Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Attention Span and Tech Autonomy as Moral Goods and Societal Necessities

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Digital Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we argue that attention span should be protected and cultivated as a societal and moral good and that individuals should have the autonomy to choose where they direct their attention without technological impediments. Attention span allows people to devote their attention to meaningful tasks and to focus on tasks or topics that require and deserve deeper concentration. Technology often diverts attention from the meaningful to the less so and changes how we cultivate attention span. We explore the concept of distraction technology, referring to technologies that divert attention and harm attention span. While recognizing the many benefits of information technology, it is important to be aware of and address the negative impacts of distraction technology on attention span and tech autonomy. Artificial intelligence has improved technology, enabling it to personalize and deliver information more likely to engage the user. Rather than giving in to technology that needlessly interrupts, scatters thoughts, and invades spaces where people once concentrated, we argue that there is a moral duty to protect attention span and tech autonomy. Apps, computers, and smartphones have allowed faster, efficient research and communication at the expense of some depth. Ethicists and the responsible tech ecosystem should support policies that preserve attention span and limit distraction. Technology developers should make design decisions that aim to keep people on task, rather than distracting them. Legislators, regulators, and the tech industry should work toward responsible technology that aligns with human interests.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data and Materials Availability

The authors did not engage in primary empirical research involving research subjects or use computations or data analysis.

Notes

  1. Personal responsibility for specific actions like participating in underground markets for organ sales or sexual predation are outside the scope.

References

  • 117th Congress. (2021). Kids internet design and safety act (S.2918 - KIDS Act). Congress.gov, Library of Congress: sponsored by Sen. Markey, Edward J.

  • Anderson, C., Bell, E., & Shirky, C. (2014). Post industrial journalism: Adapting to the present. Tow center for digital journalism, Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, T., & Childress, J. (2001). Principles of biomedical ethics (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, S. (2022). What is scheduled summary on iPhone? https://macreports.com/what-is-scheduled-summary-on-iphone/

  • Carr, N. (2010). The shallows: What the Internet is doing to our brains. W. W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Center for Humane Technology. (2021). Ledger of Harms. https://ledger.humanetech.com/

  • Dalha, L. (2017). Five listening skills for effective learning. https://penprofile.com/five-listening-skills-for-effective-learning/

  • Delgado, P., Vargas, C., Ackerman, R., & Salmerón, L. (2018). Don’t throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension. Educational Research Review, 25, 23–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denworth, L. (2020). Friendship. W. W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Floridi, L. ed. (2015). The Onlife Initiative. In: The Onlife Manifesto. Springer: Cham, pp. 7–13.

  • Graber, D. (2014). Kids, tech and those shrinking attention spans. Huffington Post. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/kids-tech-and-those-shrinking-attention-spans_b_4870655

  • Hanin, M. (2021). Theorizing digital distraction. Philosophy & Technology, 34, 395–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, S. (2014). Waking up: A guide to spirituality without religion. Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickok, M. (2022). AI organizations. AI ethicist website. https://www.aiethicist.org/ai-organizations

  • Holba, A. (2019). Listening in leisure: Enacting the Chora to cultivate understanding. International Journal of Listening, 33(3), 173–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyman, M. (2008). The ultramind solution: Fix your broken brain by healing your body first - the simple way to defeat depression, overcome anxiety, and sharpen your mind. Scribner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Information Commissioner’s Office. (2022). Introduction to the age appropriate design code. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/ico-codes-of-practice/age-appropriate-design-code/

  • Janusik, L. (2007). Building listening theory: The validation of the conversational listening span. Communication Studies, 58(2), 139–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Junco, R., & Cotten, S. (2012). No A 4 U: The relationship between multitasking and academic performance. Computers & Education, 59(2), 505–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Riis, J. (2005). Living, and thinking about it: Two perspectives on life. In F. Huppert, N. Baylis, & B. Keverne (Eds.), The Science of Well-Being (pp. 285–304). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karaiskos, D., Tzavellas, E., Georgia, B., & Paparrigopoulos, T. (2010). Social network addiction: A new clinical disorder? European Psychiatry, 25(S1), 855–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King’s College London. (2022). Are attention spans really collapsing? Data shows UK public are worried – but also see benefits from technology. https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/are-attention-spans-really-collapsing-data-shows-uk-public-are-worried-but-also-see-benefits-from-technology

  • Koessmeier, C., & Büttner, O. (2021). Why are we distracted by social media? Distraction situations and strategies, reasons for distraction, and individual differences. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(e711416).

  • Lodge, J., & Harrison, W. (2019). The role of attention in learning in the digital age. Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 92(1), 21–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansharamani, V. (2020). Think for yourself: Restoring common sense in the age of experts and artificial intelligence. Harvard business Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCulloch, G. (2019). Because Internet: Understanding the new rules of language. Riverhead Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. (2022). ‘We are killing people’: How technology has made your car ‘a candy store of distraction’. L. A. Times. https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2022-07-06/we-are-killing-people-how-technology-has-made-your-car-a-candy-store-of-distraction

  • Navia, L. E. (2007). Socrates: An examined life. Prometheus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Navidad, F., et al. (2013). Touch therapy and therapeutic listening: An approach to improve attention span and behaviors of people with autism. International Proceedings of Economics Development and Research, 60(3), 9–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oksanen, M. (1997). The moral value of biodiversity. Ambio, 26(8), 541–545. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4314663

  • Paul, J., Baker, H., & Cochran, J. (2012). Effect of online social networking on student academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2117–2127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ra, C., et al. (2018). Association of digital media use with subsequent symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder among adolescents. JAMA, 320(3), 255–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratti, E., & Graves, M. (2021). Cultivating moral attention: A virtue-oriented approach to responsible data science in healthcare. Philosophy & Technology, 34, 1819–1846.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raynes-Goldie, K. (2020). Dark patterns: The secret sauce behind addictive tech. Particle. https://particle.scitech.org.au/tech/dark-patterns-the-secret-behind-addictive-tech/

  • Rosenqvist, J., et al. (2016). Relationship of TV watching, computer use, and reading to children’s neurocognitive functions. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 46, 11–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seaver, N. (2019). Captivating algorithms: Recommender systems as traps. Journal of Material Culture, 24(4), 421–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Settanni, M., Marengo, D., Fabris, M., & Longobardi, C. (2018). The interplay between ADHD symptoms and time perspective in addictive social media use: A study on adolescent Facebook users. Children and Youth Services Review, 89, 165–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shah, P. (2022). Scheduled Summary is the best feature android should steal from iOS. Android Police. https://www.androidpolice.com/apple-ios-scheduled-summary-best-feature-google-android-should-steal/

  • Sharifian, N., & Zahodne, L. (2019). Social media bytes: Daily associations between social media use and everyday memory failures across the adult life span. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 75(3), 540–548.

  • Shuai, L. et al. (2021). Influences of digital media use on children and adolescents with ADHD during COVID-19 pandemic. Globalization and Health, 17(48).

  • Small, G., & Vorgan, G. (2009). iBrain: Surviving the technological alteration of the modern mind. William Morrow Paperbacks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timimi, F. K. (2012). Medicine, morality and health care social media. BMC Medicine, 10(1), 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomalin, M. (2022). Rethinking online friction in the information society. Journal of Information Technology.

  • Vallor, S. (2016). Technology and the virtues: A philosophical guide to a future worth wanting. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Van Noppen, A. (2021). Creating technology worthy of the human spirit. Journal of Social Computing, 2(4), 309–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verburgh, L., Scherder, E., Van Lange, P., & Oosterlaan, J. (2016). Do elite and amateur soccer players outperform non-athletes on neurocognitive functioning? A Study Among 8–12 Year Old Children. PLoS ONE, 11(12), e0165741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walburn Viviano, M. (2022). Investigators: Bay pilot operating ever forward was distracted. Chesapeake Bay Magazine. https://chesapeakebaymagazine.com/bay-pilot-suspended-for-ever-forward-grounding/

  • Ward, A. (2013). Supernormal: How the Internet is changing our memories and our minds. Psychological Inquiry, 24(4), 341–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, A., Duke, K., Gneezy, A., & Bos, M. (2017). Brain drain: The mere presence of one’s own smartphone reduces available cognitive capacity. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 2(2), 140–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, J., et al. (2016). On working memory and a productivity illusion in distracted driving. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 5, 445–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, R., et al. (2013). Life-span cognitive activity, neuropathologic burden, and cognitive aging. Neurology, 81(4), 314–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeykelis, L., Cummings, J., & Reeves, B. (2014). Multitasking on a single device: Arousal and the frequency, anticipation, and prediction of switching between media content on a computer. Journal of Communication, 64(1), 167–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge Camille Castelyn, Ph.D. for her participation in the conceptualization.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Columbia University, 2970 Broadway, New York, NY, 10027, USA

    Anne Zimmerman

  2. The Finnish Institute of Bioethics, Pirkankatu 21 A 9, 33230, Tampere, Finland

    Joel Janhonen

  3. Alumnus, King’s College London, England, Providence Medical Technology Inc, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Michael Saadeh

Authors
  1. Anne Zimmerman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joel Janhonen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael Saadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Each author contributed to the conceptualization, research, argument, and writing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne Zimmerman.

Ethics declarations

Consent to Participate

No research subjects were used for our paper.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zimmerman, A., Janhonen, J. & Saadeh, M. Attention Span and Tech Autonomy as Moral Goods and Societal Necessities. DISO 2, 23 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44206-023-00053-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44206-023-00053-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation