Effects of cell phone presence on the control of visual attention during the Navon task.
Attentional control
Cell phone presence
Navon task
Smartphone dependency
Visual attention
Journal
BMC psychology
ISSN: 2050-7283
Titre abrégé: BMC Psychol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101627676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Oct 2023
12 Oct 2023
Historique:
received:
02
06
2023
accepted:
06
10
2023
medline:
1
11
2023
pubmed:
13
10
2023
entrez:
12
10
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Although cell phones can provide great convenience to our lives, research has shown that they can also affect our behavior, even when not in use. It seems that having a cell phone nearby may not be ideal when the user needs to concentrate on work. However, little is known about whether cell phone presence specifically impairs attentional control. This study investigated whether cell phone presence can influence attentional control in the Navon task, which involves spatial switching of attention between global and local levels. It was found that the reaction time for all types of trials decreased when the participants had a cell phone nearby compared to when they had a mobile battery nearby. It was also found that phone dependency led to more incorrect responses among participants, but this effect was independent of the influence of phone presence on the Navon task performance. These findings indicate that cell phone presence may have a positive influence on the perceptual process of the Navon letter, suggesting that the effects of phone presence are not always negative. One implication provided by this study is that it is possible to challenge the assertion that cell phones should always be excluded from the workplace by highlighting the positive effects of their presence.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Although cell phones can provide great convenience to our lives, research has shown that they can also affect our behavior, even when not in use. It seems that having a cell phone nearby may not be ideal when the user needs to concentrate on work. However, little is known about whether cell phone presence specifically impairs attentional control.
METHODS
METHODS
This study investigated whether cell phone presence can influence attentional control in the Navon task, which involves spatial switching of attention between global and local levels.
RESULTS
RESULTS
It was found that the reaction time for all types of trials decreased when the participants had a cell phone nearby compared to when they had a mobile battery nearby. It was also found that phone dependency led to more incorrect responses among participants, but this effect was independent of the influence of phone presence on the Navon task performance.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
These findings indicate that cell phone presence may have a positive influence on the perceptual process of the Navon letter, suggesting that the effects of phone presence are not always negative. One implication provided by this study is that it is possible to challenge the assertion that cell phones should always be excluded from the workplace by highlighting the positive effects of their presence.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37828554
doi: 10.1186/s40359-023-01381-2
pii: 10.1186/s40359-023-01381-2
pmc: PMC10571467
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
334Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
J Exp Psychol Gen. 1999 Sep;128(3):309-331
pubmed: 10513398
Front Neuroinform. 2009 Jan 15;2:10
pubmed: 19198666
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2001 Jun;130(2):169-83
pubmed: 11409097
Cogn Psychol. 2000 Aug;41(1):49-100
pubmed: 10945922
Psychon Bull Rev. 2001 Jun;8(2):331-5
pubmed: 11495122
Psychol Res. 2021 Jun;85(4):1783-1800
pubmed: 32356010
Behav Res Methods. 2005 Aug;37(3):498-505
pubmed: 16405146
Front Hum Neurosci. 2015 Jan 26;8:1071
pubmed: 25674057
PLoS One. 2020 Aug 13;15(8):e0219233
pubmed: 32790667
Front Hum Neurosci. 2011 Jun 13;5:57
pubmed: 21716633
J Autism Dev Disord. 2013 Feb;43(2):395-403
pubmed: 22729383
Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2021 Apr;24(4):275-281
pubmed: 33090002
Sci Rep. 2019 Dec 6;9(1):18519
pubmed: 31811205
Autism. 2001 Mar;5(1):67-80
pubmed: 11708391
Conscious Cogn. 2020 Nov;86:103033
pubmed: 33137560
J Athl Train. 2010 Jul-Aug;45(4):327-32
pubmed: 20617905
Neuroimage. 2001 Jan;13(1):56-67
pubmed: 11133309
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2014 Oct;76(7):1985-97
pubmed: 25085738
J Neurosci Methods. 2007 May 15;162(1-2):8-13
pubmed: 17254636
Am J Psychol. 1988 Summer;101(2):171-91
pubmed: 3389419
J Addict. 2013;2013:912807
pubmed: 24826371
Psychol Bull. 1979 May;86(3):446-61
pubmed: 451109
Front Psychol. 2020 May 05;11:672
pubmed: 32431636
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2003 Mar;132(1):47-70
pubmed: 12656297
Front Psychol. 2022 Jul 06;13:920878
pubmed: 35903727
Neuropsychology. 2010 Mar;24(2):222-243
pubmed: 20230116
Sci Rep. 2022 Jun 9;12(1):9507
pubmed: 35681033
Front Psychol. 2015 Aug 07;6:1171
pubmed: 26300841