My Continuous Partial Attention is Yours
You have my absolute continuous partial attention. No, really, you do. And that’s a problem. Because any second now, it’s going to be swept away.
In 2006 Linda Stone (technology visionary, ex-Microsoft and Apple executive) coined the phrase ‘continuous partial attention’ and defines it this way:
“Continuous partial attention describes how many of us use our attention today. It is different from multi-tasking. The two are differentiated by the impulse that motivates them. When we multi-task, we are motivated by a desire to be more productive and more efficient. We’re often doing things that are automatic, that require very little cognitive processing. We give the same priority to much of what we do when we multi-task — we file and copy papers, talk on the phone, eat lunch — we get as many things done at one time as we possibly can in order to make more time for ourselves and in order to be more efficient and more productive.
To pay continuous partial attention is to pay partial attention — CONTINUOUSLY. It is motivated by a desire to be a LIVE node on the network. Another way of saying this is that we want to connect and be connected. We want to effectively scan for opportunity and optimize for the best opportunities, activities, and contacts, in any given moment. To be busy, to be connected, is to be alive, to be recognized, and to matter.”
True confession: I sometimes check my email while on conference calls (everyone does… don’t they?), go online while watching TV, and take calls while driving. I read and respond to email while I’m going through the tunnel on the train, never one to ‘waste time’ (although the latter behavior is probably considered multitasking). But it’s not to be busy, be recognized or to matter.
It’s simply to keep up - which is why I’ve taken up yoga as an antidote.
In a post today titled Dumbing Down and Smartening Up via the Internet, InfoWorld blogger Ephraim Schwartz noted the vast impact technology is beginning to have on our attention - whether it be continuous partial attention or full-on attention.
And, he notes, that ‘digital natives’ (DN’s - people born into the digital world) have shorter attention spans than ‘digital immigrants’ (DI’s - people who’ve become fascinated by technology at some later point in their lives).
“Capturing and holding the attention of a viewer, not a reader, started with television. Sociologists have long been commenting on the fact that American television programming jumps from scene to scene far more rapidly than British programs do. It both appeals to and, I think, helps create viewers with shorter attention spans.
I have two concerns about this development. One, unless we get DNs to behave more like DIs, future generations will have a harder time developing the study skills they need to master and understand their environment in order to become the kind of professionals — doctors, architects, engineers — that we need to keep a complex society running.
My second fear is political. Unless our future generations learn to analyze content and understand issues by reading deeply, they will be far more susceptible to being manipulated — and not likely for noble goals.”
Where do we go for hope? Ephram noted he gets his from the growth of social networks in businesses - and the information shared among teams and across organizations - and the tools that enable them.
“Companies such as Attensa and ConnectBeam are at the cutting edge, creating enterprise-level social networking technology that allows users to easily exchange information. This in turn allows more people to use information more intelligently.“
People using more information more intelligently… there’s something to hold hope for. I believe I’ll meditate on that this afternoon.
