[acb-hsp] Hooked on Gadgets, and Paying a Price

[dchandler001]

Excellent article.  I'm thinking about removing our cable because my 
daughter spends too much time watching it.  Deb
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "peter altschul" <paltschul at centurytel.net>
To: "Acbhsp" <acb-hsp at acb.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 5:33 AM
Subject: [acb-hsp] Hooked on Gadgets, and Paying a Price


> New York Times
>  June 6, 2010
>  Hooked on Gadgets, and Paying a Mental Price
>  By MATT RICHTEL
>  SAN FRANCISCO -- When one of the most important e-mail messages of his 
> life
> landed in his in-box a few years ago, Kord Campbell overlooked it.
>  Not just for a day or two, but 12 days.  He finally saw it while sifting 
> through
> old messages: a big company wanted to buy his Internet start-up.
>  "I stood up from my desk and said, `Oh my God, oh my God, oh my God,`" 
> Mr.
>  Campbell said.  "It's kind of hard to miss an e-mail like that, but I 
> did."
>  The message had slipped by him amid an electronic flood: two computer 
> screens
> alive with e-mail, instant messages, online chats, a Web browser and the
> computer code he was writing.
>  While he managed to salvage the $1.3 million deal after apologizing to 
> his
> suitor, Mr.  Campbell continues to struggle with the effects of the deluge 
> of
> data.  Even after he unplugs, he craves the stimulation he gets from his
> electronic gadgets.  He forgets things like dinner plans, and he has 
> trouble
> focusing on his family.
>  His wife, Brenda, complains, "It seems like he can no longer be fully in 
> the
> moment."
>  This is your brain on computers.
>  Scientists say juggling e-mail, phone calls and other incoming 
> information can
> change how people think and behave.  They say our ability to focus is 
> being
> undermined by bursts of information.
>  These play to a primitive impulse to respond to immediate opportunities 
> and
> threats.  The stimulation provokes excitement -- a dopamine squirt -- that
> researchers say can be addictive.  In its absence, people feel bored.
>  The resulting distractions can have deadly consequences, as when
> cellphone-wielding drivers and train engineers cause wrecks.  And for 
> millions of
> people like Mr.  Campbell, these urges can inflict nicks and cuts on 
> creativity
> and deep thought, interrupting work and family life.
>  While many people say multitasking makes them more productive, research 
> shows
> otherwise.  Heavy multitaskers actually have more trouble focusing and 
> shutting
> out irrelevant information, scientists say, and they experience more 
> stress.
>  And scientists are discovering that even after the multitasking ends, 
> fractured
> thinking and lack of focus persist.  In other words, this is also your 
> brain off
> computers.
>  "The technology is rewiring our brains," said Nora Volkow, director of 
> the
> National Institute of Drug Abuse and one of the world's leading brain
> scientists.  She and other researchers compare the lure of digital 
> stimulation
> less to that of drugs and alcohol than to food and sex, which are 
> essential but
> counterproductive in excess.
>  Technology use can benefit the brain in some ways, researchers say. 
> Imaging
> studies show the brains of Internet users become more efficient at finding
> information.  And players of some video games develop better visual 
> acuity.
>  More broadly, cellphones and computers have transformed life.  They let 
> people
> escape their cubicles and work anywhere.  They shrink distances and handle
> countless mundane tasks, freeing up time for more exciting pursuits.
>  For better or worse, the consumption of media, as varied as e-mail and 
> TV, has
> exploded.  In 2008, people consumed three times as much information each 
> day as
> they did in 1960.  And they are constantly shifting their attention. 
> Computer
> users at work change windows or check e-mail or other programs nearly 37 
> times
> an hour, new research shows.
>  The nonstop interactivity is one of the most significant shifts ever in 
> the
> human environment, said Adam Gazzaley, a neuroscientist at the University 
> of
> California, San Francisco.
>  "We are exposing our brains to an environment and asking them to do 
> things we
> weren't necessarily evolved to do," he said.  "We know already there are
> consequences."
>  Mr.  Campbell, 43, came of age with the personal computer, and he is a 
> heavier
> user of technology than most.  But researchers say the habits and 
> struggles of
> Mr.  Campbell and his family typify what many experience -- and what many 
> more
> will, if trends continue.
>  For him, the tensions feel increasingly acute, and the effects harder to 
> shake.
>  The Campbells recently moved to California from Oklahoma to start a 
> software
> venture.  Mr.  Campbell's life revolves around computers.
>  He goes to sleep with a laptop or iPhone on his chest, and when he wakes, 
> he
> goes online.  He and Mrs.  Campbell, 39, head to the tidy kitchen in their
> four-bedroom hillside rental in Orinda, an affluent suburb of San 
> Francisco,
> where she makes breakfast and watches a TV news feed in the corner of the
> computer screen while he uses the rest of the monitor to check his e-mail.
>  Major spats have arisen because Mr.  Campbell escapes into video games 
> during
> tough emotional stretches.  On family vacations, he has trouble putting 
> down his
> devices.  When he rides the subway to San Francisco, he knows he will be 
> offline
> 221 seconds as the train goes through a tunnel.
>  Their 16-year-old son, Connor, tall and polite like his father, recently
> received his first Cbs, which his family blames on distraction from his 
> gadgets.
>  Their 8-year-old daughter, Lily, like her mother, playfully tells her 
> father
> that he favors technology over family.
>  "I would love for him to totally unplug, to be totally engaged," says 
> Mrs.
> Campbell, who adds that he becomes bcrotchety until he gets his fix." But 
> she
> would not try to force a change.
>  "He loves it.  Technology is part of the fabric of who he is," she says. 
> "If I
> hated technology, I'd be hating him, and a part of who my son is too."
>  Always On
> Mr.  Campbell, whose given name is Thomas, had an early start with 
> technology in
> Oklahoma City.  When he was in third grade, his parents bought him Pong, a 
> video
> game.  Then came a string of game consoles and PC's, which he learned to 
> program.
>  In high school, he balanced computers, basketball and a romance with 
> Brenda, a
> cheerleader with a gorgeous singing voice.  He studied too, with focus,
> uninterrupted by e-mail.  "I did my homework because I needed to get it 
> done," he
> said.  "I didn't have anything else to do."
>  He left college to help with a family business, then set up a lawn mowing
> service.  At night he would read, play video games, hang out with Brenda 
> and, as
> she remembers it, "talk a lot more."
>  In 1996, he started a successful Internet provider.  Then he built the 
> start-up
> that he sold for $1.3 million in 2003 to LookSmart, a search engine.
>  Mr.  Campbell loves the rush of modern life and keeping up with the 
> latest
> information.  "I want to be the first to hear when the aliens land," he 
> said,
> laughing.  But other times, he fantasizes about living in pioneer days 
> when
> things moved more slowly: "I can't keep everything in my head."
>  No wonder.  As he came of age, so did a new era of data and 
> communication.
>  At home, people consume 12 hours of media a day on average, when an hour 
> spent
> with, say, the Internet and TV simultaneously counts as two hours.  That 
> compares
> with five hours in 1960, say researchers at the University of California, 
> San
> Diego.  Computer users visit an average of 40 Web sites a day, according 
> to
> research by RescueTime, which offers time-management tools.
>  As computers have changed, so has the understanding of the human brain. 
> Until 15
> years ago, scientists thought the brain stopped developing after 
> childhood.  Now
> they understand that its neural networks continue to develop, influenced 
> by
> things like learning skills.
>  So not long after Eyal Ophir arrived at Stanford in 2004, he wondered 
> whether
> heavy multitasking might be leading to changes in a characteristic of the 
> brain
> long thought immutable: that humans can process only a single stream of
> information at a time.
>  Going back a half-century, tests had shown that the brain could barely 
> process
> two streams, and could not simultaneously make decisions about them.  But 
> Mr.
>  Ophir, a student-turned-researcher, thought multitaskers might be 
> rewiring
> themselves to handle the load.
>  His passion was personal.  He had spent seven years in Israeli 
> intelligence after
> being weeded out of the air force -- partly, he felt, because he was not a 
> good
> multitasker.  Could his brain be retrained?
>  Mr.  Ophir, like others around the country studying how technology bent 
> the
> brain, was startled by what he discovered.
>  The Myth of Multitasking
> The test subjects were divided into two groups: those classified as heavy
> multitaskers based on their answers to questions about how they used 
> technology,
> and those who were not.
>  In a test created by Mr.  Ophir and his colleagues, subjects at a 
> computer were
> briefly shown an image of red rectangles.  Then they saw a similar image 
> and were
> asked whether any of the rectangles had moved.  It was a simple task until 
> the
> addition of a twist: blue rectangles were added, and the subjects were 
> told to
> ignore them.  (Play a game testing how well you filter out distractions.)
> The multitaskers then did a significantly worse job than the 
> non-multitaskers at
> recognizing whether red rectangles had changed position.  In other words, 
> they
> had trouble filtering out the blue ones -- the irrelevant information.
>  So, too, the multitaskers took longer than non-multitaskers to switch 
> among
> tasks, like differentiating vowels from consonants and then odd from even
> numbers.  The multitaskers were shown to be less efficient at juggling 
> problems.
>  (Play a game testing how well you switch between tasks.)
> Other tests at Stanford, an important center for research in this 
> fast-growing
> field, showed multitaskers tended to search for new information rather 
> than
> accept a reward for putting older, more valuable information to work.
>  Researchers say these findings point to an interesting dynamic: 
> multitaskers
> seem more sensitive than non-multitaskers to incoming information.
>  The results also illustrate an age-old conflict in the brain, one that
> technology may be intensifying.  A portion of the brain acts as a control 
> tower,
> helping a person focus and set priorities.  More primitive parts of the 
> brain,
> like those that process sight and sound, demand that it pay attention to 
> new
> information, bombarding the control tower when they are stimulated.
>  Researchers say there is an evolutionary rationale for the pressure this 
> barrage
> puts on the brain.  The lower-brain functions alert humans to danger, like 
> a
> nearby lion, overriding goals like building a hut.  In the modern world, 
> the
> chime of incoming e-mail can override the goal of writing a business plan 
> or
> playing catch with the children.
>  "Throughout evolutionary history, a big surprise would get everyone's 
> brain
> thinking," said Clifford Nass, a communications professor at Stanford. 
> "But
> we've got a large and growing group of people who think the slightest hint 
> that
> something interesting might be going on is like catnip.  They can't ignore 
> it."
>  Mr.  Nass says the Stanford studies are important because they show
> multitasking's lingering effects: "The scary part for guys like Kord is, 
> they
> can't shut off their multitasking tendencies when they're not 
> multitasking."
>  Melina Uncapher, a neurobiologist on the Stanford team, said she and 
> other
> researchers were unsure whether the muddied multitaskers were simply prone 
> to
> distraction and would have had trouble focusing in any era.  But she added 
> that
> the idea that information overload causes distraction was supported by 
> more and
> more research.
>  A study at the University of California, Irvine, found that people 
> interrupted
> by e-mail reported significantly increased stress compared with those left 
> to
> focus.  Stress hormones have been shown to reduce short-term memory, said 
> Gary
> Small, a psychiatrist at the University of California, Los Angeles.
>  Preliminary research shows some people can more easily juggle multiple
> information streams.  These "supertaskers" represent less than 3 percent 
> of the
> population, according to scientists at the University of Utah.
>  Other research shows computer use has neurological advantages.  In 
> imaging
> studies, Dr.  Small observed that Internet users showed greater brain 
> activity
> than nonusers, suggesting they were growing their neural circuitry.
>  At the University of Rochester, researchers found that players of some
> fast-paced video games can track the movement of a third more objects on a
> screen than nonplayers.  They say the games can improve reaction and the 
> ability
> to pick out details amid clutter.
>  "In a sense, those games have a very strong both rehabilitative and 
> educational
> power," said the lead researcher, Daphne Bavelier, who is working with 
> others in
> the field to channel these changes into real-world benefits like safer 
> driving.
>  There is a vibrant debate among scientists over whether technology's 
> influence
> on behavior and the brain is good or bad, and how significant it is.
>  "The bottom line is, the brain is wired to adapt," said Steven Yantis, a
> professor of brain sciences at Johns Hopkins University.  "There's no 
> question
> that rewiring goes on all the time," he added.  But he said it was too 
> early to
> say whether the changes caused by technology were materially different 
> from
> others in the past.
>  Mr.  Ophir is loath to call the cognitive changes bad or good, though the 
> impact
> on analysis and creativity worries him.
>  He is not just worried about other people.  Shortly after he came to 
> Stanford, a
> professor thanked him for being the one student in class paying full 
> attention
> and not using a computer or phone.  But he recently began using an iPhone 
> and
> noticed a change; he felt its pull, even when playing with his daughter.
>  "The media is changing me," he said.  "I hear this internal ping that 
> says: check
> e-mail and voice mail." "I have to work to suppress it."
> Kord Campbell does not bother to suppress it, or no longer can.
>  Interrupted by a Corpse
> It is a Wednesday in April, and in 10 minutes, Mr.  Campbell has an online
> conference call that could determine the fate of his new venture, called 
> Loggly.
>  It makes software that helps companies understand the clicking and buying
> patterns of their online customers.
>  Mr.  Campbell and his colleagues, each working from a home office, are
> frantically trying to set up a program that will let them share images 
> with
> executives at their prospective partner.
>  But at the moment when Mr.  Campbell most needs to focus on that urgent 
> task,
> something else competes for his attention: "Man Found Dead Inside His 
> Business."
>  That is the tweet that appears on the left-most of Mr.  Campbell's array 
> of
> monitors, which he has expanded to three screens, at times adding a laptop 
> and
> an iPad.
>  On the left screen, Mr.  Campbell follows the tweets of 1,100 people, 
> along with
> instant messages and group chats.  The middle monitor displays a dark 
> field
> filled with computer code, along with Skype, a service that allows Mr. 
> Campbell
> to talk to his colleagues, sometimes using video.  The monitor on the 
> right keeps
> e-mail, a calendar, a Web browser and a music player.
>  Even with the meeting fast approaching, Mr.  Campbell cannot resist the 
> tweet
> about the corpse.  He clicks on the link in it, glances at the article and
> dismisses it.  "It's some article about something somewhere," he says, 
> annoyed by
> the ads for jeans popping up.
>  The program gets fixed, and the meeting turns out to be fruitful: the 
> partners
>>every ready to do business.  A colleague says via instant
> message: "YES."
>  Other times, Mr.  Campbell's information juggling has taken a more 
> serious toll.
>  A few weeks earlier, he once again overlooked an e-mail message from a
> prospective investor.  Another time, Mr.  Campbell signed the company up 
> for the
> wrong type of business account on Amazonddcom, costing $300 a month for 
> six
> months before he got around to correcting it.  He has burned hamburgers on 
> the
> grill, forgotten to pick up the children and lingered in the bathroom 
> playing
> video games on an iPhone.
>  Mr.  Campbell can be unaware of his own habits.  In a two-and-a-half hour 
> stretch
> one recent morning, he switched rapidly between e-mail and several other
> programs, according to data from RescueTime, which monitored his computer 
> use
> with his permission.  But when asked later what he was doing in that 
> period, Mr.
>  Campbell said he had been on a long Skype call, and "may have pulled up 
> an
> e-mail or two."
>  The kind of disconnection Mr.  Campbell experiences is not an entirely 
> new
> problem, of course.  As they did in earlier eras, people can become so 
> lost in
> work, hobbies or TV that they fail to pay attention to family.
>  Mr.  Campbell concedes that, even without technology, he may work or play
> obsessively, just as his father immersed himself in crossword puzzles. 
> But he
> says this era is different because he can multitask anyplace, anytime.
>  "Itbs a mixed blessing," he said.  "If you're not careful, your marriage 
> can fall
> apart or your kids can be ready to play and you'll get distracted."
>  The Toll on Children
> Father and son sit in armchairs.  Controllers in hand, they engage in a 
> fierce
> video game battle, displayed on the nearby flat-panel TV, as Lily watches.
>  They are playing Super Smash Bros.  Brawl, a cartoonish animated fight 
> between
> characters that battle using anvils, explosives and other weapons.
>  "Kill him, Dad," Lily screams.  To no avail.  Connor regularly beats his 
> father,
> prompting expletives and, once, a thrown pillow.  But there is bonding and 
> mutual
> respect.
>  "He's a lot more tactical," says Connor.  "But I'm really good at quick
> reflexes."
>  Screens big and small are central to the Campbell family's leisure time. 
> Connor
> and his mother relax while watching TV shows like "Heroes." Lily has an 
> iPod
> Touch, a portable DVD player and her own laptop, which she uses to watch 
> videos,
> listen to music and play games.
>  Lily, a second-grader, is allowed only an hour a day of unstructured 
> time, which
> she often spends with her devices.  The laptop can consume her.
>  "When she's on it, you can holler her name all day and she won't hear," 
> Mrs.
>  Campbell said.
>  Researchers worry that constant digital stimulation like this creates 
> attention
> problems for children with brains that are still developing, who already
> struggle to set priorities and resist impulses.
>  Connor's troubles started late last year.  He could not focus on 
> homework.  No
> wonder, perhaps.  On his bedroom desk sit two monitors, one with his music
> collection, one with Facebook and Reddit, a social site with news links 
> that he
> and his father love.  His iPhone availed him to relentless texting with 
> his
> girlfriend.
>  When he studied, "a little voice would be saying, `Look upb at the 
> computer, and
> I'd look up," Connor said.  "Normally, I'd say I want to only read for a 
> few
> minutes, but I'd search every corner of Reddit and then check Facebook."
> His Web browsing informs him.  "He's a fact hound," Mr.  Campbell brags. 
> "Connor
> is, other than programming, extremely technical.  He's 100 percent 
> Internet
> savvy."
>  But the parents worry too.  "Connor is obsessed," his mother said.  "Kord 
> says we
> have to teach him balance."
>  So in January, they held a family meeting.  Study time now takes place in 
> a group
> setting at the dinner table after everyone has finished eating.  It feels, 
> Mr.
>  Campbell says, like togetherness.
>  No Vacations
> For spring break, the family rented a cottage in Carmel, Calif.  Mrs. 
> Campbell
> hoped everyone would unplug.
>  But the day before they left, the iPad from Apple came out, and Mr. 
> Campbell
> snapped one up.  The next night, their first on vacation, "We didn't go 
> out to
> dinner," Mrs.  Campbell mourned.  "We just sat there on our devices."
>  She rallied the troops the next day to the aquarium.  Her husband joined 
> them for
> a bit but then begged out to do e-mail on his phone.
>  Later she found him playing video games.
>  The trip came as Mr.  Campbell was trying to raise several million 
> dollars for
> his new venture, a goal that he achieved.  Brenda said she understood that 
> his
> pursuit required intensity but was less understanding of the accompanying 
> surge
> in video game.
>  His behavior brought about a discussion between them.  Mrs.  Campbell 
> said he told
> her that he was capable of logging off, citing a trip to Hawaii several 
> years
> ago that they called their second honeymoon.
>  "What trip are you thinking about?" she said she asked him.  She recalled 
> that he
> had spent two hours a day online in the hotel's business center.
>  On Thursday, their fourth day in Carmel, Mr.  Campbell spent the day at 
> the beach
> with his family.  They flew a kite and played whiffle ball.
>  Connor unplugged too.  "It changes the mood of everything when everybody 
> is
> present," Mrs.  Campbell said.
>  The next day, the family drove home, and Mr.  Campbell disappeared into 
> his
> office.
>  Technology use is growing for Mrs.  Campbell as well.  She divides her 
> time
> between keeping the books of her husband's company, homemaking and working 
> at
> the school library.  She checks e-mail 25 times a day, sends texts and 
> uses
> Facebook.
>  Recently, she was baking peanut butter cookies for Teacher Appreciation 
> Day when
> her phone chimed in the living room.  She answered a text, then became 
> lost in
> Facebook, forgot about the cookies and burned them.  She started a new 
> batch, but
> heard the phone again, got lost in messaging, and burned those too.  Out 
> of
> ingredients and shamed, she bought cookies at the store.
>  She feels less focused and has trouble completing projects.  Some days, 
> she
> promises herself she will ignore her device.  "It's like a diet -- you 
> have good
> intentions in the morning and then you're like, `There went that,`" she 
> said.
>  Mr.  Nass at Stanford thinks the ultimate risk of heavy technology use is 
> that it
> diminishes empathy by limiting how much people engage with one another, 
> even in
> the same room.
>  "The way we become more human is by paying attention to each other," he 
> said.
>  "It shows how much you care."
>  That empathy, Mr.  Nass said, is essential to the human condition.  "We 
> are at an
> inflection point," he said.  "A significant fraction of people's 
> experiences are
>  now fragmented."
> _______________________________________________
> acb-hsp mailing list
> acb-hsp at acb.org
> http://www.acb.org/mailman/listinfo/acb-hsp