Technology plays an integral role in young people’s lives, however, there are a host of potential negative impacts associated with media multitasking for students.
By Dr Kristy Goodwin and Amanda J. Pooley
Digital Devices
ABSTRACT
Adolescents are growing up in a digitally-immersive environment, relying on a range of digital technologies for both learning and leisure. The proliferation of digital technologies in students’ lives has resulted in many engaging in media multitasking in an attempt to accommodate the constant onslaught of information being thrust at them.
Whilst research has confirmed that general multitasking impairs students’ cognition and wellbeing, there’s some evidence to suggest that the relationship between ‘media multitasking’ and learning and wellbeing is a complex one, warranting a deeper understanding and more nuanced conversations. This paper will identify why attention management is a critical, yet challenging skill for today’s students to develop, the impact of media multitasking on students’ cognition, physical health and mental wellbeing and will conclude with suggested strategies to help students cultivate their focus in a distracted, digital world.
The relationship between ‘media multitasking’ and learning and wellbeing is a complex one.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Young people are spending significant amounts of time with digital media1 and it is estimated that 29% of that time is spent simultaneously juggling multiple streams of media2. It’s important to acknowledge that there’s significant variation in terms of the data regarding adolescents’ daily media usage due to inconsistencies in data collection methods (student and parent self-reporting and not specifically time-tracking software being used) and increased digital requirements for learning purposes. Defined as the simultaneous use of two or more types of media, or rapid switching between media sources (for example, listening to music, whilst replying to messages and scrolling through social media), media multitasking has generally been correlated with poorer academic performance3, is negatively correlated with wellbeing4 and adversely impacts psychosocial relationships and physical safety5.
Research has confirmed that there are psychological and biological constraints that make multitasking ineffective. The brain is unable to perform multiple tasks simultaneously, or switch between tasks, without adverse consequences. Rapid task switching, or ‘continuous partial attention’, as it is sometimes referred to, leads to decrements in processing as the brain cannot concurrently process multiple neural processes. However, studies indicate that many of today’s students are frequently switching tasks, with one study showing that adolescents switch tasks every six minutes6 and more recent work suggesting that students have somewhere between three to five minutes of focused work before they switch their attention7.
Students have somewhere between three to five minutes of focused work before they switch their attention.
TYPES OF DISTRACTIONS
Gorman8 and Eyal9 distinguish between types of distractions as
- Internal — which tend to be emotional distractions such as thoughts and inner dialogue; and
- External — typically these are sensory distractions such as alerts, notifications and people.
This distinction helps to exemplify why digital distractions can be debilitating to adolescents’ focus. The technologies students use as part of their leisure and their learning (often to a lesser extent), particularly gaming and social media, have the potential to elicit both types of distractions. Whilst phone bans may remove the external triggers that prompt distraction, they do not deter the internal ruminations about the online world. Therefore, it’s imperative that today’s students are equipped with the skills and metacognition required to manage digital distractions, as they pose a significant threat to students’ focus.
WHY ATTENTION MANAGEMENT IS A CRITICAL SKILL FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
Teachers and parents/carers have observed that many students today are media multitaskers, concurrently consuming multiple streams of media by simultaneously—listening to music, whilst playing games, replying to messages and completing online homework10. However, being able to orient, direct and control one’s attention and resist media multitasking will be a fundamental skill to succeed in a digital landscape. Georgetown University Professor Cal Newport has proposed that focus is the new IQ11.
…being able to orient, direct and control one’s attention and resist media multitasking will be a fundamental skill to succeed in a digital landscape.
PUBLISHED 2018
WAYS STUDENTS’ ATTENTION SPANS ARE CHANGING IN THE DIGITAL LANDSCAPE
Teacher and student observations and anecdotal data indicate that students’ attention spans are being altered, potentially but not exclusively due to their digital immersion. Whilst it is difficult to obtain empirical evidence that proves causation, professionals and students themselves attribute waning attention spans to digital technologies12. Research has shown that many adolescents frequently engage in media multitasking, both when engaging in learning and leisure activities13.
Rosen studied 260 middle school, high school and university students as they studied in their homes for 15 minutes. He found that participants averaged less than six minutes of studying before switching tasks, most often because of digital distractions, but also due to students self-interrupting to check their devices14.
Adolescents frequently engage in media multitasking, both when engaging in learning and leisure activities.
WHY STUDENTS ARE VULNERABLE TO DIGITAL DISTRACTIONS
There are three colliding factors that combine to make it challenging for students to resist digital distractions:
PREFRONTAL CORTEX IS STILL DEVELOPING
Managing attention requires impulse control which occurs in the prefrontal cortex of the brain. However, this brain region isn’t fully developed until after adolescence and into the twenties15. During adolescence the prefrontal cortex is not yet myelinated, which is when a fatty white substance coats the neural pathways to allow for speedy transmission between neuronal axons, meaning that young people are still developing their executive function skills such as impulse control, working memory and mental flexibility. This results in young people being particularly vulnerable to digital distractions.
SELF-DETERMINATION THEORY
Derived from the work of psychologists Deci and Ryan, self-determination theory posits that humans have three basic psychological needs: connection, competence and control16. The online world, particularly social media and gaming, tap into these three basic needs, strengthening the online appeal and making media multitasking more prevalent in adolescents whose psychological needs are often fulfilled through their online pursuits.
PERSUASIVE DESIGN PRINCIPLES
The digital technologies that students use, particularly for their leisure pursuits, deploy a range of design techniques that make the online world very appealing for students. For example, the use of intermittent variable rewards, metrics, colour selections and ‘bottomless bowl’ principle means that users enter the ‘state of insufficiency’ whereby they rarely feel ‘done’ or ‘complete’. These design principles are tempting to a developing brain, where impulse control skills are still developing.
Younger students (preteens) are more sensitive to the negative effects of media multitasking.
The research literature suggests that younger students (preteens) are more sensitive to the negative effects of media multitasking on academic performance as their attentional systems and executive function skills are still developing17. Research also suggests that boys have more inhibitory control difficulties compared to girls because of delayed prefrontal development in the brain18.
IMPACT OF MEDIA MULTITASKING ON ADOLESCENTS
IMPACT OF MEDIA MULTITASKING ON COGNITION
Students and teachers are observing that students’ ability to focus is changing with increased digital exposure in teens’ lives. A 2018 study by Common Sense Media found that 57% of teens agreed that social media distracts them when they should be doing their homework19. A similar study by the same organisation reported in 2012 showed that 71% of teachers believed that digital media had ‘hurt’ students’ attention spans and compromised their academic performance20. A 2021 report from the Gonski Institute for Education at UNSW Sydney found that 83% of parents think their children are negatively distracted by digital technologies (and interestingly 90% think that digital devices negatively distract them)21.
57% of teens agreed that social media distracts them when they should be doing their homework
PUBLISHED 2018
Students and teachers are observing that students’ ability to focus is changing with increased digital exposure in teens’ lives. A 2018 study by Common Sense Media found that 57% of teens agreed that social media distracts them when they should be doing their homework . A similar study by the same organisation reported in 2012 showed that 71% of teachers believed that digital media had ‘hurt’ students’ attention spans and compromised their academic performance . A 2021 report from the Gonski Institute for Education at UNSW Sydney found that 83% of parents think their children are negatively distracted by digital technologies (and interestingly 90% think that digital devices negatively distract them) .
Research has shown that media multitasking (MMT) is generally, but not always, associated with reduced performance on academic tasks. MMT is correlated with lower academic achievement, poorer recall of teaching content and task performance22. The mere presence of a smartphone can diminish performance, as one study with college undergraduates revealed23.
There is currently mixed evidence to support the assertion that media multitasking is detrimental to students’ focus and subsequent performance. Some research suggests that high degrees of MMT can act as a form of cognitive training that could bolster task switching capabilities. However, other studies reveal the opposite effect25 and some studies show null effects26.
Other studies have shown that whilst media multitasking may not negatively affect performance, it does impact task completion time27, with students not adjusting their studying time to accommodate for interruptions if they engaged in media multitasking28. In one study, the time to read a passage increased from 29 minutes to 49 minutes when students engaged in instant messaging at the same time29. Research has shown that task switching can result in tasks taking up to 40% longer to complete the same tasks had they been completed individually and frequent switching depletes cognitive resources resulting in increased error rates30.
Students’ ability to focus is changing with increased digital exposure in teens’ lives.
IMPACT OF MEDIA MULTITASKING ON PHYSICAL HEALTH AND SAFETY
There is strong evidence to confirm that media use as a pedestrian or driver poses serious threats to adolescents’ safety31. These tasks require adolescents to focus on pertinent information, sustain attention to traffic, switch attention as required and ignore distractions, all of which are cognitively demanding tasks for adolescents and children.
IMPACT OF MEDIA MULTITASKING ON MENTAL WELLBEING
Media multitasking has been shown to result in poorer sleep outcomes, which can in turn perpetuate inattention32. One study specifically examined 17-19 year old students and found that those students who had the least sleep were those who also demonstrated lowest attention scores33. It is important to consider other factors that may impact on students’ sleep, as one study found that adolescents who multitask more, consume more caffeinated drinks, which can cause sleep disturbances34.
Media multitasking has been shown to result in poorer sleep outcomes, which can in turn perpetuate inattention
PUBLISHED 2015
IMPACT OF MEDIA MULTITASKING ON PSYCHOSOCIAL WELLBEING
Research has demonstrated the negative psychosocial implications of phone use during social interactions amongst adolescents in the form of ‘technoference’ (technology use during an interaction was viewed as an interference)35. However, recent studies suggest that a norm shift may be transpiring and phone use during face-to-face interactions may also offer benefits for teens’ psychosocial wellbeing in terms of connection derived from the behaviour, entertainment and efficiency in terms of information access36.
it’s critical that when students need to engage in focused work, they need to do so with as few distractions as possible.
STRATEGIES TO BOOST STUDENTS’ FOCUS ONLINE
OFFLINE STRATEGIES
Metacognition strategies
Students require explicit instruction on how the brain works most efficiently and when it can remain focused on a single task, for a period of time. Simple experiments can elucidate the costs of frequent task switching.
Study hours by chronotype
Students can optimise their focus by establishing study routines that are congruent with their chronotype (their biological clock that governs the body’s rhythms for sleep and focused tasks)37. It is during these focus hours, that students need to minimise as many external, digital distractions as possible (see below for suggestions).
Physical activity
Physical exertion has been shown to boost cognitive control abilities38.
Sleep
Encourage students to meet the suggested sleep requirements each night, in terms of both duration and quality of sleep. Fitness trackers and general monitoring can foster healthy sleep behaviours.
Greentime
Time in nature has been shown to have a restorative effect on attention and possibly mitigate some of the unfavourable psychological impacts of excessive time online39.
Mindfulness and breathing techniques
Studies have shown that mindfulness and breathing techniques can aid in sustaining students’ attention40.
DIGITAL STRATEGIES
Studies have revealed that disregarding irrelevant stimuli, such as notifications or alerts, is not a passive process, but is a cognitively-demanding task that expends critical mental resources. Hence, it’s critical that when students need to engage in focused work, they need to do so with as few distractions as possible.
Work in online focus sprints
learning online is cognitively taxing as there are multiple streams of information for the brain to process. Working in shorter intervals when working online will help to foster better focus and concentration.
Tech check-in breaks
Studies have shown that offering students regular ‘technology breaks’, where they check their digital devices at regular, scheduled intervals whilst studying, can be beneficial as it counteracts the anxiety that can result if phones are removed from students (a term colloquially referred to as ‘nomophobia’)41. These studies have suggested that self-reported anxiety may stem from fear of missing out (FOMO).
Proximity
Students are encouraged to avoid having their ‘tech-temptations’ close by when studying or performing tasks that require focus as the mere presence of a smartphone can deteriorate focus and performance42. Equally important, students are encouraged to remove the apps and icons off their home screen or browser window to create more friction to access them. Creating intermediary steps to access possible distractions creates a potential barrier meaning students are less likely to succumb to digital distractions when needing to engage in focused work.
Manage notifications
Students are encouraged to disable non-essential notifications, establish VIP notification lists and bundle essential notifications at a time that will not divert their attention. For example, students might elect to receive social media notifications at a time when they’re likely to have completed any homework or study requirements.
Technological tools
There are a myriad of prohibition technology tools that restrict students’ access to websites and apps, at nominated times of the day. Most smartphones now come with generic software that allows users to track and set limits on usage. There are similar tools that can be installed on laptops, tablets and desktop computers to restrict students’ access during critical times of focus.
Activate ‘Do Not Disturb’ (DND) mode
students should use DND any time when they need to engage in deep, focused work. Users can now have DND automatically activated according to their calendar commitments and can customise their settings so automated replies are sent to people who attempt to contact them whilst this mode is activated, helping students cope with their FOMO43.
Turn the screen to ‘greyscale’
The colours of icons and apps have been carefully selected based on how the brain responds to specific colours. Students are encouraged to turn their smartphone to greyscale at certain times of the day to reduce it’s psychological appeal.
Maximise desktop laptop windows
Given what was previously stated about intentional colour choice, it’s strongly advised that students maximise windows and screens when working online, to minimise the likelihood of task switching.
It’s imperative young people are equipped with the skills required to better manage digital distractions.
CONCLUSION
There are a host of potential negative impacts associated with media multitasking for students, as this paper has identified. However, technology plays an integral role in young people’s lives, for academic and personal reasons and therefore it’s imperative that young people are equipped with the skills required to better manage digital distractions.
References
1 Rideout, V., and Robb, M. B. (2019). The Common Sense census: Media use by tweens and teens, 2019. San Francisco, CA: Common Sense Media.
2 Rideout, V. J., Foehr, U. G., & Roberts, D. F. (2010). Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8-to 18-Year-Olds. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.
3 Courage, M. L., Bakhtiar, A., Fitzpatrick, C., Kenny, S., & Brandeau, K. (2015). Growing up multitasking: The costs and benefits for cognitive development. Developmental Review, 35, 5-41.
4 Becker, M. W., Alzahabi, R., & Hopwood, C. J. (2013). Media multitasking is associated with symptoms of depression and social anxiety. Cyberpsychology, behavior, and social networking, 16(2), 132-135.
5 Yang, X., Xu, X., & Zhu, L. (2015). Media multitasking and psychological wellbeing in Chinese adolescents: Time management as a moderator. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 216-222.
Baswail, A., Allinson, L., Goddard, P., & Pfeffer, K. (2019). Adolescents’ mobile phone use while crossing the road. Safety, 5(2), 27.
Tao, S., Wu, X., Wan, Y., Zhang, S., Hao, J., & Tao, F. (2015). Interactions of problematic mobile phone use and psychopathological symptoms with unintentional injuries: a school-based sample of Chinese adolescents. BMC public health, 16(1), 1-10.
6 Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. A. (2013). Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced task-switching while studying. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 948-958.
7 Gazzaley, A., & Rosen, L. D. (2016). The distracted mind: Ancient brains in a high-tech world. Mit Press.
8 Gorman, D. (2013). Focus: The Hidden Driver of Excellence. Harper Collins.
9 Eyal, N. (2019). Indistractable: How to Control Your Attention and Choose Your Own Life. Penguin.
10 Carrier, L. M., Cheever, N. A., Rosen, L. D., Benitez, S., & Chang, J. (2009). Multitasking across generations: Multitasking choices and difficulty ratings in three generations of Americans. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 483-489.
Carrier, L. M., Rosen, L. D., Cheever, N. A., & Lim, A. F. (2015). Causes, effects, and practicalities of everyday multitasking. Developmental Review, 35, 64-78.
11Newport, C. (2016). Deep work: Rules for focused success in a distracted world. Hachette UK.
12 Purcell, K, Rainie, L, Heaps, A, Buchanan, J, Friedrich, L, Jacklin, A, & Zickuhr, K, 2012, How teens do research in the digital world, Pew Internet & American Life Project.
Rideout, V, and Robb, MB, 2018, Social media, social life: Teens reveal their experiences. Common Sense Media, San Francisco.
13 Carrier, L. M., Rosen, L. D., Cheever, N. A., & Lim, A. F. (2015). Causes, effects, and practicalities of everyday multitasking. Developmental Review, 35, 64-78.
14 Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. A. (2013). Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced task-switching while studying. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 948-958.
15 Caballero, A., Granberg, R., & Tseng, K. Y. (2016). Mechanisms contributing to prefrontal cortex maturation during adolescence. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 70, 4-12.
16 Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Self-determination theory.
17 Baumgartner, S. E., van der Schuur, W. A., Lemmens, J. S., & te Poel, F. (2018). The relationship between media multitasking and attention problems in adolescents: Results of two longitudinal studies. Human Communication Research, 44(1), 3-30.
18 Rogobete, D. A., Ionescu, T., & Miclea, M. (2021). The relationship between media multitasking behavior and executive function in adolescence: A replication study. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 41(5), 725-753.
White, T., Loth, E., Rubia, K. et al. Sex Differences in COMT Polymorphism Effects on Prefrontal Inhibitory Control in Adolescence. Neuropsychopharmacol 39, 2560–2569 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/npp.2014.107.
19 Rideout, V, and Robb, MB, 2018, Social media, social life: Teens reveal their experiences. Common Sense Media, San Francisco.
20 Rideout V. ‘Children, teens, and entertainment media: The view from the classroom.’ Common Sense Media, https://www.commonsensemedia.org/research/children-teens-and-entertainment-media-the-view-from-the-classroom/ accessed 14th September 2018.
21 Graham, A., & Sahlberg, P (2021). Growing Up Digital Australia: Phase 2 technical report. Gonski Institute for Education. UNSW, Sydney.
22 Courage, M. L., Bakhtiar, A., Fitzpatrick, C., Kenny, S., & Brandeau, K. (2015). Growing up multitasking: The costs and benefits for cognitive development. Developmental Review, 35, 5-41.
Patil, R., Brown, M., Ibrahim, M., Myers, J., Brown, K., Khan, M., & Callaway, R. (2019). Digital distraction outside the classroom: an empirical study. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 34(7), 46-55.
23 Thornton, B., Faires, A., Robbins, M., & Rollins, E. (2014). The mere presence of a cell phone may be distracting: Implications for attention and task performance. Social Psychology, 45(6), 479.
Wentworth, D. K., & Middleton, J. H. (2014). Technology use and academic performance. Computers & Education, 78, 306-311.
Thornton, B., Faires, A., Robbins, M., & Rollins, E. (2014). The mere presence of a cell phone may be distracting: Implications for attention and task performance. Social Psychology, 45(6), 479.
24 Alzahabi, R., & Becker, M. W. (2013). The association between media multitasking, task-switching, and dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(5), 1485.
25 Ophir, E., Nass, C., & Wagner, A. D. (2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(37), 15583-15587.
26 Gorman, T. E., & Green, C. S. (2016). Short-term mindfulness intervention reduces the negative attentional effects associated with heavy media multitasking. Scientific reports, 6(1), 1-7.
27 Bowman, L. L., Levine, L. E., Waite, B. M., & Gendron, M. (2010). Can students really multitask? An experimental study of instant messaging while reading. Computers & Education, 54(4), 927-931.
Fox, A. B., Rosen, J., & Crawford, M. (2009). Distractions, distractions: does instant messaging affect college students’ performance on a concurrent reading comprehension task?. Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 12(1), 51-53.
28 Patterson, M. C. (2017). A naturalistic investigation of media multitasking while studying and the effects on exam performance. Teaching of Psychology, 44(1), 51-57.
29 Bowman, L. L., Levine, L. E., Waite, B. M., & Gendron, M. (2010). Can students really multitask? An experimental study of instant messaging while reading. Computers & Education, 54(4), 927-931.
30 Meyer, D. E., Evans, J. E., Lauber, E. J., Gmeindl, L., Rubinstein, J., Junck, L., & Koeppe, R. A. (1998, March). The role of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for executive cognitive processes in task switching. In Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society, San Francisco, CA.
31 Baswail, A., Allinson, L., Goddard, P., & Pfeffer, K. (2019). Adolescents’ mobile phone use while crossing the road. Safety, 5(2), 27.
Caird, J. K., Willness, C. R., Steel, P., & Scialfa, C. (2008). A meta-analysis of the effects of cell phones on driver performance. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 40(4), 1282-1293.
Pešić, D., Antić, B., Glavić, D., & Milenković, M. (2016). The effects of mobile phone use on pedestrian crossing behaviour at unsignalized intersections–Models for predicting unsafe pedestrians behaviour. Safety science, 82, 1-8.
32 Hysing, M., Pallesen, S., Stormark, K. M., Jakobsen, R., Lundervold, A. J., & Sivertsen, B. (2015). Sleep and use of electronic devices in adolescence: results from a large population-based study. BMJ open, 5(1), e006748.
33 Morsy, A. A., & Shalaby, N. S. (2012). The use of technology by university adolescent students and its relation to attention, sleep, and academic achievement. Journal of American Science, 8(1), 264-270.
Morsy, A. A., & Shalaby, N. S. (2012). The use of technology by university adolescent students and its relation to attention, sleep, and academic achievement. J Am Sci, 8(1), 264-270.
34 Calamaro, C. J., Mason, T. B., & Ratcliffe, S. J. (2009). Adolescents living the 24/7 lifestyle: effects of caffeine and technology on sleep duration and daytime functioning. Pediatrics, 123(6), e1005-e1010.
35 McDaniel, B. T., & Coyne, S. M. (2016). “Technoference”: The interference of technology in couple relationships and implications for women’s personal and relational well-being. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 5(1), 85.
36 Kelly, L., Miller-Ott, A. E., & Duran, R. L. (2019). Phubbing friends: Understanding face threats from, and responses to, friends’ cell phone usage through the lens of politeness theory. Communication Quarterly, 67(5), 540-559.
Abeele, M. M. V., Hendrickson, A. T., Pollmann, M. M., & Ling, R. (2019). Phubbing behavior in conversations and its relation to perceived conversation intimacy and distraction: An exploratory observation study. Computers in Human Behavior, 100, 35-47.
37 Zerbini, G., & Merrow, M. (2017). Time to learn: How chronotype impacts education. PsyCh Journal, 6(4), 263-276.
38 Gallotta, M. C., Guidetti, L., Franciosi, E., Emerenziani, G. P., Bonavolonta, V., & Baldari, C. (2012). Effects of varying type of exertion on children’s attention capacity. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 44(3), 550-555.
Reigal, R. E., Moral-Campillo, L., Mier, R. J. R. D., Morillo-Baro, J. P., Morales-Sánchez, V., Pastrana, J. L., & Hernández-Mendo, A. (2020). Physical fitness level is related to attention and concentration in adolescents. Frontiers in psychology, 11, 110.
Vanhelst, J., Béghin, L., Duhamel, A., Manios, Y., Molnar, D., De Henauw, S., … & Petraki, I. (2016). Physical activity is associated with attention capacity in adolescents. The Journal of Pediatrics, 168, 126-131.
39 Oswald, T. K., Rumbold, A. R., Kedzior, S. G., & Moore, V. M. (2020). Psychological impacts of “screen time” and “green time” for children and adolescents: A systematic scoping review. PloS one, 15(9), e0237725.
40 Weng, H. Y., Lewis-Peacock, J. A., Hecht, F. M., Uncapher, M. R., Ziegler, D. A., Farb, N. A., … & Gazzaley, A. (2020). Focus on the breath: Brain decoding reveals internal states of attention during meditation. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 14, 336.Ziegler, D. A., Simon, A. J., Gallen, C. L., Skinner, S., Janowich, J. R., Volponi, J. J., … & Gazzaley, A. (2019). Closed-loop digital meditation improves sustained attention in young adults. Nature human behaviour, 3(7), 746-757.
41 Cheever, N. A., Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Chavez, A. (2014). Out of sight is not out of mind: The impact of restricting wireless mobile device use on anxiety levels among low, moderate and high users. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 290-297.
Clayton, R. B., Leshner, G., & Almond, A. (2015). The extended iSelf: The impact of iPhone separation on cognition, emotion, and physiology. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(2), 119-135. Przybylski, A. K., Murayama, K., DeHaan, C. R., & Gladwell, V. (2013). Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in human behavior, 29(4), 1841-1848.
Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. A. (2013). Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced task-switching while studying. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 948-958.
42 Thornton, B., Faires, A., Robbins, M., & Rollins, E. (2014). The mere presence of a cell phone may be distracting: Implications for attention and task performance. Social Psychology, 45(6), 479.
43 Heever, N. A., Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Chavez, A. (2014). Out of sight is not out of mind: The impact of restricting wireless mobile device use on anxiety levels among low, moderate and high users. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 290-297.