Media Multitasking and Attention

Are you good at simultaneously juggling different tech or apps?

by Multitasking

Actually, none of us are. Multitasking requires us to split our focussed attention between two or three different tasks. When we try to do more than one thing at a time, we are sacrificing the ability to perform, and the ability to limit errors, on each of the tasks that we are simultaneously trying to accomplish.

From a cognitive perspective, our ability to process information coming in through our senses is limited. If we are focussing on one thing at a time, our attention is fully engaged in that task. When we switch from task 1 to task 2, a few things happen.

The first is ‘attention residue’. When you finish working on a task, you are often still thinking about it for a little while. It may be a few seconds, a few minutes or a few hours. E.g. sending an email and then thinking ‘I could have phrased that differently’, ‘I wonder if they are at their desk and will be able to reply before the end of the day’. In order to perform the next task well, we need to be able to drop the attention residue from the previous task in order to be able to fully concentrate on the current task.

The second aspect is ‘resumption lag’. This is when one task is interrupted, in order to work on another task. Once the second task is completed, picking up the first task takes time. This is because the memory trace needs to be reactivated. It takes time to remember what it is we were doing, where we were and what we were still needing to accomplish. The longer it takes to pick up the second task, the more faded the memory trace is, and the longer it takes to re-establish it and resume the task.

We are most aware of these two phenomena when we are working on two cognitively demanding tasks, such as trying to sculpt a tactfully worded email while balancing month-end statements. We are least aware of them when we are doing less demanding tasks, like checking the message stream and creating a purchase order. When we multitask, we switch so quickly between different activities, and at a speed that convinces us that we are juggling both tasks simultaneously.

What impact does this have on us when we engage in media multitasking?

Switching between different media means that we are constantly switching our attention to each form of media. If you were simultaneously watching a movie, scrolling through social media and texting a friend, how much of the movie do you remember? Without scrolling back, how much of details of your conversation can you recall the next day.

Although none of these tasks requires significant cognitive power, or deep concentration, the downside of regularly engaging in this kind of media multitasking is that (like any form of practice), our brain becomes used to this constant media switching. It can become difficult to focus on doing ‘deep work’ and we tend to become easily distracted by notifications, incoming emails and movement around us.

There are a few simple things we can do to reduce the level of media multitasking we engage with and teach our brain to focus our attention on the work we do. By doing so, we become a lot more efficient and the work we do has fewer errors.  

  • Put your phone on silent and turn the screen away from you. Better yet, put in your desk draw for extended periods of time. Most people check their notifications within 30 seconds of receiving them – no matter what that notification is. Research also shows that even having your phone on your desk reduces your ability to pay attention to the task at hand (a bit of the FOMO effect).
  • Try to only have one app open at a time, or at least only the apps that you really need to get your current task completed. Having multiple apps open simultaneously can become distracting and get you thinking about other projects or work that also needs doing.
  • If possible, have discussions with your manager, team and co-workers about switching off your email and instant messaging for key periods each day. If you add a ‘I tend to answer my emails at the beginning and end of the day’ type message in your signature, this may limit others expecting an immediate reply from you at all hours of the day. Research on email reply times suggests that our quick response times are based on what we think others expect, rather than what they really expect.
  • Block out periods in your diary for focussed work time and try get away from open plan spaces that are susceptible to regular interruption from others.
  • Have discussions with your boss and team members about keeping team meetings to either mornings or afternoons, allowing a greater ability to plan in dedicated thinking and productivity time.
  • Try limiting your working hours to specific start and finish times – especially if you are working from home. Some people go for a walk around their block at the start and end of the day to replicate the commute to and from work. Although workplace mindsets tended to suggest working parents produce less work than those who are more flexible with their start and finish times, the research contradicted this by showcasing that working parents were more productive in the reduced time than both childless parents and single people. Their homebased responsibilities challenge them to ensure working hours are focussed and productive, because they have no other time to get that work done.

Focussed work takes time and practice to do well. But, it is worth the extra effort. You can get a lot more done in a shorter space of time. This allows you to have more time to do the things you enjoy – hobbies, friends, family, sport, gaming – guilt free. It also allows your brain time to reboot the energy consumed during the course of the day, an essential part of getting enough quality and quantity of sleep and to being more energised and productive the following day.

You can read more about the effects of task switching whilst using multiple media simultaneously in Chapter 6 of Lee Haddlington’s Cybercognition (which is quite academically focussed CyberPsychology book). 

Cal Newport, a professor in computer science, promotes the science and rationale behind setting aside technology in order to engage in ‘Deep Work’, that results in the more productive, focussed work that is needed to thrive in today’s business culture. 

You can also read more on Sophie Leroy’s study on attention by clicking the link ‘Why is it so hard to do my work? The challenge of attention residue when switching between work tasks‘.

Related Articles
Automatic-Processing

The bonus and disruption of automatic processing during Lockdowns

by Automatic Behaviour

Pre-March 2020, we operated in a face-to-face biased workplace, with its own escalating levels of workplace expectations, pressures, work pace and stress.

Technology was being continually integrated into our daily working and home lives without us really taking stock of how it was either positively or negatively impacting us. Processes that included new technology innovation were quickly automated and became standardised.

Being innovative and future-focussed was about having or using the latest apps, social media platforms and gadgets that made us look more trendy, productive and ‘in-tune’ with our work.

We were already experiencing heightened levels of on-demand communication. We just kept going on this trajectory, because that was how work just happened. 

And then, one day, everything changed—absolutely everything. Every day presented a new challenge, a new hurdle to overcome, a new skill to learn, a new problem to juggle. 

Those first few months of Lockdown 1 were quite something, weren’t they? Having to hard-pivot (seemingly) almost daily, living in constant uncertainty and holding it together were key themes of that first Covid-Quarter. 

Then summer arrived and things started easing slightly… for a while, before rushing headlong into the late autumn lockdown. Who could keep up with the mandates, guidelines, traffic light system and tiers of winter 2020/21? Things started easing in the middle of this year, and then the next variant was upon us… 

Throughout all of this, we’ve spent 18 months working on constantly shifting sands of expectations, processes, and uncertainty. 

Pandemics and technology aside, as human beings, we rely heavily on an automated processing model for daily operation. 

This is where everyday activities are moved from a conscious level to a level of unconscious automatic functioning. 

What does this mean? Well, think about making a warm drink, driving a car, talking and writing, holding down a conversation, pulling up a work document… all these things we had to learn at some stage of our lives. We weren’t born knowing how to do them.

But, once we consciously worked on and developed the initial skillsets, the process shifted into the unconscious realm where we no longer think about actioning these simple, everyday tasks.

Just imagine what it would be like if these actions were not automated, how tiring, tedious and time-consuming basic living would be. 

Automatic processing means that we are able to release the conscious, working part of our brain to learn new skills, ruminate about events and conversations, think about someone else, and work through a tough problem… in other words, the ability to live the fulfilling and rewarding lives that we want to live. 

When our lives were massively interrupted in March 2020, those automatic processes that we relied on so much were relatively useless to us.

We suddenly had to dedicate huge portions of our working brain to figure out how to ‘do’ this working-from-home, manage our teams, virtually engage with clients, get projects done, and learn computer apps and programmes we weren’t familiar with (without physical colleagues or IT teams available to help), manage home life, help children with homeschooling, figure out how to get enough toilet paper or allocate enough time for queuing outside the supermarket, working through the nuances of the various mandates, dealing with our emotional and mental states… 

This onslaught of non-automated activity left us emotionally, mentally and physically exhausted most days. 

What we’ve all learnt through the past 18 months of remote and hybrid working, is how important routines and processes are to us as humans. Many of us have, therefore, started to re-evaluate the relationship we had with technology and how we intend to integrate it into our working and home lives in a more productive and less controlling way. 

Related Articles
Personality Type and Cyber Security

Does our personality type make us more or less susceptible to phishing and online scams?

by Cyber Security

According to academic research in this area, the short answer is ‘yes’. The majority of research has used The Big 5 Personality Types to identify different types of Cyber Security behaviour. Although research in this area has slightly conflicting results, there are some general findings that are interesting to note. These are outlined briefly below.

Openness to Experiences

Those who have a greater level of this type have a greater ability to adjust their viewpoints and are therefore better able to review information in emails on the merit of the content itself, rather than on preconceived ideas around either the content or the sender. They are, therefore, better able to identify phishing content. However, they are more likely to reveal personal information about themselves on social media and within online communication.

Extroverts

Are a lot more sociable and more likely to share information with others around phishing scams. They are also more likely to share information about themselves with others and are more likely to have been bored during lockdowns, craving social interaction, so potentially more likely to click on links to help alleviate boredom.

Agreeableness

Those high in agreeableness traits are more inclined to want to please others, and try avoid people disliking them. They are, therefore, more susceptible to phishing attacks, as they just want to please others. If the email looks like it comes from an internal department or a supplier/customer, they may want to try be helpful and/or ‘fix’ things.

Neuroticism

People who have more of this personality type have an inherent need to believe that others are telling the truth. They also don’t like to upset people, so are likely to fall for phishing scams.

Conscientiousness

Those who display more of this trait are the least likely to fall for phishing scams. They tend to read content more critically and are more likely to follow training guidelines.

Although generic cyber security training and education is vital within any organisation, to help minimise susceptibility to phishing attacks, training should include how each personality type can be affected differently. This may make individual workers more vigilant towards phishing attacks that they are more susceptible to – based on their dominant personality traits.

Take the Big 5 Personality test and a brief explanation of each:

If you want to take the Big 5 Personality Test to find out more about where you fit within each range, you can find a link below.

Take the test.

Read more about The Big 5 personality types.

A few notes about Personality based Psychometric Tests:

  • Although there are a number of psychometric tests available on the market, a large number of them are complicated to decipher and/or are only commercially available. Researchers, therefore, tend to use The Big 5 personality psychometric test as a standard academic for research.
  • Personality tests can indicate a preference for specific behaviour but should not be used to stigmatise people and categorise them into neat boxes. In all things psychological and behavioural, we are all on a spectrum, and display a unique combination of characteristics to a greater or lesser degree.
  • Personality tests are self-completion questionnaires that people fill in based on how they view their own behaviour. We are generally not very good at understanding our own behaviour. This means that they can give us (like any self-completion questionnaires) an indication of different behavioural types, but should be read and interpreted as such.

If you want to know more about what cybersecurity threats you may encounter, you can read ESET’s T2 2021 Cyber Threat Report.

Related Articles
Automated Behaviour and Cyber Security

Have we established muscle memory around remote working and what impact does this have on us as individuals?

by Individual Differences and Impact

A number of us have been working remotely for the past 18 months. We often hear statements around how work has ‘shifted’. With that phrase comes the expectation that we’ve had plenty of time to adapt to this ‘new normal’ and should be working effectively and efficiently at this stage. Haven’t we all become used to this way of working?

There is a perception that remote working is now an established norm, but it isn’t. Our working environment is still in constant flux. It is still shifting. It will still be shifting for a few years yet – until we become more certain around how to manage this epidemic. Even then, it will take another few years before we establish and start entrenching specific workplace norms in line with variations of hybrid working practices.

When it comes to our everyday functioning and adapting, the processing part of our brain has limited ability to process conscious, intentional activities. Every time something changes in our environment and how we do things, we have to adapt and readapt. Think about when you start a new role or take up a new hobby, you have to really think about what you are doing until it becomes a habit. Then you do a lot of it without thinking. It becomes automated behaviour.

However, things have been in constant shift and flux since March 2020. Our children are at home schooling. They are at school. It’s term time and lateral flow tests. They’re on summer holiday. Do they need masks or don’t they? Do I have enough tests in the house or do I need more? Am I going into the office this week or working from home? Do we still need to keep 2 meters apart? Why are they (not) wearing a mask? Should I elbow bump, or can I shake hands with them? Is that meeting in Zoom, Teams or Google Meet? Where was that link? What day am I in the office this week again? My programme doesn’t seem to be working, where did I write down how to fix it? What’s the name of that new IT person again?

We continuously absorb sensory information through all 5 of our senses. Our working-memory has to work hard to filter out a lot of that information, while simultaneously processing our thoughts, actions and behaviour. We cope best when we are able to automate a large portion of the behaviour we do every day. From making hot drinks, to driving our car, to finding our way to the office/home, to most of life’s ‘little things’ that we don’t give much daily thought to. If these things shift, we have to consciously think through how to perform and execute them effectively. This takes up substantial cognitive effort and can lead to cognitive exhaustion if we aren’t able to automate much of our daily behaviour.

Although we have indeed already built up some normative practices around remote working, each shift that we have to do requires us to extend higher levels of cognitive effort that takes ‘processing power’ that otherwise could be used to fulfil ‘deeper work’. To get into the flow that allows us to be productive, acquire any new skills or think deeply about our work, we need to have a lot of our day-to-day behaviour shifted into automatic functioning. This is the reason we develop habits and routines, it is also why we allocate spaces in our house (or our desk) for specific objects. It means they are easier to find, and we don’t need substantial cognitive effort to locate them.

We get stressed when things are different, or we have to think consciously about a particular process. Just think about how stressed you can get when you can’t find something you are looking for (especially if they aren’t in their normal place). Every time we ask people to shift how they do things, increases their levels of non-automatic behaviour and raises stress levels. It is cognitively exhausting to be regularly stressed in this way and when the majority of our behaviour isn’t given time to become automated.

So, all of this shifting, shifting and shifting that is constantly happening around our ways of working, and the continuous need to adapt to workplace norms, means we have to think so much harder about things that should otherwise be automated behaviour. It leaves us with less cognitive energy and capacity to focus on our ‘real work’ and to think deeply about the problems and issues we have to resolve. These extra cognitive thinking efforts and additional stress from shifting workplace norms, reduces our ability to be vigilant and spot errors in our work and fraudulent emails. Things we would otherwise have spotted, because we have the cognitive thinking-space to do so, we are a lot less vigilant about.

This is one of the reasons why we are generally experiencing higher levels of cyber scams and those who may otherwise be super-vigilant, are less able to do so. It’s not just that our home-based online security is at lower levels than we’d have in the workplace. It’s that our general cognitive ability to spot and correctly respond to phishing emails and scams is substantially compromised by how much harder we are having to think and adapt to our daily workplace and homebased shifting demands.  

Related Articles
ELSF LI Ad

European Legal Security Forum​ – Convergence of home and work

by News and talks

Convergence of Home and Work / Cyber Hygiene / Humanising Cyber Security

29 September 2021 (In Person) 

European Legal Security Forum

In Person Panel Discussion: 29 September 2021 (London, UK)

The Convergence of Home And Work / Cyber Hygiene / Humanising Cyber Security. 

Carolyn joined Janet Day and Daniel Demonakis as a panel member talking about: 

  • Which pressure points have been exposed by the remote working regime
  • Lessons learned about security & processes for remote and hybrid working
  • Burnout & Management
  • Moving back into the office – are there extra risks and how do we manage people.
Related Articles - Talks and Events
Parental Fatigue

Parental Burnout, an unintended consequence of a pandemic

by Individual Differences and Impact

‘Parental Burnout’ is “an exhaustion syndrome, characterised by feeling physically and mentally overwhelmed” (first identified by Isabelle Roskam and Moïra Mikolajczak in the early ’80s). Simultaneously working, managing a home and raising children involves complicated and frequent role-switching. Each of these roles requires different cognitive functioning and does not allow the brain enough time to deep-dive into the productive functioning that each requires. This means that what we do takes longer and does not to the same level of quality that deep-diving allows.

Research conducted by Seville et al. (2020) during Lockdown 1.0 showed that although fathers took on a much greater role (versus pre-pandemic) in home and childcare, mothers took on a proportionately greater level of responsibility (30% versus 47% respectively). Mothers were more likely to engage in active childcare such as meals and bedtime, whereas fathers were more likely to engage in more passive childcare such as playtime and screentime.

Stories have been emerging for some time now of parents experiencing deep levels of Compassion Syndrome, which leaves parents feeling overwhelmed, stressed, guilty and isolated. A few ‘real-life’ stories are told in a recent Guardian article. Compassion Syndrome has historically been associated mostly with those in the care industry. However, parents are starting to experience this in untold measure, especially when they are also managing a diverse team of staff.

In reality, we don’t know we are experiencing burnout until we actually do burnout. It is essential to start putting some strategies in place to give you time to mentally and emotionally recover each day to help mitigate against long-term stress and burnout:

* If possible, carve out at least 30 min’s of alone-time each day – although playing electronic games can help with feelings of ‘escapism’, it still uses up cognitive energy doing so – put your phone down and use the time to rest your brain. Take a bath, go for a walk, sit on your balcony or in the garden, listen to an audiobook, engage in a hobby or craft, bake… the key is to ‘switch off’ the analytical, thinking part of your brain and give your creative, divergent part of your brain a bit of exercise.

* If you don’t already do so, start journaling. If you don’t have time to write things down, do voice recordings. A big part of therapy is the process of ‘releasing’ the thoughts from your head. Running water is a lot fresher than stagnant water. Ruminating tends to stagnate thoughts.

* Try putting a few more firm boundaries in place, both for you and for family members. If possible, delegate more tasks. Done is better than perfect.

Self-care is so important. Don’t wait until breaking point before reaching out to family, friends, or colleagues. Reach out to the Mind Charity or Samaritans or try searching on PsychologyToday, BPS or BACP databases for a therapist near you or one you think could help you. Video therapy is a norm now, and finding the best therapist in a different part of the country is better than finding an ok therapist near you.

Related Articles
Do we control technology

Do we control technology, or does it control us?

by Digital Work

In general, the narrative around mobile technology use is either non-existent or cast in a negative light. Some see technology as a tool to be used, while others view it as a disruption or mechanism for addictive behaviours. 

Theoretical concepts around the impact of technology on human behaviour have two distinct opposing perspectives.

The first is a social constructivist view. This is where technology is neutral and useful for achieving specific tasks. The user engages with devices within their own personal technical abilities and focussed on how technology and people interact over time.  This view focuses on the dynamic interactions between people and technology and includes how the people use and adapt to technology, at home and work. The socially constructed nature of the use of technology by humans is premised by the view that ‘we make tools, and tools make us’.

The second is a deterministic perspective. This is where technology is given the ability to change and shape human behaviour and social structures. This viewpoint suggests that technology and human behaviour is ‘mutually dependent, integrative, and co-evolving over time’ (for more information on this perspective, see Orlikowsi & Scott’s work on Sociomateriality p. 443).

These two theoretical concepts have a direct impact on what is called ‘Boundary Theory’. This is where workers subconsciously or actively create and maintain barriers between their work life and home life. We can either think of technology as a way to accomplish our life and career goals or we can think of technology as a type of master that we are a type of slave to. Boundary Theory has become a lot more important since its first conceptualisation at the turn of the 21st century, with the now ubiquitous use of laptops, tablets and mobile phones that allow constant access to workplace files and communication.

Remote working has gone even further in highlighting how important it is to manage the right level of workplace technology use during time traditionally allocated to private pursuits and homelife. When remote working, some people have no choice to and some people prefer to integrate their family and work lives. ‘Integrators’ generally use the flexibility that technology allows them to manage home demands while still fulfilling workplace demands. Working while children are in bed or at school and being available in late afternoons for home-based responsibilities.

Other workers prefer to have distinct boundaries between work and home life. This is not so easy to do when remote working from home. Unless there is a separate space within the home to conduct work, it can be really difficult to mentally, physically and emotionally separate out the two life-realms. ‘Segmenters’ tend to get really frustrated and can become quite exhausted when they are not able to create these strong boundaries between their various responsibilities.

A few hints and tips:

If you prefer to segment than integrate different life-realms, but feel forced to due to remote working from home, below are a few potential ways you can create psychological boundaries between the two:

  • Use different technology for home and workplace activities
  • Try not to upload work emails onto your personal mobile phone. Some people use two different phones (one for personal and one for work use) so that they can switch off the work phone at the end of the working day
  • Have a ‘for work only’ notebook that you can leave somewhere easily accessible, so if you have a work-based idea/thought or you remember something you forgot to do, you can jot it down and tackle it the following working day
  • Walk around the block at the beginning or end of the working day. This can create a sense of ‘leaving home’ and ‘leaving the office’. It may not be quite the same as transporting yourself to an alternative location, but it can create a more definitive boundary between the two realms.
Related Articles
Lost Connections Post Header

Lost Connections – Johann Hari

by Book ReviewsCultural & Society Norms

In this book, Johann Hari goes in search of the answers to help him understand more about the depression that surfaced in his teens and became a big part of his life.

His passion for investigating and writing on various subjects seems to come from a deep desire to find specific answers to deeply personal questions shared by many of us in the West. 

In this book Johann talks to many experts around the world to uncover what is driving the majority of the depression epidemic, how medication is being used to try to solve the personal and social issues that are endemic, and what we can do as individuals to reverse this trend.

The title of the book is a clue into what the cause and potential solution are for the state of depression amongst many in the West.

The overriding principle is that our individualistic life focus has resulted in our pursuit of independence from the group and the severing of ties to our communities that ground us in who we are as part of a group. 

Although we are searching for and think we have found connections in online groups and friends, these online shallow connections cannot replace the deeper offline connections that are essential to our human grounding. 

In the West, moving away from where we grew up is not uncommon. We go away to Uni. We move towns/counties/countries with a new job, for a partner, or in search of a new lifestyle. 

Each new move is a separation from established connections towards new connections. With limited opportunities to build or sustain offline connections wherever we go, many turn online to find substitute connections. 

Although this book is about ‘Uncovering the real causes of depression – and the unexpected solutions’, the premise of the book is true for many who turn to online apps, games, gambling, porn and social media tools. There is a direct link between spending time online and anxiety/depression. 

The solutions Johann provides are, therefore, not just for those who struggle with depression, but for those who find themselves spending more time online than they feel they ought to and need to find a way back to building better, deeper, more real connections with others. 

You can find out more about his book Stolen Focus including some additional notes and snippets to his interviews on the Stolen Focus website. 

About Johann Hari:

Johann Hari is a journalist and author. You can read more about him on his official website. 

Book Review Related Articles
Zoom Video Fatigue

Zoom Fatigue and Non-Verbal Overload

by Individual Differences and Impact

Video conferencing has become a major part of remote and hybrid working. The term ‘zoom fatigue’ quickly caught on during the early stages of the first 2020 lockdown. Being in meetings most of the day in the office had shifted to being in meetings most of the day on video calls. Some of us potentially increased the number of meetings they had each day. As someone recently commented to me “you’re now only 1-click away from the meeting, so it feels easy to be involved in every one of them”. 

As we know, video meetings are different from in-person meetings. There are no opportunities to have a quick whispered conversation about a point with someone, it is difficult to interrupt the speaker with questions, and you aren’t always able to see everyone who is in attendance at the meeting. In an academic article from Technology, Mind, and Body, Jeremy Bailenson highlights four potential (although hypothetical) causes of Zoom Fatigue. Below is a brief summary of the four points suggested by Bailenson in addition to some hints and tips on how to potentially manage zoom fatigue. 

Gazing up-close for long periods of time *

In face-to-face meetings, attendees spend a limited amount of time staring directly at the speaker or at every person in the room. In zoom meetings, attendees spend the majority of the meeting looking into the face of all participants on the screen for extended periods of time. The up-close, intense, and direct eye-gaze, normally reserved for family and close friends, but is now being employed for colleagues and strangers for extended periods of time each day.

Extra subconscious mental processing *

Non-verbal behaviour, such as body language, is a subconscious, complex and integrative part of face-to-face communication. With video conferencing, we need to make an intentional effort to both read and communicate these otherwise effortless non-verbal cues. Viewing only a face and upper body means we have to work harder to read and translate the reduced body language cues. Moreover, more mental work has to go into interpreting eye and body movement that may differ on a video-grid screen to that in face-to-face interactions.

The 'mirror effect' *

Although there is always the option to ‘hide self-view’ on zoom, the default for video conferencing software is the ability to constantly see your own reflection during a call. Research has show that this self-focus and evaluation of their reflection, can lead to more pro-social behaviour, but can also lead to higher stress levels and can prime women (more than men) to experience depression.

Physically less mobility *

In face-to-face meetings it is acceptable to move in the chair, stretch, get up or even refill a glass or cup. In these meetings participants can generally see everyone else in the room. In a zoom call, there is a very narrow ‘cone’ of view that participants need to remain in for the duration of the call. Being forced to sit in a camera’s view reduces movement. Additionally, excessive movement does encourage visual attention from others, so it is often ideal to remain as stationary as possible.

A few hints and tips:

Individuals:

  • Try turning on the ‘hide self-view’ option on your camera once you have positioned yourself in the correct place in front of the camera.
  • If you use a laptop, use an external keyboard, allowing you to distance yourself from the faces on screen.
  • Blocking out sections in your diary that allow for breaks between zoom meetings can give you time and opportunity to move around more. 
  • Attending only the meetings you need to, rather than attending just because you can, will reduce the possibility of you being expected to attend more meetings than you really need to participate in. 

Teams: 

  • Allow participants to turn off their camera’s (in addition to muting themselves) if they are not actively talking. This will give them the option of getting up, moving around and writing notes without feeling ‘watched’. 
  • Setting out explicit video conferencing norms and keeping track of changes in implicit norms will help employees and managers to create a much healthier relationship with video conferencing tools. 

Although there are some behavioural norms around video conferencing that will naturally evolve and become part of how we do remote working going forward. Some of these norms have become nuances across various business cultures, depending on company and team policies. It will take time to develop a uniform video conferencing culture. In the meantime, it may be that teams (or even companies) need to develop and implement explicit ‘rules’ and norms that help to manage video meetings and reduce employees’ resulting fatigue levels. 

Related Articles
NeuroPlasticity

Digital Media and The Brain

by Digital Brain

A recent article published by NMSBA lays out 6 things that impact the neuroplasticity of the brain. There are positive and negative aspects to the impact of technology on our cognitive functioning. 

  1. Attention – Information learnt while multi-tasking can encourage information to be stored in the part of the brain specialising in facts and ideas rather than in long-term storage. This means the information is stored in a shallower way, therefore making it more difficult to retrieve. Regular interruptions also tend to reduce our ability to sustain our attention on the task at hand. 
  2. Memory – ‘Cognitive offloading’ is the tendency to rely on the internet to aid memory. Those who rely on Google more are less likely to form memory around the information they find. 
  3. Thought – Reading on a digital device can reduce your ability to think abstractly about what you are reading. Creativity and invention rely on the ability to deliberate and think deeply or abstractly. 
  4. Empathy – Being more distracted reduces your ability to be empathetic. Writing by hand may help create memory and thoughts, in a way that typing cannot. This can help us stop and think about others, and help us create deeper connections with others. 
  5. Meta-Awareness – Being constantly distracted by new information and notifications can reduce the brain’s ability to distinguish between what is important and what needs focus, potentially tricking us into thinking that something new is more important than what we are currently working on. 
  6. Attitude – Screentime can increase depression, anxiety and aggression, and can contribute towards some losing touch with reality.

Each of these areas is still being investigated by CyberPsychologists and others involved in investigating the interaction between humans and technology. 

As the workings of the brain are quite a specialist field, this will be an ongoing revelation about how new technology will impact how we think and behave.

Related Articles