So, Peoples’ attention spans are shorter now – how can we catch them?

[GraceOlsen]

Hi guys, have you ever felt like you can't concentrate these days for more than a few seconds, well you probably won't get to the end of this post, but studies might have a say in that.

According to a study by Microsoft we now lose focus after a mere eight seconds. That's one second less than the notorious nine-second attention span of goldfish.

Apparently, our increasingly digitalized lifestyle is to blame. The mobile revolution, which started around 2000, has caused our attention spans to drop from 12 seconds to eight seconds.

Maybe, it's not all bad news. The report suggests that we've become pretty good at multitasking in the mobile age now (thanks, mobile phones), even if heavy phone users struggle to filter out irrelevant info.. and Microsoft thinks that this shorter attention span is a side effect of our brains adapting to the mobile Internet.

And if you're wondering whether there are any generational differences when it comes to mobile use, a survey says yes. A whopping 77% of 18- to 24-year-olds reach for their phone when they have nothing else to do, compared to just 10% of those over 65.

Hmmm, except something doesn't smell right...

You know what's fishy? Those supposed attention span stats that everyone keeps throwing around. As it is, our aquatic friends, the goldfish, aren't as forgetful as we thought. In fact, they're pretty darn smart and attentive.

According to neuro-psychogists, goldfish can learn and remember things just like birds and mammals can. They've even been used in countless studies to help us understand how memory works. And there have been hundreds of studies on memory and fish learning the subject dating all the way back to 1900s. Which proves no evidence that our attention spans are shrinking, but hey, what do I know?
*
But do you think your attention span is no more than eight seconds?

I guess I'd say congratulations if you made it to the end of the post, you've just proved that you can concentrate (for more than 8 seconds). Yay!

 

[Introversion]

The report suggests that we've become pretty good at multitasking in the mobile age now

That goes against other studies I’ve seen, that suggest no one multitasks well. I know I don’t.

As I’ve aged, I find that I bail out of things quicker than I did decades ago — movies, books, music — if it doesn’t grab me. I’m not sure this means I’m a becoming a goldfish rather than just becoming better at guarding my time? In my teens, I could count on the fingers of one hand novels that I started but didn’t finish. Today, I’d guess I DNF something like 30-50% of the novels I start.

 

[GraceOlsen]

That goes against other studies I’ve seen, that suggest no one multitasks well. I know I don’t.

Can't argue with you there, I'm yet to meet anyone who multitask well myself

 

[CMBright]

To paraphrase Twain, "lies, damn lies and stastistics".

Is this the average, median or mean? How many were questioned? Self selected or random selection? Self reported or testing? I lose interest fast if it isn't something I'm interested in, I can hyperfocus for hours, then wonder why I'm hungry and need to use the "facilities" when I feel like I haven't spent more than a few minutes at something.

I could be wrong but I doubt our attention span as individuals or as a society is decreasing. Even if we do think random thoughts, we have to be able to focus longer than 8 to 12 seconds or we wouldn't be able to finish an 8 hour shift at work or finish making a meal without wandering off, Dory-style from Finding Nemo.

 

[Gramps]

I think people's attention...Wait, what was the question? Was there a question? Now, where are my glass and why to I have one sock in my hand. Oh yes, I've got it. I'm as sharp as I ever was.

 

[stephenf]

I have no idea about other people's attention span . However , in 1962, the film Lawrence of Arabia was considered so long ,210 minuets , it was shown in two parts . Now , it would still be a long film , but the normal full-length films are nearly that or longer

 

[ChaseJxyz]

It would have been cool if you posted sources to any of the things you were saying...because it's really easy to lie online, and for people to parrot the lies, because "from Microsoft" sure does sound believable!

Also, you CAN multitask. But it's more like "parallel processing," you need to have (at least) two separate guys in your brain, each working on their own task. And it also has to be things that are different enough that they don't compete with the body's parts (as you still only have one set of hardware to share). Like you can't knit and chop onions at the same time, but you can knit and watch a movie. But 99% of people aren't capable of doing that, since they only have one person per brain/body.

 

[GraceOlsen]

As I’ve aged, I find that I bail out of things quicker than I did decades ago — movies, books, music — if it doesn’t grab me. I’m not sure this means I’m a becoming a goldfish rather than just becoming better at guarding my time? In my teens, I could count on the fingers of one hand novels that I started but didn’t finish. Today, I’d guess I DNF something like 30-50% of the novels I start.

Haha, no @Introversion. I don't think you're becoming a gold fish, just because you're not interested in a particular book or movie doesn't mean you easily put things off. So I guess you're doing yourself a favour for being selective. Today, there a too much information out there, that if you can't cut through the clutter, you're going to get caught up in the noise. As with books, movies, we're not obligated to read things that fails to excite us. My 1 rule for reading a book is reading the first chapter, if I'm not smitten by the end of the first chapter I'm moving on to the next. Besides there are lots of great books, life's too short to be stuck with bad ones.

 

[GraceOlsen]

I think people's attention...Wait, what was the question? Was there a question? Now, where are my glass and why to I have one sock in my hand. Oh yes, I've got it. I'm as sharp as I ever was.

Go Gramps!

 

[Introversion]

My 1 rule for reading a book is reading the first chapter, if I'm not smitten by the end of the first chapter I'm moving on to the next.

You’re more forgiving than me. I’ve DNF’d books after just a few paragraphs.

I do find that the Internet has made me more prone to interrupting myself, when reading. Reading on an iPad is a mixed blessing, since it’s so easy to just switch to a browser to “just check a few things”.

 

[GraceOlsen]

To paraphrase Twain, "lies, damn lies and stastistics".

Is this the average, median or mean? How many were questioned? Self selected or random selection? Self reported or testing? I lose interest fast if it isn't something I'm interested in, I can hyperfocus for hours, then wonder why I'm hungry and need to use the "facilities" when I feel like I haven't spent more than a few minutes at something.

I could be wrong but I doubt our attention span as individuals or as a society is decreasing. Even if we do think random thoughts, we have to be able to focus longer than 8 to 12 seconds or we wouldn't be able to finish an 8 hour shift at work or finish making a meal without wandering off, Dory-style from Finding Nemo.

Good point @CMBright. Can I like your reply a hundred time?

 

[Maryn]

Without any fanfare, we can do what the most popular modern fiction does:

• Write lean, without any unnecessary words.
• Make sure we don't repeat ourselves, rephrasing facts in evidence.
• Ensure ever scene advances either plot or character development.
• Keep chapters short.
• End chapters with a page turner when possible.

I'm not sure I value or even trust study results from a tech company, since they have a horse in the race, so to speak. I see people reach for their phones--but not when they're engrossed in what they're reading. It's on us authors to write the book people want to read a little more of.

Maryn, trying

 

[CMBright]

Without any fanfare, we can do what the most popular modern fiction does:

• Write lean, without any unnecessary words.
• Make sure we don't repeat ourselves, rephrasing facts in evidence.
• Ensure ever scene advances either plot or character development.
• Keep chapters short.
• End chapters with a page turner when possible.

I'm not sure I value or even trust study results from a tech company, since they have a horse in the race, so to speak. I see people reach for their phones--but not when they're engrossed in what they're reading. It's on us authors to write the book people want to read a little more of.

Maryn, trying

And then there are people who are reading on their mobile phones.

 

[Maryn]

(Them and their youthful eyes!) Good point. One of our daughters reads on her phone nearly every night, sitting next to her husband who's watching stuff that doesn't interest her on TV.

Maryn, who has to enlarge the scale so much she can't read easily on the phone

 

[Stytch]

I'm guessing there's "attention" and then there's "attention." Like, attention for advertising you are being asked to pay attention to against your will... ad reps will give a number like, 2 seconds or whatever, before you lose the customer. Opening lines of a book? Well, you've already made it into their attention by getting it picked up and opened, so... there's no way it's 2 seconds for that. Etc. Etc.

 

[dickson]

I have a bad case of Magpie Brain, so my intrinsic attention span is pretty short. But in practice, I attend to what I'm doing with a breaklock/reaquire-target cycle: My brain snaps back, I pick up where I was... I've been like that my entire life, and have had to come up with strategies to navigate life. Think "Motherless Brooklyn".

ETA: M. Brooklyn-the-novel has a favorite line, from Motherless hissownself: "You could kill me and I still wouldn't be frightened of you."

 

[Schaun]

Johann Hari's book Stolen Focus deals with this subject and it's excellent.

Hari has done of lot of writing and speaking on addiction and depression, but in this book, he looks at why our ability to pay attention is collapsing. He brings up a variety of attention-span statistics like the one you mentioned in your original post. For years, I've felt I've had a harder and harder time maintaining my attention for even short periods of time. Hari argues that our inability to focus is not some personal failing, but that in fact our focus has been stolen by the information and social environments in which we now live - environments drastically different even from those that our parents grew up in. He covers twelve different ways that our environment robs our attention, combining his personal experiences with research in neuroscience, psychology, and various social sciences with interviews with researchers all over the globe to figure out ways we can get our focus back.

One interesting tidbit: he brings in research and interviews with cognitive scientists to argue that multi-tasking doesn't actually exist. We can't focus on two things at one time. What we can do it constantly and rapidly switch focus between multiple things, and it's so taxing on our brain that our brain lies to itself and says it's actually focusing on all of those things at once.

This book really made me think differently about my ability to concenrate, and is helping me move past the technically-accurate-but-almost-entirely-usless kinds of advice you usually get on this subject, like "you just need to put your phone down more" or "you just need to spend less time on social media". I highly recommend the book.

 

[GraceOlsen]

Johann Hari's book Stolen Focus deals with this subject and it's excellent.

Hari has done of lot of writing and speaking on addiction and depression, but in this book, he looks at why our ability to pay attention is collapsing. He brings up a variety of attention-span statistics like the one you mentioned in your original post. For years, I've felt I've had a harder and harder time maintaining my attention for even short periods of time. Hari argues that our inability to focus is not some personal failing, but that in fact our focus has been stolen by the information and social environments in which we now live - environments drastically different even from those that our parents grew up in. He covers twelve different ways that our environment robs our attention, combining his personal experiences with research in neuroscience, psychology, and various social sciences with interviews with researchers all over the globe to figure out ways we can get our focus back.

One interesting tidbit: he brings in research and interviews with cognitive scientists to argue that multi-tasking doesn't actually exist. We can't focus on two things at one time. What we can do it constantly and rapidly switch focus between multiple things, and it's so taxing on our brain that our brain lies to itself and says it's actually focusing on all of those things at once.

This book really made me think differently about my ability to concenrate, and is helping me move past the technically-accurate-but-almost-entirely-usless kinds of advice you usually get on this subject, like "you just need to put your phone down more" or "you just need to spend less time on social media". I highly recommend the book.

Thanks so much Schaun for weighing in on this topic, One point that particularly stood out to me was his argument that multi-tasking is a myth—something that I've always felt deep down but never been able to grasp. The book seems to be full of insight. I'm glad to hear it's helped you rethink your own ability to concentrate and I'll definitely have to check it out for myself.

 

[Sully317]

I can relate, as I have mild ADD, which is one of the reasons I'm coming to writing later in life. Sitting and concentrating on something for hours before - SQUIRREL! - my wee brain wanders off can be a challenge.

 

[AZombie]

And then there are people who are reading on their mobile phones.

Oh boy. I worked in the office at a construction company once, and used to read on my phone during smoke breaks. Someone always had a snide remark about how I should "stop spending so much time on facebook". I was reading Moby Dick, dang it.

 

[Fi Webster]

Johann Hari's book Stolen Focus deals with this subject and it's excellent.

Thanks for bringing up this book, Schaun. I've had it on my wish list for a while and will now move it higher up in the queue.

My husband has ADHD, for which he's mastered a kitbag of nonpharmaceutical coping techniques, e.g. deliberate perseveration. And as a psychiatrist I know a fair amount about it. But from a personal point of view I have a different life history with what I used to think of as multitasking. Starting in college when I discovered I could sing every word of lyrics-intensive music for hours on end while simultaneously composing (while typing) research papers for humanities courses—and in fact could focus better while doing so than without the singing—I thought of myself as a natural multitasker. Later on, in my clinical training, I consciously explored the question of "How many mental/emotional/sensory/physical activities can I do simultaneously?" and discovered my limit is around five to six "tracks."

But along the way I learned enough cognitive science and neurobiology to realize my impression of multitracking—as if I were mixing lead vocals, backup vocals, two or three guitars, keyboards, drums, etc., for a studio recording—was in fact fallacious. While I subjectively experience all those attention tracks occurring at once, in fact my brain is doing rapid-fire switching, just as the audio engineer in the production booth is switching around mentally while running the boards with both hands. Paying closer attention to how my focus shifts around during live music performances helped me consolidate that understanding.

As with most of us, all these issues have come to the fore in the contemporary information environment. While I can still maintain multiple foci, I find I lack the discipline I once had to pull that off in an intentional way. That is, I can't reliably put the most important focus, like writing or making artwork, front and center the way I used to. It would be helpful to reframe the problem without self-blame—to figure out which info channels bleeding from my iPad/Kindle/stereo/TV/movie/social life are distracting me from that primary focus, and which ones are still supportive of the task at hand.

 

[Schaun]

While I can still maintain multiple foci, I find I lack the discipline I once had to pull that off in an intentional way.

That's one of the things I liked most about Hari's book. I was inclined to view my lack of focus as a lack of discipline, but he go into lots of ways our current information environment has been and continued to be deliberately structured to overcome our self-disciplinary safeguards and undermine our ability to focus.

Incidentally, Hari's work on depression and addition is also really great. If nothing else, his TED talks on the subject are both very good listens as well as just extremely humane treatments of subjects in which public conversations are too often marked by a lack of compassion:

"Everything you think you know about addiction is wrong":

"This could be why you're depressed and anxious":