Negative effects of technology Flashcards
Discuss one or more negative effects of technology on one or more cognitive processes.
INTRO
In today’s technologically advanced world, it is important to examine the impact of technology on cognitive processes. This essay will explore the negative effects of technology on cognitive processes, with a specific focus on the cognitive process of memory.
Two particular negative effects of technology on memory will be addressed. The first negative effect is the impairment of recall, whereby individuals experience difficulties in retrieving information from their memory. The second negative effect is the reduction in working memory capacity, which refers to the limited ability to hold and manipulate information in the short term.
Transactive memory will be examined, which refers to a system of collective memory shared among individuals. It encompasses both individual memories and knowledge about where to access specific memories, which can be stored in other individuals or external sources such as books or the Internet.
Additionally, media multitasking will be explored, which involves the simultaneous engagement with multiple media sources, such as watching television while reading emails on a tablet.
Study 1 : Sparrow 2011
Study 1: Sparrow 2011
Aim: investigate the relationships between memory, technology, and ease of access to information.
Procedure: Three experiments were conducted.
E1, participants were tested using easy or hard trivia questions and performed a modified Stroop task with technology-related words. Cognitive processing speeds were measured during the task.
E2 employed an independent sample design, where participants typed newly learned trivia facts into a computer. They were informed that the information would either be saved for later access or erased.
E3, the same procedure was used, but participants were given different messages indicating whether their entries were saved or erased, with variations in the folder names.
Results:
E1, the presence of technology words caused more cognitive interference, resulting in slower cognitive processing.
E2, participants who believed they could access the information later demonstrated poorer recall compared to those who believed it would be erased. The explicit instruction to remember had no effect on recall rates.
E3, participants had better memory for statements they thought had been erased and were more likely to recall the folder names where the information was saved rather than the actual information itself. These findings suggest the presence of the “Google Effect” or digital amnesia, where the expectation of easy access to information hinders recall ability.
Evaluation Sparrow
Strengths:
Experiment 1 and 3 utilized a repeated measures design, allowing for direct comparisons between conditions and enhancing the validity of the results
The tasks used in the experiments resembled real-world experiences, providing the study with increased ecological validity.
Limitations:
The study focused on a narrow range of memory effects related to digital technology, limiting its generalizability to other cognitive processes.
Attempts to replicate Sparrow’s findings have not been successful, raising questions about the reliability of the original study.
The tasks used in the experiments may have had low ecological validity, as they lacked personal relevance and value to the participants.
Demand characteristics may have influenced participants’ behavior and led to the discovery of the research aims.
The sample consisted of university students, who may not represent the broader population in terms of memory abilities and computer usage.
Overall, Sparrow highlights the phenomenon of digital amnesia as a negative effect of technology on memory. Digital amnesia refers to the impaired ability to recall information due to the reliance on digital devices and easy access to information. Through their experiments, Sparrow and her colleagues demonstrate how the expectation of accessing information later can detrimentally affect memory encoding and recall. It is important to consider its limitations and the need for further research in this area.
Study 2: Cain et al 2016
Aim: conducted a study to explore the relationship between media multitasking and cognitive processing, specifically focusing on working memory capacity and its impact on academic achievement in adolescents.
Method: The study involved a self-selected sample of 74 8th-grade students from the greater Boston area, representing diverse backgrounds in terms of gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Participants completed a questionnaire to determine the amount of time spent engaging in various media activities, such as watching TV, playing video games, reading print and electronic media, and instant messaging.
This information was used to calculate a Media Multitasking Index (MMI) for each participant through comparing it with standarized test scores.
Results:
The findings of the study revealed a significant correlation between media multitasking and reduced working memory capacity. Furthermore, the study found that higher levels of media multitasking were associated with lower academic achievement on the standardized tests in both math and English.
Evaluation study 2: Cain et al
Strengths .
The use of a standardized Media Multitasking Index (MMI) allows for a quantifiable measure of media multitasking behavior, adding objectivity to the study.
The study focused on real-world measures of academic achievement, providing a more direct link between media multitasking and its impact on academic performance.
Limitations
The study primarily relied on correlations between media multitasking and verbal/mathematical performance, and did not include laboratory experiments to establish causation. Therefore, the researchers caution against generalizing the results too widely.
^ It is worth considering the limitations of small sample size and potential biases in a self-selected sample, which may affect the generalizability of the findings.
^ The study focused on adolescents in the 8th grade from a specific geographical area, which may limit the generalizability of the results to other populations or age groups.
^ The reliance on self-reported measures of media multitasking may introduce recall bias or inaccurate reporting.
The study did not consider other potential confounding factors, such as socio-economic status
Overall, Cain et al. (2016) sheds light on the detrimental impact of media multitasking on working memory and academic achievement among adolescents. Media multitasking refers to the act of engaging with multiple forms of media simultaneously, such as watching TV while texting or browsing the internet. The study reveals a correlation between media multitasking behavior and reduced working memory capacity, as well as lower performance on standardized tests.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the essay explored the negative effects of technology on cognitive processes, with a focus on memory. Through the examination of two studies, Sparrow (2011) and Cain et al. (2016), we have gained insights into the phenomena of digital amnesia and media multitasking. These findings underscore the need for individuals to critically evaluate their reliance on technology and be aware of its potential drawbacks on cognitive functioning.
