we may often be in a state of not feeling we need to encode the information internally. When we need it, we will look it up.
I wonder if this was a conscious decision to not keep the thoughts in mind or if they really thought they'd remember and then couldn't.
Media and communications devices, from telephones to TV sets, have always tapped into this instinct
I wonder if these studies would show the same results if they did them every few years starting when these devices where introduced to the public. How drastic have things actually changed is a question nobody could really answer but it is a scary thing to think about considering its all happened so fast.
Social skills and relationships seem to suffer as well.
What about all the social components your smartphone has? I definitely notice that it could change how a person interacts face to face but for some people it may help people be more open by meeting so many people in the palm of their hand.
the more heavily students relied on their phones in their everyday lives, the greater the cognitive penalty they suffered.
What about if you use your phone for things that improve your cognitive ability? Of course nobody ONLY does that, but I definitely think without phones, the younger generations would be less smart, considering how much you can learn by simply typing in a question or even asking Siri.
In subsequent interviews, nearly all the participants said that their phones hadn’t been a distraction—that they hadn’t even thought about the devices during the experiment.
Is this possible to really take into account? I think anybody, including myself would probably think it wasn't a distraction at all, but deep down we all know the draw it has on us.
The results were striking. In both tests, the subjects whose phones were in view posted the worst scores, while those who left their phones in a different room did the best. The students who kept their phones in their pockets or bags came out in the middle. As the phone’s proximity increased, brainpower decreased.
This is crazy to think. Ive always just thought it depended on the person. Some people seem to have better focus than others, but according to this its really in relation to everybody.
people’s phones beep or buzz while they’re in the middle of a challenging task, their focus wavers, and their work gets sloppier
I think any college student today could relate to this. I often times have to set my phone aside and focus on my work for a set period of time because if I leave it near me I can get sucked into social media or texting.
Adrian Ward, a cognitive psychologist and marketing professor at the University of Texas at Austin, has been studying the way smartphones and the internet affect our thoughts and judgments for a decade.
Would these studies come up with different conclusions depending on what part of the country you are in? I think in places like New York, or Atlanta its certain smartphones would have a massive impact on people, but what about more rural places like farming states or anywhere outside of the big city living habits?
The smartphone has become a repository of the self, recording and dispensing the words, sounds and images that define what we think, what we experience and who we are.
This is an interesting way of putting it. Nobody really thinks about the fact most of our opinions and thoughts are influenced by things we read or watched on our device. Its rare to experience things or witness them in real life these days.
The smartphone is something new in the world
I think this is the main reason for the common appeal in todays society. Nobody cares wha works well or efficiently anymore, these days the newest thing is the coolest thing. Thats why everybody gets so drawn to new iPhone releases every year and pay hundreds of dollars for changes that are so small.
30,000 times over the coming year
This is terrifying, imagine how much time you waste of the year on your phone and not doing things that actually have value.
I am one of those people for whom the act of formulating sentences, and reading them, is intrinsic to thought itself.
I also feel this way, Ive always loved music, reading, and writing because I am good at putting my thoughts into words the minute I have them. I notice other people struggle to do that sometimes because they let their emotions interfere with the acceptance of what they have to say.
Salinger’s defense of his privacy eventually came to seem as absurd as the attacks on it,
This is why a lot of writers find themselves as popular one day, and irrelevant the next. Sometimes going through something good or bad, and sharing that experience only happens because of what took place for inspiration. Then without anything drastic happening at that point in time, they don't have the confidence to put out what may have happened in the past without those emotions tied to it.
This privacy, in turn, not only surrounded his work but was embedded in it
I think anybody trying to create something powerful to a reader has to make it as personal and private as you can. The more private the idea then the more it draws the people who relate to it. I think thats why music has been such a worldwide art form. Music artists put deep thoughts into words and those who relate can turn to that for help when they are going through something.
Is tweeting the same as publishing?
I don't think so at all. Not that the idea can't be just as serious or meaningful in a tweet as a published work but I feel like tweets are more viewed as each persons individual thought and nobody takes it very seriously unless it directly applies to you. Published work seems to make any reader feel a connection because its not surrounded by a billion different writings and thoughts.
It’s like a seed that, when you return to it, may have grown into something visible.
I think this is true with any idea, regardless of the way its shared, though scripture or a tweet, either way if your idea relates to another persons, it is sure to grow larger and more complex.
Most great writers could, if they wanted to, be very good at Twitter, because it is a medium of words and also of form. Its built-in limitation corresponds to the sense of rhythm and proportion that writers apply to each line
I don't know if I agree with this. Like I said in my last annotation, writers thrived off stretching ideas and thoughts into a full picture for a reader to see. Its difficult to change your ways from being so specifically worded and long stretched to making a full concept or idea into a few short words
Who are the really unlikely tweeters from literary history?
At this point in time I feel like new generation have become more and more drawn away from writing. Its rare to find someone who enjoys taking the time to create their own ideas and put them into script. Because of this, I feel like any past figures of writing wouldn't possibly settle for tweeting a small sentence or word even to describe all the thoughts and ideas in their head.
then glanced down to see I was at Location 152 of 25053. I was only sixth-tenths of 1% into the book.
This is the exact reason I couldn't use my moms kindle when I tried to do some summer reading on it back in highschool. I would feel almost accomplished in a way with how much I had read just for my confidence to get shot down by how much I had NOT read yet.
I really loved the compression of poems
I also used to think I didn't like reading because I never had the patience to read books, but growing up I found myself liking poetry because its a simple but more clever way of writing.
Will our flighty brains ever get as much out of phone screens as paper? Are the great works of literature doomed to fade away like ghosts?
I also have wondered, if everybody transfers to reading on a device, what will happen to classic pieces of literature? Sure they are still available on things like an app or a kindle but will the original copies just be gone?
With Snapchat and Facebook pecking at you like ravenous ducks, one could scarcely imagine a tool more exquisitely tuned to destroy deep attention than a modern phone.
I wonder if tests while the phone is on airplane mode would effect the final statistics because of less distractions. Would there still be problems trying to read off the screen?
When scientists test these things, they find that people who read a text onscreen remember less of it than people who read it on paper
As my last point mentioned, all the distractions within a device can drag your focus away from the thing you are actually reading. Even the smallest noise or notification can pause your train of thought.
These days, critics of digital reading worry that serious literature sort of can’t be adequately read on high-tech devices. Screens, they fear, are inherently inferior to print.
This is certainly a considerable thought because of the way technology has driven people to lose focus on the tasks at hand. Reading in a book focuses strictly on the writings and trying to do that on a phone screen can be difficult with things like notifications popping up, or different apps to open with a few clicks of the screen.