We are not crazy- overheard cell phone conversations are VERY distracting

I spend most mornings before visiting with clients at St. Elmo’s (my local coffee shop). Besides reading the paper and discussing politics with friends (and, of course, the coffee), what I like most about St. Elmo’s is its firm NO CELLPHONE POLICY.  I am sure you, too, feel that overheard cell phone conversations are very distracting.  Well, Lauren Embersen, while she was an undergraduate at the University of British Columbia, thought so, too.  The difference is that she performed the research to find out why  (for her Ph.D. at Cornell University).  The study results (co-authors are Michael Goldstein [Cornell University], Michael Spivey [University of California at Merced] and Gary Lupyan [University of Wisconsin-Madison]) are published in Psychological Science (September 2010; one needs to be a subscriber to read the document).  It turns out hearing half a conversation is much more distracting than hearing the entire discourse.

Ms. Embersen recording two pairs of female roommates holding a cell conversation- as a dialogue (both sides heard) and a “halfalogue” (only one side of the conversation could be

Pictogram: use of cellphones is prohibited

Image via Wikipedia

heard, i.e., a simulated overheard cell phone conversation).  A monologue version (one person recapping the conversation) was also recorded.

These recordings were then played for 24 volunteers at modulating volumes (and silence,

as the control), who performed two different tasks on a computer.  One test involved tracking a moving dot on the monitor with the

mouse.  The other test required them to push a button whenever they saw four specific letters flash on the monitor.  The volunteers were requested to ignore the sounds and just concentrate on the assignment.

Performance (missed responses, incorrect hits) was the worst when the “halfalogue” was heard.  Overhearing the dialogue provided a six-fold response for the moving dot test when compared to the “halfalogue”.  The letter response test performance dropped 10% during the “halfalogue” (when compared to the dialogue, silence, or monologues).  The “halfalogues” were also adjusted to sound muffled (as if underwater) to test if the acoustic characteristics of the voice affected performance (and not the unpredictability); there was no significant effect.

Ms. Embersen postulates that our brains tend to ignore predictable items, but pays closer attention to those items that are not predictable.  A dialogue flows predictably, so we tend to ignore it.  However, overheard cell conversations, with varying bursts of noise and silence, are much less predictable to our brains.

About RAAckerman@Cerebrations.biz

A polymath whose interests span chemical engineering, medicine, biotechnology, business, management, among other areas. Among my inventions/developments: dialyzer, dialysate, neurosurgical drill, respiratory inspirometer, colon electrolyte lavages, urinary catheters, cardiac catheters, water reuse systems, drinking water system, ammonia degrading microbes, toxic chemical reduction via microbes, onsite waste water treatment, electronic health care information systems, bookkeeping and accounting programs, among others.
This entry was posted in Brain, Medicine and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s