The Internet is an interruption system. It seizes our attention only to scramble it. There’s the problem of hypertext and the many different kinds of media coming at us simultaneously. Every time we shift our attention, the brain has to reorient itself, further taxing our mental resources. Many studies have shown that switching between just two tasks can add substantially to our cognitive load, impeding our thinking and increasing the likelihood that we’ll overlook or misinterpret important information. On the Internet, where we generally juggle several tasks, the switching costs pile ever higher. We willingly accept the loss of concentration and focus, the fragmentation of our attention, and the thinning of our thoughts in return for the wealth of compelling, or at least diverting, information we receive.
In a Science article published in early 2009, prominent developmental psychologist Patricia Greenfield reviewed more than 40 studies of the effects of various types of media on intelligence and learning ability. She concluded that “every medium develops some cognitive skills at the expense of others.” Our growing use of the Net and other screen-based technologies, she wrote, has led to the “widespread and sophisticated development of visual-spatial skills.” But those gains go hand in hand with a weakening of our capacity for the kind of “deep processing” that underpins “mindful knowledge acquisition, inductive analysis, critical thinking, imagination, and reflection.”
The ability to scan and browse is as important as the ability to read deeply and think attentively. The problem is that skimming is becoming our dominant mode of thought. Once a means to an end, a way to identify information for further study, it’s becoming an end in itself—our preferred method of both learning and analysis. Dazzled by the Net’s treasures, we are blind to the damage we may be doing to our intellectual lives and even our culture.
We are evolving from cultivators of personal knowledge into hunters and gatherers in the electronic data forest.
From Nicholas Carr's The Shallows. Read more at Wired
Saturday, November 27
Friday, November 26
The Web Shatters Focus
What kind of brain is the Web giving us? Dozens of studies by psychologists, neurobiologists, and educators point to the same conclusion: When we go online, we enter an environment that promotes cursory reading, hurried and distracted thinking, and superficial learning. Even as the Internet grants us easy access to vast amounts of information, it is turning us into shallower thinkers, literally changing the structure of our brain.
A 2007 scholarly review of hypertext experiments concluded that jumping between digital documents impedes understanding. And if links are bad for concentration and comprehension, it shouldn’t be surprising that more recent research suggests that links surrounded by images, videos, and advertisements could be even worse.
When facts and experiences enter our long-term memory, we are able to weave them into the complex ideas that give richness to our thought. But the passage from working memory to long-term memory also forms a bottleneck in our brain. Whereas long-term memory has an almost unlimited capacity, working memory can hold only a relatively small amount of information at a time. And that short-term storage is fragile: A break in our attention can sweep its contents from our mind.
Imagine filling a bathtub with a thimble; that’s the challenge involved in moving information from working memory into long-term memory. On the Net, we face many information faucets, all going full blast. Our little thimble overflows as we rush from tap to tap. We transfer only a small jumble of drops from different faucets, not a continuous, coherent stream. When the load exceeds our mind’s ability to process and store it, we’re unable to retain the information or to draw connections with other memories.
From Nicholas Carr's The Shallows. Read more at Wired
A 2007 scholarly review of hypertext experiments concluded that jumping between digital documents impedes understanding. And if links are bad for concentration and comprehension, it shouldn’t be surprising that more recent research suggests that links surrounded by images, videos, and advertisements could be even worse.
When facts and experiences enter our long-term memory, we are able to weave them into the complex ideas that give richness to our thought. But the passage from working memory to long-term memory also forms a bottleneck in our brain. Whereas long-term memory has an almost unlimited capacity, working memory can hold only a relatively small amount of information at a time. And that short-term storage is fragile: A break in our attention can sweep its contents from our mind.
Imagine filling a bathtub with a thimble; that’s the challenge involved in moving information from working memory into long-term memory. On the Net, we face many information faucets, all going full blast. Our little thimble overflows as we rush from tap to tap. We transfer only a small jumble of drops from different faucets, not a continuous, coherent stream. When the load exceeds our mind’s ability to process and store it, we’re unable to retain the information or to draw connections with other memories.
From Nicholas Carr's The Shallows. Read more at Wired
Affluent Viewers Love TV
Affluent adults are watching the same amount of TV as they did a year ago, according to a new report. Research shows that individuals in homes with incomes of $100,000-plus watch an average of 17.6 hours a week this year, tied with 2009. However, Internet usage has shown a 12% bump, rising from an average of 22.6 hours a week in 2009 to 25.3 this year, according to the annual Mendelsohn Affluent Survey.
The research also found evidence that TV advertising reaches more adults than other media. Of a projected group of 44.1 million affluent Americans, 38.6 million saw an ad on TV in a six-month period. Magazines were second at 35.5 million. Web sites were fifth at 33.4 million (following direct mail and newspapers).
Read more at Media Post
The research also found evidence that TV advertising reaches more adults than other media. Of a projected group of 44.1 million affluent Americans, 38.6 million saw an ad on TV in a six-month period. Magazines were second at 35.5 million. Web sites were fifth at 33.4 million (following direct mail and newspapers).
Read more at Media Post
Thursday, November 25
Spammers
Spammers are moving onto social-networking sites such as Facebook because they find e-mail increasingly unrewarding. Online-security firms stop more than 98% from reaching its target.
Typical junk mail comes from freelancers who are paid to direct traffic to websites that sell fake pills and counterfeit brands. But fraud and forgery are illegal. Instead of tricking consumers into a purchase, they are stealing their money directly. Links used to direct the gullible to a site selling counterfeits. Now they install “Trojan” software that ransacks hard drives for bank details and the like.
Nor is Facebook as safe as Mr Zuckerberg would wish. As an experiment, BitDefender, an online-security firm, set up fake profiles on the social network and asked strangers to enter into a digital friendship. They were able to create as many as 100 new friends a day. Offering a profile picture, particularly of a pretty woman, increased their odds. When the firm’s researchers expanded their requests to strangers who shared even one mutual friend, almost half accepted. Worse, a quarter of BitDefender’s new friends clicked on links posted by the firm, even when the destination was obscured.
Read more at The Economist
Typical junk mail comes from freelancers who are paid to direct traffic to websites that sell fake pills and counterfeit brands. But fraud and forgery are illegal. Instead of tricking consumers into a purchase, they are stealing their money directly. Links used to direct the gullible to a site selling counterfeits. Now they install “Trojan” software that ransacks hard drives for bank details and the like.
Nor is Facebook as safe as Mr Zuckerberg would wish. As an experiment, BitDefender, an online-security firm, set up fake profiles on the social network and asked strangers to enter into a digital friendship. They were able to create as many as 100 new friends a day. Offering a profile picture, particularly of a pretty woman, increased their odds. When the firm’s researchers expanded their requests to strangers who shared even one mutual friend, almost half accepted. Worse, a quarter of BitDefender’s new friends clicked on links posted by the firm, even when the destination was obscured.
Read more at The Economist
Monday, November 22
Dotconomy
PayPal is one of a growing band of online companies dipping into the data they gather in an effort to divine trends in the American economy. Last month Hal Varian, Google’s chief economist, revealed that the search-engine giant had developed a “Google Price Index”, based on web-shopping data it holds—though it has yet to decide whether to publish it. While Google flirts with inflation, Intuit monitors employment. The firm, which offers online payroll, tax and other services to small businesses, produces a monthly small-business employment index based on aggregated data from 59,000 of its customers.
Tayloe Stansbury, Intuit’s chief technology officer, says that most of the firm’s data mining is geared to helping its customers. But some economic policymakers are paying attention to web firms’ statistics, for a couple of reasons.
The first is the speed with which the data are generated and crunched. Because web businesses gather data rapidly, their indicators can sometimes identify trends before official statistics. Take the case of Monster Worldwide, an online job service that publishes an index tracking jobs posted on its own and other sites. This fell sharply in 2007 before official numbers showed employment in America weakening
A second reason that web firms’ indicators are gaining popularity is the detailed data that underpin them.
Some economists caution that web firms’ data have big handicaps. Many of the indices have only a short history, which means they are of little value to policymakers interested in long-term trends. And they often measure only online transactions, which limits their appeal.
Read more at The Economist.
Tayloe Stansbury, Intuit’s chief technology officer, says that most of the firm’s data mining is geared to helping its customers. But some economic policymakers are paying attention to web firms’ statistics, for a couple of reasons.
The first is the speed with which the data are generated and crunched. Because web businesses gather data rapidly, their indicators can sometimes identify trends before official statistics. Take the case of Monster Worldwide, an online job service that publishes an index tracking jobs posted on its own and other sites. This fell sharply in 2007 before official numbers showed employment in America weakening
A second reason that web firms’ indicators are gaining popularity is the detailed data that underpin them.
Some economists caution that web firms’ data have big handicaps. Many of the indices have only a short history, which means they are of little value to policymakers interested in long-term trends. And they often measure only online transactions, which limits their appeal.
Read more at The Economist.
Ad Revenue Report
Online advertising revenue increased 17 percent in the 3rd Quarter of 2010 when compared to the same period in 2009. Internet ad revenue set a record in the process hitting $6.4 billion, according to the The Interactive Advertising Bureau.
Read more here.
Read more here.
Sunday, November 21
66 Mexican journalists killed
In the last five years, 66 journalists have been killed and 12 journalists have disappeared in Mexico, according to a report by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). There has been a conviction in only 10% of the cases.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)