Your screen addiction is changing the way your brain read stuff

Tuesday, 2 January 2018



Did you even spot the mistake in the title? If the answer is no, don’t worry. You’re not entirely losing your marbles, and you definitely won’t be alone in missing it. And fortunately, you now have science - and probably those long hours spent at your work desk - to blame for your own ineptitude. You see, your computer screen is quite literally changing the way your brain reads. And I’m afraid it’s not for the better.
Unfortunately, it’s not only the little errors you’re missing either; while scientists had already established that proofing on paper helps you pick up more errors, researchers from Dartmouth College, USA, have also found that reading from a screen limits the brain’s ability to understand concepts as deeply. So while the internet may be widening our access to interesting and challenging ideas more than ever before, the truth is, it’s all a bit wasted on us.
Apparently, it’s all down to the fact that when we’re reading from a screen, we tend to focus more on the minor details, rather than the broader idea: “The ever-increasing demands of multitasking, divided attention, and information overload that individuals encounter in their use of digital technologies may cause them to ‘retreat’ to the less cognitively-demanding lower end of the concrete-abstract continuum,” reads the Dartmouth College report. Or to put it in simple terms: it’s the brain version of computer says no.

In order to work this all out, scientists asked a group of 300 people to complete simple tasks based around making analytical judgements, comprehending stories and recalling information, with some of the participants using a screen and some of them completing the tasks on paper. They found that those using paper had a considerably better understanding of the concepts presented to them, while those using screens focused instead on fewer, more particular details.
In fact, the differences were pretty staggering; on one particular test, participants were asked to read a selection of information about four fictitious cars and then choose the car that should be considered superior. Just 43 per cent of those using screens gave the correct answer, compared to 66 of those reading on paper. Fortunately, there is a little redemption for screen lovers, because when asked questions with factual answers, such as details, participants using the digital platform scored better with 73 per cent correct, compared to those using the non-digital platform, who scored 58 per cent correct.
In what will come as bad news for Kindle (and murder mystery) fans, a comprehension test taken after reading a short story showed that the people who performed best in terms of understanding broader issues within the text were those who had seen the paper copies. So while you might remember that there was a green car in the story, you won’t necessarily think deeply enough to twig why it was even relevant - which kind of sucks if you’re trying to get your detective on.

The study backs up earlier research by scientists at the University of Leicester, which found that students exposed to entirely new information via on-screen reading took considerably longer to retain it than those exposed to it on paper: “What we found was that people on paper started to ‘know’ the material more quickly over the passage of time,” Kate Garland, a lecturer in psychology, told TIME. “It took longer and [required] more repeated testing to get into that knowing state [with the computer reading, but] eventually the people who did it on the computer caught up”.
However, that doesn’t mean that everyone agrees with the findings, with some arguing that the effectiveness of any intake depends considerably more on the reading preferences of the individual. Schools and businesses investing more in technology than ever before, partly because younger generations who have grown up with screens say it helps them to read faster and with more confidence. Craig Stark, a professor of neurobiology at the University of California, also contended that wider research is needed before we can say for certain whether it’s going to make a real difference: “This was a small, well-run study, but we have to be careful about extending the findings to the population at large,” he told ABC news. “We really need more research about how digital media affects us now and in the long-run.”

For now though, the moral of the story seems to be that if you need to swot for a big test or presentation and can’t seem to remember when the Battle of Waterloo was or exactly how much you’re going to need for that big investment, then revise on your computer - or even your smartphone. But if you want to actually be able to explain your “who, what, whys”, or to enjoy that book you’ve been looking forward to reading, then switch off your screen and go old school. Preferably on the sofa, with a glass of wine. 
And next time you’re about to dropthousands of dollars on a car, orhundreds of thousands on a house, spend the 30 cents it costs you to print the spec out - because even if you're not convinced of how much difference it'll make, you could just save yourself a whole world of pain.
Share

No comments:

Post a Comment

 
Copyright © 2015 SwiftIntel