CHAPTER 4 LOUDON
CASES 2
CASES 2
TOO MUCH TECHNOLOGY?
Do you think that the more
information managers receive, the better their decisions? Well, think again. Most
of us can no longer imagine the world without the Internet and without our
favorite gadgets, whether they’re iPads, smartphones, laptops, or cell phones.
However, although these devices have brought about a new era of collaboration
and communication, they also have introduced new concerns about our
relationship with technology.
Some researchers suggest that the
Internet and other digital technologies are fundamentally changing the way we
think—and not for the better. Is the Internet actually making us “dumber,” and
have we reached a point where we have too much technology? Or does the Internet
offer so many new opportunities to discover information that it’s actually
making us “smarter.” And, by the way, how do we define “dumber” and “smarter”
in an Internet age?
Wait a second, you’re saying. How
could this be? The Internet is an unprecedented source for acquiring and
sharing all types of information. Creating and disseminating media has never
been easier. Resources like Wikipedia and Google have helped to organize
knowledge and make that knowledge accessible to the world, and they would not
have been possible without the Internet. And other digital media technologies
have become indispensable parts of our lives. At first glance, it’s not clear
how such advancements could do anything but make us smarter.
In response to this argument,
several authorities claim that making it possible for millions of people to create
media—written blogs, photos, videos—has understandably lowered the quality of
media. Bloggers very rarely do original reporting or research but instead copy
it from professional resources. YouTube videos contributed by newbies to video come
nowhere near the quality of professional videos. Newspapers struggle to stay in
business while bloggers provide free content of inconsistent quality.
But similar warnings were issued in
response to the development of the printing press. As Gutenberg’s invention
spread throughout Europe, contemporary literature exploded in popularity, and much
of it was considered mediocre by intellectuals of the era. But rather than
being destroyed, it was simply in the early stages of fundamental change. As people
came to grips with the new technology andthe new norms governing it,
literature, newspapers, scientific journals, fiction, and non-fiction all began
to contribute to the intellectual climate instead of detracting from it. Today,
we can’t imagine a world without print media.
Advocates of digital media argue
that history is bound to repeat itself as we gain familiarity with the Internet
and other newer technologies. The scientific revolution was galvanized by peer
review and collaboration enabled by the printing press. According to many
digital media supporters, the Internet will usher in a similar revolution in publishing
capability and collaboration, and it will be a resounding success for society
as a whole.
This may all be true, but from a
cognitive standpoint, the effects of the Internet and other digital devices
might not be so positive. New studies suggest that digital technologies are
damaging our ability to think clearly and focus. Digital technology users
develop an inevitable desire to multitask, doing several things at once while
using their devices. Although TV, the Internet, and video games are effective
at developing our visual processing ability, research suggests that they
detract from our ability to think deeply and retain information. It’s true that
the Internet grants users easy access to the world’s information, but the
medium through which that information is delivered is hurting our ability to think
deeply and critically about what we read and hear. You’d be “smarter” (in the
sense of being able to give an account of the content) by reading a book rather
than viewing a video on the same topic while texting with your friends.
Using the Internet lends itself to
multitasking. Pages are littered with hyperlinks to other sites; tabbed
browsing allows us to switch rapidly between two windows; and we can surf the
Web while watching TV, instant messaging friends, or talking on the phone. But
the constant distractions and disruptions that are central to online
experiences prevent our brains from creating the neural connections that
constitute full understanding of a topic.
Traditional print media, by contrast, makes it easier to fully concentrate on
the content with fewer interruptions.
A recent study conducted by a team
of researchers at Stanford found that multitaskers are not only more easily
distracted, but were also surprisingly poor atmultitasking compared to people
who rarely do so themselves. The team also found that multitaskers receive a
jolt of excitement when confronted with a new piece of information or a new
call, message, or e-mail. The cellular structure of the brain is highly adaptable
and adjusts to the tools we use, so multitaskers quickly become dependent on
the excitement they experience when confronted with something new. This means
that multitaskers continue to be easily distracted, even if they’re totally
unplugged from the devices they most often use.
Eyal Ophir, a cognitive scientist on
the research team at Stanford, devised a test to measure this phenomenon. Subjects
self-identifying as multitaskers were asked to keep track of red rectangles in
series of images. When blue rectangles were introduced, multitaskers struggled
to recognize whether or not the red rectangles had changed position from image
to image. Normal testers significantly
outperformed the multitaskers. Less than three percent of multitaskers (called
“supertaskers”) are able to manage multiple information streams at once; for
the vast majority of us, multitasking does not result in greater productivity.
Neuroscientist Michael Merzenich
argues that our brains are being ‘massively remodeled’ by our constant and
ever-growing usage of the Web. And it’s not just the Web that’s contributing to
this trend. Our ability to focus is also being undermined by the constant
distractions provided by smart phones and other digital technology. Television
and video games are no exception. Another study showed that when presented with
two identical TV shows, one of which had a news crawl at the bottom, viewers
retained much more information about the show without the news crawl. The
impact of these technologies on children may be even greater than the impact on
adults, because their brains are still developing, and they already struggle to
set proper priorities and resist impulses.
The implications of recent research
on the impact of Web 2.0 “social” technologies for management decision making
are significant. As it turns out, the “always-connected” harried executive securrying
through airports and train stations, holding multiple voice and text
conversations with clients and co-workers on sometimes several mobile devices, might
not be a very good decision maker. In fact, the quality of decision making most
likely falls as the quantity of digital information increases through multiple channels,
and managers lose their critical thinking
capabilities. Likewise, in terms of
management productivity, studies of Internet use in the
workplace suggest that Web 2.0
social technologies offer managers new opportunities to waste time rather than
focus on their responsibilities. Checked your Facebook page today? Clearly we
need to find out more about the impacts of mobile and social technologies on
management work.
Sources: Randall Stross, “Computers
at Home: Educational Hope vs. Teenage Reality,” The New York Times, July 9,
2010; Matt Richtel, “Hooked on Gadgets, and Paying a Mental Price,” The New
York Times, June 6, 2010; Clay Shirky, “Does the Internet Make you Smarter?” The
Wall Street Journal, June 4, 2010; Nicholas Carr, “Does the Internet Make you
Dumber?” The Wall Street Journal, June 5, 2010; Ofer Malamud and Christian
Pop-Echeles, “Home Computer Use and the Development of Human Capital,” January
2010; and “Is Technology Producing a Decline in Critical Thinking and Analysis?”
Science Daily, January 29, 2009.
CASE STUDY
1. What are some of the arguments
for and against the use of digital media?
2. How might the brain affected by
constant digital media usage?
3. Do you think these arguments
outweigh the positives of digital media usage? Why or why not?
4. What additional concerns are
there for children using digital media? Should children under 8 use computers
and cellphones? Why or why not?
Solution:
If we use our digital media can be
more aware of media developments and their usefulness if digital media is appropriate
for our needs for the digital media.
if we deny the existence of digital
media around us then I think we will have difficulty facing any activity that
relate to digital media according to date.
Because our brains continue to
respond whenever there is development of digital media so that our brains are
being "massively remodeled" by our constant and ever-growing usage of
the Web. And it's not just the Web that's contributing to this trend. Our
ability to focus is also being undermined by the constant distractions provided
by smart phones and other digital technology.
I think these arguments
outweigh the positives of digital media usage because the argument discusses
the values of the positive and negative uses of digital media along with how
digital media should be used and at what age should one start using the digital
media.
The additional concerns are there
for children using digital media is the negative effect that will be received
by the children of the digital media is greater than the impact on adults,
because their brains are still developing, and they've been struggling to set
the right priorities and resist impulses.