Nav: Home

Strategic studying limits the costs of divided attention

June 21, 2017

Multitasking while studying may impair overall memory for the study material, but your ability to strategically identify and remember the most important information may stay intact, according to new findings published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

"Dividing attention wasn't necessarily a good thing for learning and recall, but we found that distracted participants were just as likely to recall the most important information as were participants who were able to give the presented information their full attention," explains psychology researcher Catherine D. Middlebrooks of the University of California, Los Angeles. "The ability to prioritize high-value information during study was consistently immune to the effects of divided attention, regardless of the extent of the distractions that participants faced."

Previous research has shown that learners are able to compensate for the limitations of memory by prioritizing certain information and essentially sacrificing other information as they study. That is, they strategically compensate for factors that are beyond their control - but deploying this strategic approach to studying itself requires cognitive resources. Middlebrooks and UCLA co-authors Tyson K. Kerr and Alan D. Castel wanted to know whether learners have sufficient cognitive resources to overcome the potential costs incurred by studying strategically.

In one experiment, the researchers asked 192 undergraduate student participants to view a series of word lists and remember as many words as possible. Importantly, each word had a numerical value, from 1 to 10, and participants were instructed to maximize the total value of the words they recalled.

Students randomly assigned to the divided attention group studied the word lists as digits were also being read aloud - they were instructed to press a key every time they heard three odd digits in a row. Other students studied the lists while lyrical music, with which they were familiar or unfamiliar, played in the background. Another group of students studied with no additional distractions.

As expected, those students who were forced to divide their attention between the word list and the digits recalled fewer words compared with the students in the other groups. The data showed that the background music had no discernible effect on students' overall recall.

Importantly, students really did seem to pay attention to the value of the words - their odds of recalling a 10-point word were almost five times greater than their odds of recalling a 1-point word. The link between value and recall held for students in all of the groups, regardless of whether they studied with or without distraction.

The findings suggest that the students adjusted their studying to compensate for their study conditions, paying particular attention to the most important study items.

A second experiment, in which students had to divide their attention between studying word lists and completing tone-monitoring tasks that varied in difficulty, showed a similar pattern of results. Participants performed worse when their attention was divided, but they were still able to selectively remember the high-value words.

In both experiments, participants were better able to remember the words as they gained more experience with the task, suggesting that their ability to study selectively improved with practice.

"Situations in which we can actually give something our full, truly undivided attention are often few and far between--at any given moment, you're likely to be distracted to some extent by a number of factors," says Middlebrooks. "Our findings don't suggest that multi-tasking or being distracted will never affect how well we might prioritize important information, but they do suggest that distraction does not automatically doom our efforts and that we seem to consider their costs when deciding how best to allocate our limited resources."

In future research, Middlebrooks and colleagues hope to explore how various real-world factors - such as having to choose which material to study and how--might affect strategic studying.
-end-
This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health National Institute on Aging (Award No. R01AG044335 to A. D. Castel).

For more information about this study, please contact: Catherine D. Middlebrooks at cmiddlebrooks@ucla.edu.

The article abstract is available online at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797617702502

The APS journal Psychological Science is the highest ranked empirical journal in psychology. For a copy of the article "Selectively Distracted: Divided Attention and Memory for Important Information" and access to other Psychological Science research findings, please contact Anna Mikulak at 202-293-9300 or amikulak@psychologicalscience.org.

Association for Psychological Science

Related Attention Articles:

People pay more attention to stimuli they associate with danger
A new analysis of how people prioritize their attention when determining safety and danger in busy settings, such as crossing a road, suggests that a person will pay more attention to something if they learn it is associated with danger.
Do the costs of cancer drugs receive enough attention?
A recent analysis from Canada found that information on health-related quality of life is often not collected for investigational cancer drugs or used to calculate the balance of costs and benefits of these drugs when they are submitted for reimbursement, according to findings published early online in CANCER, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Cancer Society.
Discrimination against older people needs attention, study says
Ever cracked a joke about old people? It might seem funny, but in a world where the population aged 60 or over is growing faster than all younger age groups, ageism is no laughing matter, says a University of Alberta researcher.
Abundance of information narrows our collective attention span
New study in Nature Communications finds increasingly narrow peaks of collective attention over time, supporting a 'social acceleration' occurring across different domains.
Trained musicians perform better -- at paying attention
Musical training produces lasting improvements to a cognitive mechanism that helps individuals be more attentive and less likely to be distracted by irrelevant stimuli while performing demanding tasks.
How attention helps the brain perceive an object
The ability of the brain to ignore extraneous visual information is critical to how we work and function, but the processes governing perception and attention are not fully understood.
How the brain enables us to rapidly focus attention
University of Queensland researchers have discovered a key mechanism in the brain that may underlie our ability to rapidly focus attention.
What are you looking at? How attention affects decision-making
Scientists using eye-tracking technology have found that what we look at helps guide our decisions when faced with two visible choices, such as snack food options.
Pay attention to the 'noise' in your brain
Researchers find that the 'noise' in the brain can be attributed to fluctuations in internally generated signals such as attention.
The spotlight of attention is more like a strobe
Despite the 'illusion' of continuity, human perception pulses in and out four times per second, say researchers, a rate that is identical in human and monkey brains.
More Attention News and Attention Current Events

Top Science Podcasts

We have hand picked the top science podcasts of 2019.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

In & Out Of Love
We think of love as a mysterious, unknowable force. Something that happens to us. But what if we could control it? This hour, TED speakers on whether we can decide to fall in — and out of — love. Guests include writer Mandy Len Catron, biological anthropologist Helen Fisher, musician Dessa, One Love CEO Katie Hood, and psychologist Guy Winch.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#542 Climate Doomsday
Have you heard? Climate change. We did it. And it's bad. It's going to be worse. We are already suffering the effects of it in many ways. How should we TALK about the dangers we are facing, though? Should we get people good and scared? Or give them hope? Or both? Host Bethany Brookshire talks with David Wallace-Wells and Sheril Kirschenbaum to find out. This episode is hosted by Bethany Brookshire, science writer from Science News. Related links: Why Climate Disasters Might Not Boost Public Engagement on Climate Change on The New York Times by Andrew Revkin The other kind...
Now Playing: Radiolab

An Announcement from Radiolab