized summary. As it is, I couldn't even figure out enough information from the report to evaluate whether the methodology actually makes sense or could lead to any of the (supposed) conclusions. The kind of tests they did and how they interpreted these things were grouped into three different kinds of attention (given very broad terms whose relationship to the tasks is questionable), which all were then applied to various other ideas in seemingly arbitrary ways. It all reeks of marketing BS.
TL;DR: This report is TL;PO;HS;BM (i.e., "too long; poorly organized; highly suspect; [likely] bogus methodology," or, in a less charitable light: "too long piece of horse-sh*t bowel movement").
> Makes me wonder how I managed a 16 hour surgery the other day without ever getting bored or distracted (kind of hard to do when the patient is trying so hard to die on your table).
Clearly, without your patient's help in keeping you focused, you would have gotten distracted and wandered away from the OP after seeing a squirrel in the window :-).
Seriously, you know enough Statistics to know that your circumstance does not make a case against the study in any way, even if it was a comparable task. Your surgery task is a compound, concurrently distributed team task. It is not anything like the candidate tasks under consideration in this study. You don't need to have special powers of concentration to not be distracted in a surgery (at least no more than passing boards).
Microsoft will be pre-installing Candy Crush Saga to help people, well, focus... I guess...
you would have gotten distracted and wandered away from the OP
Kind of like the esophagus did... the trick was finding it again.
As for your second paragraph - I know. I was bored and I felt like posting. It was a... long day.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Lol no, but seriously I could tell you stories... One hospital I worked at had to go so far as to outright ban cell phones in the OR...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Seriously, avoid nurses. It might make for fine sexual tension on medical shows but if you want your life at the hospital to become a living hell, get involved with a nurse. They are valued team members (most of them) and indispensable (most of them) and you never poo where you eat. The hospital is no place for shenanigans, our patients deserve better.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
I've never had a problem with att--, oh look, a squirrel!
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.