Table of Contents
Introduction
As technology has become increasingly more relevant in our daily lives, they have also become more of a hazard to our various cognitive functions. Having changed the landscape of modern society, smartphones are undeniably an important part of our daily lives. Smartphones allow ever more access to the internet, media and other applications. They have provided the ability to communicate across oceans, purchase goods at the press of a button, and navigate through unfamiliar territories. The way in which people communicate, purchase goods, and navigate has in fact never been simpler. Even education has benefited from this technology, by providing students the ability to seek out information for better self-directed learning.
Additionally, studies have been shown that students can better retain information using instructional technology such as the smartphone (Eyam and Yaratan, 2014). But for all the good that the smartphone has done the negative effects are unavoidable. Research suggests that there are significant consequences to accepting smartphones as virtually an extended form of cognition. The near constant connection people have with the smartphone is thought to be directly affecting our ability to delay gratification, shortening our attention spans, weakening working memory, and damaging our social relationships.
Current Research
Research in the field of cognitive science and psychology has brought to light many of the cognitive functions smartphones may be affecting. The Department of Psychology at Temple University wrote about some of the specific issues smart devices are causing which affect attention, memory, and delay of gratification (Wilmer Et Al., 2017). However, despite all the current research, there is little consensus as to the actual long-term effects smartphones are having. Research in technology, and especially in smartphones, is limited and difficult due to its relative newness and advanced nature.
127 our experts are availableright now
The technology is so recent that no long-term studies exist capable of establishing a link of causation between technology and cognition. Adding to this complication is the rate at which technology changes, marking questionnaires that researchers develop outdated before their results can be used to establish any meaningful results. Additionally, it is very difficult to find someone who doesn’t have a smartphone and as even when a technologically naive person is found their age, resources, social expectations, and circumstances usually don’t fit in contrast to the experienced users.
‘As a result, much of the literature consists of quasi-experimental and correlational studies, from which strong inferences regarding causality cannot be drawn” (Wilmer Et Al., 2017). However, the limited correlational research that has been conducted has found many interesting results that need to be further considered and explored.
Delay of Gratification
The regular cue of notifications, alerts, and immediacy in which people can access information directly affects our cognitive ability to delay gratification. This constant and instantaneous flow of information is a relentless interruption which is psychologically difficult to ignore. Smartphone interruptions come in two forms; those of endogenous nature and those exogenous. Endogenous interruptions are interruptions which arise because of one’s own thoughts shifting toward a smartphone-related activity, thereby kindling an otherwise unwarranted drive to interact with the device.
The endogenous interruption can often stem from the need for a more immediate gratification than the individual’s current engagement can provide (Wilmer Et Al., 2017). This drive for gratification is the source of many peoples feeling of “need” toward their smartphone. Sherry Turkle, author of “Alone Together” argues that smartphones are disconnecting people more than ever, and she coined the term “Phantom Limb” to describe the feeling of attachment many people feel toward their smartphones (Turkle, 2011).
The smartphone, in all its shiny glory, houses many utilities that can easily fulfill our psychological needs. Social media gives us a false sense of social connectedness, games solve boredom and lack of stimulation, and the web browser is an endless feed of new information. These tools have amazing utility, but they also have influence over our us by addressing psychological needs that many find difficult to control. “Phantom vibration syndrome” is a phenomenon where someone believes that their phone has vibrated in their pocket when in fact many times the phone is not even there. The root of this phenomenon is explained as either hallucinations or psychological misinterpretations of say an itch (Rosenberg, 2015). Such phenomena suggest that our minds may have begun to establish a psychological connection to these devices.
Exogenous interruptions differ in that it is an environmental cue that captures the individual’s attention. Such distractions can be seeing another person using their smartphone, or the discussion of something often found on the smartphone such as a social media application. Ignoring these distractions can be very difficult because our brains know the stimulation provided with an interaction with the smartphone. It takes a noteworthy amount of cognitive resources to resist such impulses, which in effect is making it more difficult to delay our need for gratification.
Attention
The problem with allowing smartphones to have a psychological influence over us is realized when studying its effect on attention. The most significant amount of research on the effects of smartphones has focused itself on attention prompting titles such as “Are Smart-Phones Really Destroying the Adolescent Brain?” (Flora, 2018). In addressing this issue, the Department of Psychology at the University of Waterloo conducted a study exploring the relationship between smartphone use and everyday inattention.
They created two questioners; one measuring general smartphone use (such as sending messages or searching something) and the other measuring absent-minded smartphone use (use without any intentional purpose). The participants were then given a questionnaire with 4 scales that tested for attention lapses, attention-related errors, spontaneous mind-wandering, and deliberate mind-wandering. The results found a significant correlation between both general smartphone use, and absent-minded smartphone use and worse levels of attention. Importantly the absent-minded use led to worse levels of everyday attention than general use.
Additionally, it was found that higher levels of general use often correlated with higher levels of absent-minded use. These findings suggest that the most important variable in inattention is absent-minded smartphone use (Marty-Dugas Et Al., 2018). This absent-minded smartphone use is the result of the psychological influence as suggested earlier.
Perhaps nowhere has felt the negative influence of the smartphone as much as the classroom. In a study performed in a small liberal arts college in Southeastern Arkansas the smartphones effect on students learning ability was tested. Participants were to watch a 20-minute video lecture after being assigned to one of four control groups: cell phone usage allowed, cell phone possession allowed without usage, cell phones removed, and no instruction. During the lecture, all participants (besides the cell phone removed group) were sent a text message as a distraction.
Afterward, each participant took a test on the material of the lecture, as well as a questionnaire testing emotional issues such as obsessiveness, nomophobia, and mindfulness. The results of this study showed that those who were in the cell phone removed group performed best on the test (Lee Et Al., 2017). Other research suggested a correlation between higher levels of smartphone use and poorer GPA’s (Beland and Murphy, 2014). A common theme thought to contribute to the given negative effects, are the probability for the users to engage in multitasking.
Multitasking is disrupting to the original area of focus and disengages one’s attention from any one area. Studies done on in ‘within-phone’ interruptions have found that original task completion can be delayed by up to 400% by an interruption from another app (Leiva Et Al., 2012). Although multitasking is a significant player in the effects smartphones have on attention, it is not the only consideration.
As it turns out, a smartphones capability to distract is not limited to an actual interaction with it. In the “The Mere Presence of a Cell Phone May be Distracting”, researchers showed that the task performance of subjects is significantly reduced with the cell phone just nearby (Thornton Et Al., 2014). Other studies showed later in the paper, concluded similar results regarding the formation of pairwise relationships (Przybylski and Weinstein, 2012).
Research done in the department of psychology at Florida State University showed that exposure to smartphone notifications significantly decreased performance on attention-based tasks, even if the subject did not attend to the notification. These notifications, sometimes just as much as a vibration, prompted mind-wandering and task-irrelevant thoughts. The level of distraction caused by these notifications is of the same caliber as if the user were to actively use their phone (Stothart Et Al., 2015).
Because one needs the ability to pay attention in school, at the workplace, and in social interactions, the smartphones effect on our attention is so important. The answer is not to prescribe more drug stimulants, but to understand our own cognitive functions and how our habits may be damaging them. The correlation between smartphone use and attention difficulties is not firmly established. Yet all evidence points toward the notion that smartphones are having significant consequences on people’s attention, with real-world consequences being observed in our everyday.
Memory
An area of serious concern among researchers is how smartphones might be changing the way people process and remember information. The issues arising in this area are less to do with their psychological nature, and rather more to do with their dependence on the tools to supplement cognitive functions. Smartphones are at times supplementing thinking and altering our perceived experiences. Studies suggest that simply using media to record an event prevents us from remembering that which they are trying to preserve (Tamir Et Al., 2018).
In a study by Linda Henke (2013) participants visited an art museum and were divided into two groups; some were instructed to take pictures of what they saw and others not. The results concluded that those participants who were in the group that took pictures had an overall worse recall of the art (Henkel, 2013). The reason for this is thought to be two-fold. As shown before, smartphones are often used to multitask, diminishing one’s allocated attention toward any specific task, or moment, thereby reducing the memory of the experience.
Second, “people sometimes use such devices as a mnemonic ‘crutch’, offloading information onto them and then forgetting that information’ (Tamir Et Al., 2018). This second reasoning has been branded by other researchers as the “Google Effect”. The “’Google Effect’ is where someone who expects to be able to gain later access to information is less inclined to store the information in their long-term memory” (Sparrow Et Al., 2011). An interesting consequence of the “Google Effect” is the inability for some to differentiate between information that is known by them and information that was produced by external resources such as Google (Sparrow Et Al., 2011).
Another issue arising because of our reliance on smartphones is due to another primary feature, the GPS system. Some research done on the impact of the over-reliance on GPS systems demonstrates a weakened cognitive spatial system. Research done in 2005 found that participants who relied on navigational systems had a worse recall of their environment, and drew fragmented maps of their traveled route (Burnett and Lee, 2005).
The more people rely on smartphones as memory tools the more cognitive functions are being handed over to the device. The smartphone may help us store a phone number, or capture a moment; but the effects on our navigational system, ability to recall events, and forge mental connections are all at risk from such dependence. Smartphones are changing the process of our higher cognitive functions and the potential social consequences of the ‘Google Effect’, or the inability for someone to orient themselves in an unfamiliar territory are concerns worthy of being addressed.
Relationships
The way in which people forge relationships is also being sabotaged by the presence of smartphones. Billions of people use smartphones to communicate with people, often thousands of miles away on a regular basis. The consequence of this debatably unnatural form of communication is unknown but researchers have explored the effects that this may have on a traditional face to face interaction. The findings suggest that while the smartphones are virtually connecting us always, traditional connections are paying the price.
Przybylski and Weinstein conducted experiments where seventy- four participants were instructed to discuss ‘an interesting event that occurred to them over the past month” (Przybylski and Weinstein, 2012). The experiment divided them up into one of two conditions; either phone absent or phone present. Those in the phone present group had a phone placed on a desk nearby. Those in the phone absent group the phone had a notebook there in its place. Post analysis of the participants found that the partners who interacted with each other in the presence of a smartphone felt less close to one another, and reported a lower quality of relationship than the partners of the ‘smartphone not present’ group.
Further variations of this experiment showed that the effects are most significant when the topics of conversation are personally meaningful to the individuals (Przybylski and Weinstein, 2012). These results suggest that smartphones have a significant effect on the formation of relationships between human beings. This comes as no surprise. The smartphone as discussed prior has the capability to distract without any realized interaction, weakening attention, and causing psychological dependence. People have the sense of being continually connected to the larger social world even when not connecting. This continual presence in the mind can be a source of anxiety consequently sabotaging real-world social interactions.
When the smartphone is actually being used the level of social dissonance is much higher. The intrusive nature of the smartphone directly impacts the quality of time spent with friends, as shown in the paper “Connecting alone: Smartphone use, quality of social interactions and well-being” (Rotondi Et Al., 2017). This study also found that the lack of satisfaction holds true to not only social satisfaction but life satisfaction as well. Researchers found that people may rely on their smartphone to combat loneliness. 615 Americans were asked to participate in a survey. The findings suggest that participants who were lonely would turn to their smartphones with the hope of being connected to others (Kim, 2018). The smartphone is a perfect candidate for fulfilling the need for social assurance and immediate connection, but in reality, disrupts the actual formation of these connections.
Summary
Becoming more and more dependent on the smartphone means sacrificing some of our own cognitive functions for those of the device. The multiple studies that suggest smartphones are causing cognitive and social consequences, even when they are not being used, suggests that people are using smartphones less as a tool and more as an extension. Smartphones play such an important role in our daily lives. People use these machines to communicate, navigate, record, entertain, and learn. The overall positive impact on the billions of people around the world has been massive, but there is a dark side to this technology.
No other tool in our 200,000-year-old history has advanced as quickly as the computer. The fascinating reality of carrying a collection of minerals with all the abilities it contains in our pockets is not to be understated. However; it is necessary to address the issues of this remarkable reality. This issue is becoming increasingly more complicated as forms of media change. The implications of platforms such as Snapchat and Instagram Stories where the image is temporary and a large part of people’s lives is yet to be determined.
Our need for instant gratification has risen, attention span shortened, memory weakened, and relationships put in jeopardy. The consequences are apparent in our classrooms, our relationships, navigational abilities, daily experiences, and task performance. Smartphones are only becoming more prominent and the issues more relevant. By the year 2020, there will be 5.5 billion smartphone users, a 70 percent of the world population (Cisco Visual Index™ (VNI) Global Mobile Data [Traffic Forecast, 2015-2020]). It is crucial that people are aware of the negative side of these important tools. A large part of the responsibilities of these issues lies on the manufacturers of our smartphones. The most effective way for these issues to be addressed would be for the industry to accept new standards with human weakness at the forefront of the design.
References
- Beland, L., & Murphy, R. (2016, 08). Ill Communication: Technology, distraction & student performance. Labour Economics, 41, 61-76. doi:10.1016/j.labeco.2016.04.004
- Burnett, G. E., & Lee, K. (2005). The Effect of Vehicle Navigation Systems on the Formation of Cognitive Maps. Traffic and Transport Psychology, 407-418. doi:10.1016/b978-008044379-9/50188-6
- Cerf, V. G. (2011, 03). Sherry Turkle: Alone Together. IEEE Internet Computing, 15(2), 95-96. doi:10.1109/mic.2011.46
- Eyyam, R., & Yaratan, H. S. (2014, 01). Impact of Use of Technology in Mathematics Lessons on Student Achievement and Attitudes. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 42(1), 31-42. doi:10.2224/sbp.2014.s31
- Flora, C. (2018, 01). Are Smartphones Really Destroying the Adolescent Brain? Scientific American, 318(2), 30-37. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0218-30
- Henkel, L. A. (2013, 12). Point-and-Shoot Memories. Psychological Science, 25(2), 396-402. doi:10.1177/0956797613504438
- Kim, J. (2018, 03). Psychological issues and problematic use of smartphone: ADHD’s moderating role in the associations among loneliness, need for social assurance, need for immediate connection, and problematic use of smartphone. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 390-398. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.11.025
- Lee, S., Kim, M. W., Mcdonough, I. M., Mendoza, J. S., & Kim, M. S. (2017, 04). The Effects of Cell Phone Use and Emotion-regulation Style on College Students’ Learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 31(3), 360-366. doi:10.1002/acp.3323
- Leiva, L., Böhmer, M., Gehring, S., & Krüger, A. (2012). Back to the app. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Human-computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services – MobileHCI ’12. doi:10.1145/2371574.2371617
- Loh, K. K., & Kanai, R. (2016, 07). How Has the Internet Reshaped Human Cognition? The Neuroscientist, 22(5), 506-520. doi:10.1177/1073858415595005
- Marty-Dugas, J., Ralph, B. C., Oakman, J. M., & Smilek, D. (2018, 03). The relation between smartphone use and everyday inattention. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5(1), 46-62. doi:10.1037/cns0000131
- Nikken, P., & Schols, M. (2015, 02). How and Why Parents Guide the Media Use of Young Children. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24(11), 3423-3435. doi:10.1007/s10826-015-0144-4
- Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2012, 07). Can you connect with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences face-to-face conversation quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(3), 237-246. doi:10.1177/0265407512453827
- Rosenberger, R. (2015, 11). An experiential account of phantom vibration syndrome. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 124-131. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.065
- Rotondi, V., Stanca, L., & Tomasuolo, M. (2017). Connecting Alone: Smartphone Use, Quality of Social Interactions and Well-Being. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2893027
- Sparrow, B., Liu, J., & Wegner, D. M. (2011, 07). Google Effects on Memory: Cognitive Consequences of Having Information at Our Fingertips. Science, 333(6043), 776-778. doi:10.1126/science.1207745
- Stothart, C., Mitchum, A., & Yehnert, C. (2015). The attentional cost of receiving a cell phone notification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41(4), 893-897. doi:10.1037/xhp0000100
- Tamir, D. I., Templeton, E. M., Ward, A. F., & Zaki, J. (2018, 05). Media usage diminishes memory for experiences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 161-168. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2018.01.006
- Thornton, B., Faires, A., Robbins, M., & Rollins, E. (2014, 11). The Mere Presence of a Cell Phone May be Distracting. Social Psychology, 45(6), 479-488. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000216
- Wegner, D. M., & Ward, A. F. (2013, 11). How Google Is Changing Your Brain. Scientific American, 309(6), 58-61. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1213-58
- Wilmer, H. H., Sherman, L. E., & Chein, J. M. (2017, 04). Smartphones and Cognition: A Review of Research Exploring the Links between Mobile Technology Habits and Cognitive Functioning. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00605
