WEBVTT - Bringing attention back into focus 0:00:01.760 --> 0:00:05.040 Hi, I'm Louise Aria and I'm Francesca Rudgin and welcome 0:00:05.080 --> 0:00:08.240 to our final episode for season five at our New 0:00:08.320 --> 0:00:10.360 Zealand Herald podcast, The Little Things. 0:00:10.400 --> 0:00:12.840 Thanks for joining us in this podcast. We sit down 0:00:12.840 --> 0:00:15.080 with the experts in their fields to unpack the little 0:00:15.080 --> 0:00:17.160 things that can help us navigate life at our agent 0:00:17.200 --> 0:00:20.440 stage and really at any agent stage, where he had 0:00:20.440 --> 0:00:22.239 to cut through the overload of information and get to 0:00:22.280 --> 0:00:25.079 the nitty gritty other things that impact us every day. 0:00:25.320 --> 0:00:26.840 So at the beginning of the year, Louise, I don't 0:00:26.840 --> 0:00:28.680 know if you remember, but we were talking about what 0:00:28.720 --> 0:00:30.520 we'd love to get out of this podcast and things 0:00:30.560 --> 0:00:32.560 to work on throughout the year, and I said to you, 0:00:32.880 --> 0:00:35.960 I made a comment about my shitty attention span. Do 0:00:36.040 --> 0:00:38.440 you remember this? Like it had been summer, and I 0:00:38.520 --> 0:00:40.879 was really excited. I had this pile of books to 0:00:40.960 --> 0:00:42.960 read and I was really looking forward to just tearing 0:00:43.000 --> 0:00:45.400 into them. And I'd pick up a book and then 0:00:45.880 --> 0:00:48.560 five minutes later I'd be picking up my phone going, Oh, 0:00:48.600 --> 0:00:50.720 what's happened in the world, what's the news, which was 0:00:50.720 --> 0:00:53.280 absolutely ridiculous because it's Christmas and there is no news, 0:00:53.360 --> 0:00:55.080 nothing happens and it didn't matter how many days I 0:00:55.080 --> 0:00:56.800 did this and there was still no news. I just 0:00:56.800 --> 0:00:59.880 found myself completely distracted, so easily distracted. And I was 0:01:00.040 --> 0:01:00.800 quite surprised by this. 0:01:01.080 --> 0:01:02.960 And it's not like you, because you love a book. 0:01:03.200 --> 0:01:05.560 I know that's the thing. That's why it took me 0:01:05.600 --> 0:01:09.479 by That's what took me by surprise. Nobody's surprised about 0:01:09.480 --> 0:01:12.760 my lack of attention span. Oh, I have a lack 0:01:12.800 --> 0:01:14.959 of attention span in other areas of my life that 0:01:15.040 --> 0:01:18.640 they were already obvious. I think that's probably why it's Yeah, 0:01:18.720 --> 0:01:20.280 I don't hasn't improved. 0:01:20.319 --> 0:01:21.399 How is it now? You know? 0:01:21.440 --> 0:01:23.840 It has improved immensely, But that's because but I had 0:01:23.880 --> 0:01:25.000 to do a bit of work on it, like I 0:01:25.040 --> 0:01:28.920 had to, and mostly it's improved around my work day, 0:01:29.120 --> 0:01:31.520 Like I've actually gone, I'm going to sit and I'm 0:01:31.520 --> 0:01:33.680 going to get this task completed before I look at 0:01:33.680 --> 0:01:35.479 emails and before I pick up my phone and respond 0:01:35.480 --> 0:01:37.559 to texts, and before I'm distracted by other people needing 0:01:37.560 --> 0:01:39.880 other things from me. So I actually had to put 0:01:39.880 --> 0:01:43.600 a few boundaries and sort of just put some structure 0:01:43.640 --> 0:01:46.080 around my work, and actually I am getting it all 0:01:46.120 --> 0:01:49.120 done a lot faster, and I really enjoyed a lot 0:01:49.120 --> 0:01:51.360 of my work is writing, whether it's podcasts or film 0:01:51.400 --> 0:01:53.040 reviews and things like that, and I love getting into 0:01:53.040 --> 0:01:55.200 the flow of it. And I was noticing that every 0:01:55.240 --> 0:01:57.520 time I was getting distracted by something else or someone 0:01:57.520 --> 0:01:59.680 needing something else, I'd just kind of I'd stop and 0:01:59.720 --> 0:02:01.800 I'd get out of that flow. So it's yeah, no, 0:02:01.880 --> 0:02:04.279 it's that's worked well, but I still struggle with the book. 0:02:04.720 --> 0:02:06.000 Maybe you should try and write one. 0:02:07.040 --> 0:02:10.360 God, no, you've got a pretty good attention span, though. 0:02:10.320 --> 0:02:14.399 Oh my god, it's just no mine has. So you've 0:02:14.440 --> 0:02:16.720 improved through the year. Mine has actually gotten the worse. 0:02:17.200 --> 0:02:20.840 When I say improved, it's just well, I mean if 0:02:20.840 --> 0:02:23.280 I do things like set in my phone for forty 0:02:23.280 --> 0:02:27.000 five minutes, right, put a thing on timer forty five minutes, 0:02:27.080 --> 0:02:30.040 or do a block of work if I have one task. 0:02:30.080 --> 0:02:33.359 But I think the difference is I've got more, As 0:02:33.400 --> 0:02:34.920 you know, I used to work on one project at 0:02:34.919 --> 0:02:37.840 a time. Now I'm working on that's my problem. I've 0:02:37.880 --> 0:02:40.040 got a whole lot of different jobs. Yeah, and that's 0:02:40.080 --> 0:02:43.440 where it all disappears. You give something some attention for 0:02:43.440 --> 0:02:45.360 a little while, and then somebody needs you for something 0:02:45.360 --> 0:02:49.480 on something else, or and it might be FTU wise 0:02:49.520 --> 0:02:52.320 divided into days that I get paid by which project, 0:02:52.480 --> 0:02:53.959 but it's not the same in my head, perhaps I 0:02:53.960 --> 0:02:55.400 should do it that way, but it doesn't work. 0:02:55.440 --> 0:02:57.400 And then I work from home, so I'm distracted by 0:02:57.480 --> 0:03:00.000 I'll just quickly do that laundry. Oh, what's in the pantry? 0:03:00.160 --> 0:03:02.000 What's in the fridge that I don't know? The fridge 0:03:02.000 --> 0:03:03.600 in the pantry are hugely distracting. 0:03:05.200 --> 0:03:07.680 I'm so much worse if I work from home. Frenchhyse 0:03:07.680 --> 0:03:11.600 Spirt's ridiculous. And again I've got something that just got 0:03:11.639 --> 0:03:14.440 a deadline, and I'm fine on a deadline. But you 0:03:14.480 --> 0:03:16.360 know where I noticed? I joined a gym, and it 0:03:16.440 --> 0:03:18.720 was the university gym, which is stunning if you get 0:03:18.720 --> 0:03:21.079 a chance to see, it's beautiful. But it's full of 0:03:21.120 --> 0:03:24.280 really young people, which was fine. I could have stayed there, 0:03:24.280 --> 0:03:26.359 but it just ended up taking up too much time 0:03:26.360 --> 0:03:30.079 in my day. But you know how exercises changed, right, 0:03:30.120 --> 0:03:35.280 so now we're lifting heavier, fewer sets and fewer reps. 0:03:35.760 --> 0:03:38.400 But between the reps, between sets, you're supposed to have 0:03:38.440 --> 0:03:42.320 a two minute rest, right, according to my son, Strengthen 0:03:42.320 --> 0:03:44.640 and gndising coach, Mum, you need that two minutes. You 0:03:44.680 --> 0:03:47.960 need to be readio. Now, why can't I just sit 0:03:48.560 --> 0:03:50.520 or stand up and eat someone else use a machine 0:03:50.600 --> 0:03:52.800 or something and just steering to know for a couple 0:03:52.840 --> 0:03:54.160 of minutes. I can't do it. 0:03:54.200 --> 0:03:55.680 And you're always on your phone or something. 0:03:55.720 --> 0:03:59.200 Everybody is, everybody is you just shuffle to the end 0:03:59.200 --> 0:04:01.360 of the ever read is it your machine you're on 0:04:01.480 --> 0:04:04.200 and don't make eye contact no matter what, and just 0:04:04.240 --> 0:04:06.000 look at your phone until that time is up and 0:04:06.000 --> 0:04:09.640 then you go back to your exercise. It's like, I 0:04:09.640 --> 0:04:12.520 don't know, I'm a self interrupter. I'm my own worst 0:04:12.640 --> 0:04:14.880 enemy and I'm over it and I want to be 0:04:14.880 --> 0:04:15.120 free of it. 0:04:15.240 --> 0:04:18.279 Lets you're honest about it. We're own own worst enemies. 0:04:18.640 --> 0:04:20.480 So we're at that point of the year, aren't we that. 0:04:20.680 --> 0:04:22.360 You know a lot of people are feeling quite tired. 0:04:22.560 --> 0:04:25.080 The year is winding down, and yet we feel like 0:04:25.080 --> 0:04:27.000 we're winding up because we've just realized it's nearly the 0:04:27.040 --> 0:04:29.120 end of the year and there's ape too. The pressure 0:04:29.160 --> 0:04:31.159 is on to complete work projects, take off, end of 0:04:31.200 --> 0:04:35.760 your events before the beautiful summer holidays. We hope it 0:04:35.880 --> 0:04:38.680 seemed like a good time to talk about focus and 0:04:38.760 --> 0:04:40.920 our attention spans and help us get to the end 0:04:40.920 --> 0:04:42.400 of the year in one piece. 0:04:42.520 --> 0:04:44.919 Yeah So, back in twenty twenty three, I covered this 0:04:44.960 --> 0:04:48.000 topic on newstalk Z'B with a fabulous academic and author, 0:04:48.040 --> 0:04:52.080 Gloria Mark. Gloria is a Chancellor's Professor of Informatics at 0:04:52.080 --> 0:04:55.760 the University of California. She has a PhD in psychology 0:04:55.839 --> 0:04:58.640 and studies the impact of digital media on our lives. 0:04:59.200 --> 0:05:02.560 Her researchocuses on digital devices and the role they play 0:05:02.600 --> 0:05:06.360 in multitasking, interruptions, and our mood. Gloria has written a book. 0:05:06.360 --> 0:05:09.560 It's called Attention Span, Finding Focus for Fulfilling Life. And 0:05:09.640 --> 0:05:12.240 Gloria Mark is with us now, welcome, Good to have 0:05:12.279 --> 0:05:13.000 you with us. 0:05:13.320 --> 0:05:14.920 It's very nice to be here. 0:05:15.080 --> 0:05:19.200 So, Gloria, I mean, before you join us, Francisca and 0:05:19.279 --> 0:05:24.000 I we're just talking about our oscillating attention spans, will 0:05:24.040 --> 0:05:25.919 be the most polite way of putting it. Mine seems 0:05:25.920 --> 0:05:28.120 to have gotten worse. Francisca is maybe a tiny little 0:05:28.120 --> 0:05:30.480 bit better from having worked on it a bit. How 0:05:30.600 --> 0:05:33.760 have our lives changed in the modern digital area era? 0:05:33.920 --> 0:05:36.600 And is that the driver for our lack of attention. 0:05:38.360 --> 0:05:41.880 I would say it, yet it's because you mentioned I've 0:05:41.880 --> 0:05:46.760 been studying attention for a long time. I've been empirically 0:05:47.000 --> 0:05:51.120 tracking attention, and over a twenty year period, our attention 0:05:51.240 --> 0:05:58.760 spans on screens declined. Back around twenty two thousand and four, 0:05:59.560 --> 0:06:02.039 the hour averaged about two and a half minutes on 0:06:02.120 --> 0:06:07.080 a screen before people switched to something else, and starting 0:06:07.200 --> 0:06:12.440 from around twenty sixteen, they were averaging forty seven seconds. 0:06:12.440 --> 0:06:17.600 And these studies have been repeated multiple times, so our 0:06:17.640 --> 0:06:19.520 attention spans have declined. 0:06:20.040 --> 0:06:23.800 Forty seven seconds, not even a minute. We can't even 0:06:23.839 --> 0:06:25.880 give something a minute now. 0:06:26.760 --> 0:06:29.400 Now that's the average, but if you look at the median, 0:06:29.720 --> 0:06:34.640 the midpoint of all the data, it's worse. It's forty seconds. 0:06:35.000 --> 0:06:37.120 Can you just put that in perspective? If I'm just 0:06:37.160 --> 0:06:40.680 imagining myself sitting at my desk with my screen screens 0:06:40.760 --> 0:06:44.240 multiple because I can't just say one screen anymore in 0:06:44.279 --> 0:06:47.359 front of me. Do you mean I'm looking? So just 0:06:47.360 --> 0:06:51.360 take me, make me average most people do. I'm staring 0:06:51.400 --> 0:06:54.640 at my screen for forty seven seconds, and I want 0:06:54.680 --> 0:06:56.240 I get a thing on my phone so I look 0:06:56.279 --> 0:06:58.520 at it. I'm just trying to make this relatable. 0:06:59.360 --> 0:07:03.920 Yeah, so you suddenly switch look at your phone, then 0:07:03.960 --> 0:07:07.560 you go back, you're trying to read an article. Maybe 0:07:07.720 --> 0:07:11.960 you can pay attention for two or three minutes, but 0:07:12.000 --> 0:07:14.480 then all of a sudden, you've got texting, You check 0:07:14.520 --> 0:07:17.560 your email, you decided you want to check news, and 0:07:17.600 --> 0:07:21.080 so you have this flurry of screen changes and then 0:07:21.120 --> 0:07:24.800 maybe you go back, you read it, maybe spend another 0:07:24.880 --> 0:07:28.240 couple of minutes on the article. So it's you know, 0:07:28.560 --> 0:07:34.240 it varies, there's variability, but we're talking about the average, 0:07:34.400 --> 0:07:39.480 and again we talk about the midpoint. Right. Half the 0:07:39.600 --> 0:07:43.520 data means is that our attention spans are longer than 0:07:43.560 --> 0:07:47.239 forty seconds, but half the data shows that our attention 0:07:47.360 --> 0:07:50.320 spans are shorter than forty seconds. 0:07:50.880 --> 0:07:53.240 So if you take those these decades that you've been 0:07:53.320 --> 0:07:56.560 sort of tracking our screen use in things, Gloria, are 0:07:56.600 --> 0:08:00.400 you surprised by these results and what you see today 0:08:00.560 --> 0:08:03.440 or did you very much anticipate that this is the 0:08:03.480 --> 0:08:04.480 way things were going to go. 0:08:05.880 --> 0:08:10.560 I was surprised. I was initially surprised when I first 0:08:10.640 --> 0:08:15.040 started tracking attention because when I looked at all of 0:08:15.080 --> 0:08:18.640 our activities, not just paying attention to a screen, but 0:08:18.800 --> 0:08:22.560 how long people had interactions in the workplace, and how 0:08:22.600 --> 0:08:27.400 often they read documents. That was every three minutes that 0:08:27.560 --> 0:08:33.560 people were switching activities, and if we just looked at attention, 0:08:33.720 --> 0:08:36.320 that was two and a half minutes. That surprised me. 0:08:37.200 --> 0:08:39.240 I thought it was going to be like ten minutes. 0:08:41.120 --> 0:08:46.319 So having had that first shock, I guess you know, 0:08:46.440 --> 0:08:50.760 I was less surprised to see that they had diminished. 0:08:51.360 --> 0:08:53.560 Is it a respective of age? 0:08:53.640 --> 0:08:58.560 So yes, In the workplace, most of our workers were 0:08:58.600 --> 0:09:01.840 between twenty five and forty five or twenty five and fifty, 0:09:02.120 --> 0:09:07.360 we didn't see any age differences. And the average attention 0:09:07.480 --> 0:09:12.400 span of young people in college was forty eight seconds, 0:09:13.120 --> 0:09:15.840 so there really wasn't any difference there. 0:09:16.360 --> 0:09:18.400 Gloria, how do you track attention? 0:09:19.760 --> 0:09:26.640 Yeah, so we use a software that can track when 0:09:26.760 --> 0:09:31.439 someone clicks on a window to bring it in the forefront. Now, 0:09:31.679 --> 0:09:35.560 this is a proxy of where we're paying attention. It's 0:09:35.559 --> 0:09:39.079 not perfect, but it's it's very good, and the assumption 0:09:39.320 --> 0:09:43.080 is that if a window is in the forefront, that 0:09:43.440 --> 0:09:48.360 you're paying attention. Right. It's not perfect, of course, but 0:09:48.440 --> 0:09:52.760 it does give us a sense of screen changes. So 0:09:52.840 --> 0:09:58.120 every time someone clicks to bring some other window to 0:09:57.720 --> 0:10:01.440 the forefront. Then you know, that's what we capture. 0:10:03.160 --> 0:10:06.959 Okay, So if we we can either blame ourselves and 0:10:07.080 --> 0:10:10.880 and you know, just tell ourselves we're bad, we're useless, 0:10:10.880 --> 0:10:13.839 well plus what's wrong with us? Or we can really 0:10:14.280 --> 0:10:16.520 and I'm sure we've done this, figure out what it 0:10:16.600 --> 0:10:20.040 is that's driving this change and attention span. It can't 0:10:20.080 --> 0:10:21.760 be our faultually. 0:10:22.559 --> 0:10:26.640 No, it's it's not. I mean, we were not innocent, 0:10:27.000 --> 0:10:30.319 to be honest. But there are a lot of factors 0:10:30.360 --> 0:10:37.000 going on. So there are algorithms and as you know, 0:10:37.080 --> 0:10:41.160 every time we go on the web, we click on 0:10:41.240 --> 0:10:45.240 things that we like, we visit sites, and all of 0:10:45.280 --> 0:10:51.599 our web activity is captured and profiles of our interests 0:10:51.760 --> 0:10:56.680 are created. And these profiles then are what tech companies use, 0:10:56.880 --> 0:11:03.280 ad remarketing companies use to gear information to us. And 0:11:03.360 --> 0:11:06.160 so of course, if it's something you're interested in, it's 0:11:06.360 --> 0:11:11.160 it's hard to resist. So, and algorithms are really quite 0:11:11.280 --> 0:11:16.040 sophisticated and powerful in capturing attention. And of course they 0:11:16.080 --> 0:11:20.679 some of them appealed to very basic emotions like surprise 0:11:20.840 --> 0:11:25.439 and excitement and anger, and it's it's very hard to 0:11:27.000 --> 0:11:32.880 not be attracted to information that incites these kinds of emotions. 0:11:32.920 --> 0:11:37.480 So there's that, because sorry, I'm just thinking. An example 0:11:37.520 --> 0:11:39.280 of that would be, you know, we get our news 0:11:39.280 --> 0:11:42.560 online now, right, So I go to open my usual 0:11:42.640 --> 0:11:46.280 source of news from a no online newspaper, and before 0:11:46.320 --> 0:11:48.599 I know it, I'm looking at my favorite braind of 0:11:48.679 --> 0:11:52.280 running shoe and then I'm saying, oh, is it on sale? 0:11:52.679 --> 0:11:54.760 Could I get it even cheaper? And I've gone down 0:11:54.800 --> 0:11:58.640 that yeah, at least than forty seconds. 0:11:59.200 --> 0:12:02.679 In my book, I write about a scenario about how 0:12:02.720 --> 0:12:06.440 I'm being tracked by boots because what happened to me 0:12:06.559 --> 0:12:10.400 once was I looked at a pair of boots and 0:12:10.800 --> 0:12:12.719 you know, I don't know, these are interesting? But then 0:12:12.800 --> 0:12:18.160 I clicked away, and every time I went to a website, 0:12:19.040 --> 0:12:23.040 an image of those boots would appear. They were taunting me, 0:12:23.920 --> 0:12:32.400 you know they would, you know they would, yeah, And 0:12:34.080 --> 0:12:38.120 you know it was it was hard to to not 0:12:38.240 --> 0:12:42.080 pay attention to them. The only way out would be 0:12:42.400 --> 0:12:43.800 to purchase those boots. 0:12:44.360 --> 0:12:48.679 So yes, but I quite like the expression you use 0:12:48.760 --> 0:12:50.959 being tracked by, because you do feel like you're being 0:12:50.960 --> 0:12:53.439 a bit stalked sometimes. I mean, I wonder if that's 0:12:53.480 --> 0:12:55.640 quite a good way to think about it, just to 0:12:55.720 --> 0:12:58.720 keep your head in the right place. So you mentioned 0:12:58.720 --> 0:13:01.720 the algorithms because you've got we've got this personal technology 0:13:01.800 --> 0:13:04.559 which probably on its own could be really useful and 0:13:04.840 --> 0:13:07.199 valuable in our lives. But then we're we've added things 0:13:07.240 --> 0:13:09.880 to it. And I'm presuming it's the adit the addition 0:13:09.960 --> 0:13:13.440 of the things like algorithms, and that that is the 0:13:13.520 --> 0:13:16.079 reason for this lack a focus. 0:13:16.120 --> 0:13:20.920 But also there there are things that are just part 0:13:20.960 --> 0:13:26.719 of our humanity that we can't avoid. For example, social dynamics. 0:13:27.000 --> 0:13:32.680 We're social creatures and you know in real life we're 0:13:33.000 --> 0:13:38.320 attracted to other people. We have pure pressure. There's we 0:13:38.480 --> 0:13:43.000 deal in social capital. So someone does a favor to you, 0:13:43.000 --> 0:13:46.640 you want to do a favor back. So there's a 0:13:46.720 --> 0:13:52.400 number of these kinds of social dynamics that influence us 0:13:53.200 --> 0:13:56.880 when we're online. So for example, why why do we 0:13:56.960 --> 0:14:01.400 check email? Well, you might get that really important message 0:14:01.960 --> 0:14:04.960 and then but you also want to answer it because 0:14:04.960 --> 0:14:08.040 maybe you want that person to be able to do 0:14:08.080 --> 0:14:11.840 a favor for you someday and answer your email. We 0:14:11.960 --> 0:14:16.599 answer text messages because we want to maintain social capital, 0:14:17.280 --> 0:14:21.760 so and slack the same kind of thing. So there 0:14:21.840 --> 0:14:25.600 are all kinds of social dynamics that are just wrapped 0:14:25.680 --> 0:14:28.320 up into how we use our tech. 0:14:30.640 --> 0:14:33.680 How long if we have been distracted, how long do 0:14:33.720 --> 0:14:35.640 we know how long it takes for us to get 0:14:35.800 --> 0:14:36.760 back on task? 0:14:37.560 --> 0:14:44.240 Yeah, so we had measured this in terms of projects, 0:14:44.480 --> 0:14:48.040 so I have to I have to unwrap this. So 0:14:48.760 --> 0:14:53.320 we switch our attention every forty seven seconds. But some 0:14:53.440 --> 0:14:58.440 of that attention switching is within the same project. So 0:14:58.680 --> 0:15:03.720 if I'm writing a I might be switching continually, but 0:15:03.920 --> 0:15:07.480 it's all about the same paper, so it's the same topic. 0:15:08.080 --> 0:15:13.080 And we switch projects about every eleven minutes or so. 0:15:14.320 --> 0:15:17.520 But when we switch out of a project, then it 0:15:17.560 --> 0:15:20.680 takes about twenty three and a half minutes to be 0:15:20.720 --> 0:15:24.840 able to resume work in that interrupted project. 0:15:25.240 --> 0:15:29.640 And in case again I need a visual, So we're 0:15:29.640 --> 0:15:32.080 not sitting there for twenty three minutes going and then 0:15:32.600 --> 0:15:35.680 at twenty three minutes where we are just not effective, 0:15:35.760 --> 0:15:38.200 we're not productive on that task. Is that what it is? 0:15:38.440 --> 0:15:41.360 What we're actually doing is we're switching out of one 0:15:41.480 --> 0:15:45.920 project into another project. We work on that and then 0:15:45.960 --> 0:15:49.760 we switch into another one, and then this is like 0:15:49.840 --> 0:15:53.080 the pattern of the data. Then we start to switch 0:15:53.280 --> 0:15:56.720 again into another one, So we go back to the 0:15:56.760 --> 0:15:57.240 first one. 0:15:57.360 --> 0:16:00.160 Right, so you're doing eleven minutes here, eleven minutes there, 0:16:00.200 --> 0:16:01.120 eleven minutes there. 0:16:01.400 --> 0:16:05.720 Okay, exactly right, exactly So by the time you resume 0:16:05.800 --> 0:16:12.480 that interrupted work, the original project, your mind has been elsewhere, 0:16:13.200 --> 0:16:16.160 and then elsewhere again, and then again, and then you 0:16:16.280 --> 0:16:21.000 go back. So it's very hard to reconstruct the work 0:16:21.840 --> 0:16:24.760 that you had originally been doing. 0:16:25.240 --> 0:16:27.600 What do we do about that, Gloria? It seems to 0:16:27.680 --> 0:16:30.800 me just understanding or maybe just being a little bit 0:16:30.800 --> 0:16:33.280 more aware when we sit down at our desks tomorrow 0:16:33.400 --> 0:16:37.480 or today of how we're working is probably the first step. 0:16:37.560 --> 0:16:39.920 In order to do anything about our attention. You probably 0:16:40.000 --> 0:16:42.200 have to kind of be a little bit honest about 0:16:42.240 --> 0:16:45.280 you to yourself with your own attention. 0:16:46.000 --> 0:16:49.440 Yeah, of course we do. We have to be aware 0:16:49.760 --> 0:16:54.640 of the problem, the fact that we have a hard 0:16:54.760 --> 0:17:00.560 time paying attention, the fact that there are so many distractions. 0:17:00.840 --> 0:17:03.640 So absolutely that's the first step. 0:17:04.200 --> 0:17:08.320 It's funny, isn't it, Because I don't know the physiological 0:17:08.320 --> 0:17:10.840 stuff around that don't mean things, but we think we're 0:17:10.840 --> 0:17:13.240 getting We think that that's quite fun right, going from 0:17:13.240 --> 0:17:15.520 project to project or going oh, that looks more and 0:17:15.680 --> 0:17:17.040 that's shinier. I'll have a look at that. I'll have 0:17:17.040 --> 0:17:19.520 a look at that. But actually, what Francesca is talking 0:17:19.520 --> 0:17:23.000 about is learning yourself and adapting and maybe having a 0:17:23.040 --> 0:17:26.480 strategy around it is actually much more self soothing than 0:17:26.720 --> 0:17:29.960 the sort of frenetic changing around all the time. Would 0:17:30.000 --> 0:17:30.440 that be right? 0:17:31.280 --> 0:17:32.000 Absolutely? 0:17:32.359 --> 0:17:33.040 Yeah. 0:17:33.119 --> 0:17:40.160 So you know, people think that it helps our performance 0:17:40.960 --> 0:17:45.040 to be able to multitask, right, People think, wow, I'm 0:17:45.080 --> 0:17:48.600 a great multitasker. I can get so much done. But 0:17:48.920 --> 0:17:53.720 the reality is that it actually harms our performance. But 0:17:53.920 --> 0:17:59.040 let me first explain that multitasking doesn't mean doing two 0:17:59.240 --> 0:18:03.639 things exactly at the same time, right. Humans are not 0:18:03.960 --> 0:18:06.639 wired to be able to do that. Our brains just 0:18:06.680 --> 0:18:11.720 don't work that way unless one of those things is automatic. 0:18:13.040 --> 0:18:16.480 So you can walk and text at the same time. 0:18:16.600 --> 0:18:20.760 Because walking is automatic, we're not thinking about it, we're 0:18:20.960 --> 0:18:25.520 thinking about texting. But as soon as you know, I'm 0:18:25.560 --> 0:18:29.639 in New York City and we have crazy bicyclists, and 0:18:29.680 --> 0:18:32.920 as soon as a bicyclist tries to grind me over, 0:18:33.600 --> 0:18:38.000 I will stop texting and pay attention to that bicyclist. 0:18:38.040 --> 0:18:42.360 So all of a sudden, it's walking is no longer automatic. 0:18:43.240 --> 0:18:50.360 But back to multitasking, what we're actually doing is switching 0:18:50.359 --> 0:18:55.320 our attention rapidly. So when we're working on multiple tasks 0:18:55.480 --> 0:18:57.840 and we think we're doing it at the same time, 0:18:58.600 --> 0:19:03.320 our attention is actually switching among these different tasks and 0:19:03.560 --> 0:19:06.680 we were We don't do that very well because that's 0:19:06.760 --> 0:19:11.080 not how our brains are wired to work. 0:19:11.480 --> 0:19:12.960 Yeah, I think I've done a bit of a self 0:19:13.000 --> 0:19:16.560 experiment on that over a long period of time before 0:19:16.560 --> 0:19:18.960 I realized it wasn't working for me. And quite often 0:19:18.960 --> 0:19:20.840 it is in to podcasts, whilst I was doing a 0:19:20.920 --> 0:19:25.399 less well what I considered a job that needed less attention. 0:19:25.520 --> 0:19:28.879 That was perhaps I thought it was automatic, right, And 0:19:28.880 --> 0:19:32.240 I'd often notice I hadn't caught anything if I was 0:19:32.280 --> 0:19:34.800 concentrating on the work, hadn't caught anything of the podcast, 0:19:35.800 --> 0:19:38.359 and I'd have to keep rewinding or just making it worse, 0:19:39.240 --> 0:19:42.679 or I'd made an error on my data entry and 0:19:42.720 --> 0:19:44.760 I'd have to fix that, so that what you know, 0:19:44.880 --> 0:19:47.600 ends up regardless, ends up taking twice the time. 0:19:48.480 --> 0:19:50.960 Yes, yeah, whereas. 0:19:50.640 --> 0:19:54.160 I'm completely different. I can't listen to a podcast and work. 0:19:54.240 --> 0:19:56.720 I have to do one or the other. I can't. 0:19:56.840 --> 0:20:00.160 I you know, clearly I can't do that. So true, 0:20:00.520 --> 0:20:05.040 So have we worked out if we are multitasking and 0:20:05.080 --> 0:20:09.639 we are going from one thing to another, it's less 0:20:10.520 --> 0:20:13.120 productive than if we were just focusing on one thing. 0:20:13.160 --> 0:20:14.879 I'm presuming we've worked that out. 0:20:15.520 --> 0:20:20.800 There are three reasons why it's less productive. So the 0:20:20.840 --> 0:20:25.240 first reason is we make more errors. And we know 0:20:25.320 --> 0:20:30.160 this from decades of studies in the laboratory that when 0:20:30.240 --> 0:20:32.920 people are you know, they're given a task and they're 0:20:33.000 --> 0:20:38.439 supposed to switch back and forth between them, they just 0:20:38.520 --> 0:20:43.760 simply make more errors. Number two, it takes longer to 0:20:43.880 --> 0:20:48.159 do any one task. So imagine that you were to 0:20:48.200 --> 0:20:50.760 work on a task through to completion and then you 0:20:50.840 --> 0:20:55.680 begin another task. Well, we would do pretty well if 0:20:55.680 --> 0:20:58.680 that's how we worked, but that's not usually how people work. 0:20:58.720 --> 0:21:03.840 They usually switch among these different tasks and then you 0:21:03.920 --> 0:21:10.439 have to do redundant work, You get interference, you forget 0:21:10.520 --> 0:21:14.840 where you are. It just doesn't work very well. It's 0:21:14.920 --> 0:21:22.280 like having an internal whiteboard in your mind, and every 0:21:22.320 --> 0:21:26.240 time you do a new task, you have to write 0:21:26.240 --> 0:21:31.440 the information you need on your mind's whiteboard, right, and 0:21:31.520 --> 0:21:34.359 so you're working on a task, you've got that information 0:21:34.520 --> 0:21:38.960 written inside your mind, and then you suddenly switch, so 0:21:39.000 --> 0:21:43.000 you have to erase that whiteboard and rape something new, 0:21:43.160 --> 0:21:46.240 and then you switch again. And what we're doing when 0:21:46.240 --> 0:21:50.359 we're switching so fast is we're writing and erasing and 0:21:50.400 --> 0:21:54.440 writing and erasing, and it's just not very efficient. 0:21:55.280 --> 0:21:57.439 So if we take it outside of the workplace and 0:21:57.520 --> 0:22:01.399 we're trying to have leash a time, because I know 0:22:01.480 --> 0:22:04.520 I self sabotage even my own leisure time, if you 0:22:04.560 --> 0:22:08.840 know what I mean, Like, why do we Franciski is 0:22:08.880 --> 0:22:12.040 the example when we were talking before you came on 0:22:12.480 --> 0:22:15.520 about reading a book and then thinking, oh, better, see 0:22:15.520 --> 0:22:17.840 what's happening, and then we'll pick up your phone. Is 0:22:17.840 --> 0:22:20.560 it the same thing, like why do we do that 0:22:20.600 --> 0:22:22.960 to ourselves in the leisure time? What's driving that? 0:22:24.119 --> 0:22:31.520 It's habituation. We're habituated to keep switching our attention. And 0:22:31.600 --> 0:22:36.880 I've been interviewing a number of people recently about their 0:22:37.520 --> 0:22:42.720 tech us, and a lot of people have been reporting 0:22:42.800 --> 0:22:46.119 that it's very hard for them to read a book. 0:22:47.040 --> 0:22:51.119 They used to be able to read and spend a 0:22:51.240 --> 0:22:54.040 long time with a book, and it's very very hard 0:22:54.080 --> 0:22:59.120 for them. And I think it's that they're just habituated 0:22:59.200 --> 0:23:05.320 to switching so much and that it's carrying over into 0:23:06.320 --> 0:23:10.120 what they do off likee In trying to read a book. 0:23:11.200 --> 0:23:14.680 No, I can't run the pavement anymore without having music 0:23:14.720 --> 0:23:16.600 in my ears. But that's not distraction. I just don't 0:23:16.600 --> 0:23:19.440 want to hear my breath or my feet hitting their pavement. 0:23:20.000 --> 0:23:21.280 That's good distraction. 0:23:21.960 --> 0:23:23.919 You're listening to the little things. And our guest on 0:23:23.960 --> 0:23:27.080 the podcast today is Gloria Mark talking about our decreasing 0:23:27.119 --> 0:23:30.160 attention spans and what's behind it and how we can 0:23:30.280 --> 0:23:42.600 rEFInd our focus. We'll be back shortly. Okay, So we've 0:23:42.640 --> 0:23:46.159