The Mere Presence of Your Smartphone Reduces Brain Power, Study Shows (utexas.edu)

An anonymous reader shares a study: Your cognitive capacity is significantly reduced when your smartphone is within reach -- even if it's off. That's the takeaway finding from a new study from the McCombs School of Business at The University of Texas at Austin. McCombs Assistant Professor Adrian Ward and co-authors conducted experiments with nearly 800 smartphone users in an attempt to measure, for the first time, how well people can complete tasks when they have their smartphones nearby even when they're not using them. In one experiment, the researchers asked study participants to sit at a computer and take a series of tests that required full concentration in order to score well. The tests were geared to measure participants' available cognitive capacity -- that is, the brain's ability to hold and process data at any given time. Before beginning, participants were randomly instructed to place their smartphones either on the desk face down, in their pocket or personal bag, or in another room. All participants were instructed to turn their phones to silent. The researchers found that participants with their phones in another room significantly outperformed those with their phones on the desk, and they also slightly outperformed those participants who had kept their phones in a pocket or bag.

Comments

Totally Anecdotal But...

[MightyMartian]

I can see how your smartphone represents a significant distraction. I'm working towards my Bachelors right now, and had to do a math course, never my strongest suit. I found having my smartphone nearby really did represent a kind of a distraction. The temptation when working on a hard problem was to check my texts or my emails, and so long as that damned smartphone was within easy reach I'd often give into temptation. In the end I'd either leave it in the bedroom, or go into the office in the evening without it and work out of the meeting room without even a computer nearby. Particularly for the last couple of courses I've basically sequestered myself away with printed copies of assignments and the textbooks for the purposes of studying for my final, using pen and paper to write out notes and definitions.

Re:Totally Anecdotal But...

[TWX]

It's a similar problem with general-purpose computers in education settings like schools. That general-purpose computer is capable of doing thouands of things, only one of which is the assignment at-hand. This is compounded by the experience of using the computer being similar-to or the same-as using one's personal computer for entertainment.

I have a feeling that down the road, those with self-discipline to stay on-task despite the extremely easy opportunity for distraction will generally rise farther and faster than those that are easily distracted or otherwise can't stay on-task.

Re:Totally Anecdotal But...

[Njorthbiatr]

Not really.

Two things to keep in mind when you interpret the results of this study:

1) the participants were undergraduates.
2) the reward involved was credit.

Your exclusion set is people older or younger than the university and those who would participate in a study for college credit. This may have a notable impact on the validity of the study, since those who don't need or care about the credit are most likely those who are studious and resistant to distractions, while those who would go out of their way to participate are more likely the type to need/want the credit.

Re:Totally Anecdotal But...

[aNonnyMouseCowered]

Doesn't your smarthone have an airplane mode? I keep my gadgets close at hand. I have them loaded with a bunch of offline apps, including an offline copy of Wikipedia and Wiktionary and the usual calculator and document viewer. You can be the master not the slave of your gadgets, if you know how to limit or restrict them, disabling features you don't really or currently need. If you're studying for an exam, constant net access and Facebook are one of those.

Re:Totally Anecdotal But...

[gweihir]

Well, this is not really new. Back when I did my Calculus and Linear Algebra exam preparation, I basically borrowed my parent's basement so I did not have easy access to my computer (C64 at that time, gives you a hint how old I am). This allowed me to work long stretches on the proofs and exercises without distraction. Cot stuff that really needs your mind to be all present, you need to get away from your electronic gadgets. These days, I use a whiteboard when faced with such tasks, standing before it does provides enough distance and standing is good for thinking anyways.

Is this something like Johnny Mnemonic

[the_skywise]

Where my smartphone is secretly using my brain for memory storage?

I could not read any further ...

[angel'o'sphere]

The tests were geared to measure participants' available cognitive capacity -- that is, the brain's ability to hold and process data at any given time.
Because I realized my cell phone is not even in reach ... hurrying home now.
PANICK!

Hollow vindication

[WolfgangVL]

While I've been arguing this very thing for years, I think this is such a hard thing to measure...I imagine smartphones in your pockets and such has about the same impact on general mental tasks as an opened window, or the school band practicing in the next room, or proximity to a personal attraction, etc...

Did the people running the study have phones in THEIR pockets?

Should have had the participants remember a few new phone numbers on the spot, or drive someplace new with just good directions; or write them for somebody else, or answer a few general knowledge questions from memory, or one of the many other basic things that smartphones do so well as to have become a crutch.

I would love to see more advanced studies on this topic.

I feel so totally vindicated right now

[Rick Schumann]

Aside from not owning or wanting a smartphone myself for a whole list of reasons, I've been saying that they're just making people dumber. Now someone has proof. :-)

A riff on known multitasking studies?

[enjar]

For ages, studies of "multitasking" have shown that there is a "context switching" cost that is non-trivial for the human brain to try and do two things at once, even simple tasks, such as "write numbers 1 through 26 and write the alphabet out". People who do numbers then alphabet (1..26 then A-Z) complete before people who try to interleave the tasks (1 ... A, 2. .. B). Work organization schemes like Getting Things Done encourage turning off notifiers for new email, or batching email responses, or turning off IM clients in order to get through tasks. Then, of course, there's the whole example of getting into the "flow zone", which is important for working on complex problems -- try debugging code with a bored and hungry toddler in the same room. It's also painfully obvious when you try to have a conversation with someone who keeps looking at their phone that they aren't "all present".

So to sum up, unsurprising results. Having a distraction generating machine close at hand is going to end up with more interruptions and less ability to concentrate on anything worth concentrating on, e.g. http://heeris.id.au/2013/this-...

Re:Control group?

[ancientt]

There should be some sort of test for this kind of thing. Questions like:
Does it bother you when you see in public
A. Someone talking on their phone
B. Someone looking at their phone
C. Someone who probably has a phone
D. Someone

Re:crap study

[gweihir]

It is. Problem is there is a hardcore faction that does it really well, but has almost no "flashy" results. And then there is a "soft science" faction that gets almost all press time. In addition, many people mistake fuzzyness for lack of scientific rigor. That is not true, it just becomes harder to understand the results.