This is Hidden Brain. I'm Shankar Vedanta.
Many years ago, when Gloria Mark was visiting family in Austria,
she found it difficult to get a reliable internet connection.
My mother-in-law, who lived in a very small Austrian town,
she didn't have Wi-Fi and I couldn't stay away from internet that long.
And so what I did one day was walk around the neighborhood with my laptop open,
looking at the bars on my computer to see when I might find a hotspot.
And sure enough, I did find one.
And I sat down on the edge of the front lawn of the house and I was doing my email.
In a little while, Gloria looked up to see she had company.
Two elderly gentlemen came out of the house.
They brought lawn chairs and they sat down right in front of me.
And they didn't say a word and I didn't say anything to them.
And I just wanted to get through my email.
That was my goal.
And I was certain they were going to ask me to leave it.
And they did not look very friendly.
So I didn't think it was going to be a friendly ask.
And they just kept watching me.
Gloria tried to think of a way to explain herself across the language barrier.
After a while, I pointed to myself and I said, California.
And all of a sudden they started laughing and they said,
Schwarzenegger, because at the time their Austrian son actor turned governor,
Arnold Schwarzenegger was the governor of California.
And then I knew I had their approval and I could continue sitting there.
And I was able to finish my email.
Those were innocent times.
In a few years, Gloria was to discover the opposite problem.
The internet wasn't difficult to access.
It was difficult to escape.
With the advent of smartphones, we now get our email, news feeds, and social media
24 hours a day, seven days a week.
It can be difficult nowadays to have a conversation with someone
without being constantly interrupted by text messages, email alerts, and other notifications.
This week on Hidden Brain, we examine the effects of being constantly online on our minds,
our growing tendency to be distracted, and ways to recapture our focus and attention.
Whether it's the laptop on our desks, the cell phones in our hands, or the smart watches
on our wrists, we spend a lot of our lives looking at screens.
Technology has made it possible for us to do remarkable things.
We can stay in touch with friends and family who are hundreds of miles away and collaborate
with colleagues who live in other states and countries.
But what are the effects of all the screen time on our minds?
The University of California Irvine, psychologist Gloria Mark, studies how our capacity for
focus is changing, and how we can achieve greater harmony as we deal with many competing
demands on our attention.
Gloria Mark, welcome to Hidden Brain.
Thank you so much for having me.
Gloria, at the start of your career, you spent time working in Germany.
I understand that lunch was an important part of your work day.
What happened at lunch time?
That's right.
In Germany, the main meal of the day occurs at lunch time.
It's called Mitagessen.
The typical practice was for one colleague to walk around close to noon, gather up people,
and then we would all go as a group to lunch.
We would have our nice, long, warm meal.
We would have conversations, sometimes we would gossip.
Even though we might have been talking about things very different than our project at
hand, I would say these conversations got the wheels of our minds churning and boosted
our creativity.
Plus, it helped us bond with our colleagues.
Gloria left Germany in 2000 to join the faculty at the University of California Irvine.
One of the first things she noticed in her new job was the difference at lunch time.
So when I came back to the US, I had a heavy teaching load as an assistant professor, and
I had meetings and I had a lot of different work.
Lunch was pretty much a break between classes to run to the cafeteria, grab, take away food.
Then I would raise back to my office, would go down a long hallway, and all my colleagues
had their doors open.
As I was racing down the hallway, I would look in at their different offices, see them
sitting in front of their computers, eating their sandwiches, and then I would slide into
my office in front of my computer and do exactly the same thing.
It wasn't just about lunch.
Gloria found herself constantly sprinting from one thing to the next.
There were so many things that changed when I came back to the US.
I had classes I had to teach.
I had multiple research projects, had to write grants, sit on committees, meet with students.
I had to do service work.
There were so many different things, and I just found my attention being yanked from one
thing to another, and it was very hard for me to stay focused on any one thing.
You once found yourself double-blogged at two teleconferences at the same time.
Tell me the story of what happened.
Both of them were very important, and I was too embarrassed to cancel either one of those
conferences.
What I did was I sat there, and I happened to be in a restaurant, because I remember there
was a lot of background noise, and I had one earbud for one conference plugged into my
computer and into my right ear, and then the other earbud was plugged into my phone and
then into my left ear.
I was trying to pay attention to both of these conferences, and every so often, my name
would be called.
Every time I would hear my name call, there's something called the cocktail party phenomena
that if you hear your name all of a sudden you attend to it.
I was being asked to respond to something, and of course I couldn't hear what they were
asking, and especially with the background noise in the restaurant made it really difficult.
So I would cringe, and I have to ask them to repeat the question, and then I would put
the other earbud back in my ear and go back to trying to shift my attention back and forth
to each of these conferences.
Of course, my performance was terrible.
I didn't do well in either one of these conferences.
There was another time you were at a conference, and a colleague of yours had his computer networked
to the main display, and it gave you and everyone else a window into how many of us interact
with our devices.
It paid me a picture of what happened, Gloria.
Yeah, so this was what's called a program committee meeting, and this is where a group of people
come together, discuss papers that have been reviewed, and the committee makes a decision
as to which papers should be accepted and which ones not.
So for everyone to keep track of the list of papers, one person's computer is networked
to a large public display.
So everyone can see this list of papers as we go through them.
This person whose computer was plugged into the display kept checking his email.
So he kept changing the display, check his email.
My guess is that it was so habitual for him to check his email that he probably just
forgot that his computer was on public view for everyone to see.
So in 2009, you got what you say was a wake-up call.
What happened?
What was this wake-up call?
I received a diagnosis of Stage 3 colon cancer, and it was shocking because I thought
I was the healthiest person I knew.
I jogged.
I ate healthy.
I kept my weight down.
But suddenly, I was told that I had a 69% 5-year survival rate.
This was shocking.
But I was very determined to be in that 69% group.
And I'm very happy to say that I was in that group and it had been cancer-free since.
But the cause of the cancer was not known as many causes of cancer are just not known.
They couldn't find anything genetic to explain it.
But I can say that the years leading up to that diagnosis, I was undergoing just a tremendous
amount of stress.
And I remember at the time I kept thinking, I'm going to pay the price for all this stress.
Now I can't attribute my cancer diagnosis directly to stress.
And I can't attribute it directly to screen time.
But I can say that this cancer diagnosis was a wake-up call for me.
And it made me realize that time is finite.
And being stressed is just not a good way for us to be spending our time, living our
life.
And so this health scare just made me very deeply aware that we need to rethink how
we use our devices and how we need to really control our stress so that we can really focus
on health and well-being.
That's the most important thing.
When we come back, why paying sustained attention is so valuable and so difficult?
You're listening to Hidden Brain, I'm Shankar Vedanta.
This is Hidden Brain, I'm Shankar Vedanta.
Gloria Mark is a psychologist at the University of California, Irvine.
She studies how we pay attention and when we get distracted.
Gloria, you once heard an unusual story from your doctor about his desperate efforts to
battle the distractions of the internet.
What did he tell you?
My doctor knew about my research.
And so he volunteered to me that when he had to write a grant, he would book himself
a round trip ticket from California to Washington, D.C.
Now why did he do this?
And he said because on an airplane, you don't have Wi-Fi.
At least you can, you have the opportunity to not have Wi-Fi.
And I said to him, but on an airplane, there are so many other kinds of distractions.
People are talking and walking by and babies are crying.
And he said, no, no, those don't distract me.
It's the internet.
And I said, isn't it easier to just stay at home and turn off the internet?
And he said, he can't.
He actually had to physically change his environment to prevent himself from getting on the internet.
Was the doctor who told you the story and aberration?
Did you have heard sort of similar things from other people, Gloria?
Yes.
And so every so often, I'll get emails from people who tell me about the difficulties
they have with distractions.
And one email in particular really struck me as very characteristic.
This person wrote, trying to articulate the difficulty with workplace distractions is
like chasing a greased pig.
I feel like every day my work is to definitely navigate the complexities of this job with
the accuracy while being bombarded with emails, personal appearances by fellow coworkers,
phone calls and texts.
I leave work drained, not physically, but mentally.
I detest these devices that I think we are all slaves to.
To get a grasp on the extent of the problem of workplace distractions, Gloria and her colleagues
began to track people as they sat before their computers at work.
I'm trained in psychology.
And typically what psychologists do is they bring people into a laboratory and they will
create an artificial model of the world so that you can focus on a particular variable
to measure.
But you know, our use of devices, our computers, our phones, it's so embedded in our lives
that it's really hard to separate the rest of people's lives from their use of their
devices.
So I thought it was more important to go where people are.
And so I created what I call living laboratories so that I could study people's use of their
devices in their natural environments.
And to do this, we originally started out shadowing people with stopwatches.
So every time people switched their screen, we would click stop time, note the time, start
time for the new screen or the new activity.
And then around 2011, we started using software logging.
So we could look at people's screens switching unobtrusively and automatically without having
someone behind them, shadowing them.
And we also would have people wear heart rate monitors, which gives a measure of what's
called heart rate variability, which is a measure of stress.
We would also have people answer very short question, which gives their subjective perception
about what they're experiencing.
And what you do is you put all of these different measures together in time so that
at any point in time, you have a pretty comprehensive idea of what people are experiencing as they're
using their devices.
I'm wondering what you've observed in your many hours of observation as you watch people
at work.
What do you pick up, Gloria?
So one of the things we've observed, and I've been doing this for about 20 years, is
that the amount of attention duration on any one screen has decreased over time.
So when we first started studying this back in 2004, we found that people's average
attention on any screen was about two and a half minutes.
And then in 2012, this went down to about 75 seconds on average.
And then from about 2016 through 2020, this was like right before the pandemic started,
we found the average attention to be 47 seconds.
So it was diminishing over time.
And others have replicated it.
So people found 44 seconds, 50 seconds.
We found 47 seconds.
But the average of all these studies comes to 47 seconds on average.
Are you taking into account that people might be on the same screen but switching between
apps?
So in other words, they're on one screen, but they're in fact doing many different things.
So that one screen.
That's exactly what we are measuring.
So the idea is that whatever window is in the foreground is what people are paying attention
to.
So even though a person is just on one computer screen, if you're clicking on email, it's
the email application that appears on your screen.
If you click to work on a Word document, it's the Word document that appears on your
screen.
If you click to social media, it's the social media.
So that's what we're measuring is the amount of time that people are spending on these
different screens as the screens are switching.
There are other intersecting lines of evidence that suggest our capacity for sustained attention
is diminishing.
An interesting piece of evidence comes from another type of screen that we watch incessantly.
Our TV screens.
Yeah, when TV and film first started out, shot lengths were much longer than they are
now.
And shot lengths have also decreased over time and they now average about four seconds.
Now a way to see this very clearly is to look at your TV and turn the volume completely
down.
And then you really notice the fast shot changes.
If you watch a blockbuster film like the Transformers, shot lengths change about every two seconds
or so.
So film editors and directors design these fast shot lengths to keep us engaged in these
films.
The idea is that if they're changing rapidly, we're not going to get bored.
And I'm wondering if the relationship here is bidirectional with what's happening inside
our minds.
In other words, we actually have shorter attention spans and so the movies and television shows
are catering to that.
But the fact that movies and television shows now have so many shot changes also changes
how our minds are working.
I do think it's bidirectional.
We can't say what is causing what.
And it could also be that film editors and film directors are influenced by their own
short attention spans.
And so they're designing these short shot lengths based on what they perceive to be interesting.
In the workplace, Gloria finds that instead of focusing on one thing at a time, people
rapidly cycle between activities.
And much of this activity has a circular feel to it.
Like restless animals pacing in a cage, many of us return incessantly to the same apps
over and over with not much to show for it.
We found that people checked email on average 77 times a day.
These were information workers.
We measured them during the work day.
The previous study we had done a couple of years earlier.
We found 74 times a day on average.
And that's on average, which means that some people might be even more than 77 times a day.
Yes, one person on our sample checked over 400 times a day.
My God.
So when I'm working, I often tell myself, I'm working on something, but then I say,
I'll attend to some other thing for just a second.
I tell myself, it'll only be a second.
And then as I'm attending to the new thing, something else pops up.
And I tell myself, I look at that for just a second.
Now I'm on task number three.
Can you talk about the idea of nested interruptions and how long it takes people to return to their
original tasks?
Yes, that's a really interesting thing that we noticed.
Is that people generally think you're interrupted and then you go right back to the task that
you were interrupted from.
But that's not the typical pattern of behavior.
The typical pattern is that a person is interrupted.
And then they're interrupted from that interruption.
And then they're interrupted again.
And then they go back to the original task.
That's the general pattern of behavior.
We find that people average about 10 and a half minutes working in a project before they're
interrupted and moved to something else.
Keep in mind, within each project, there's lots of switching.
So the difficulty is that when you're interrupted, it's not just a single interruption, but you're
continually being interrupted again and again.
And so it's really hard to go back and reorient to the original task.
Does the data tell us how long it takes us on average to get back to task number one?
It takes on average about 25 and a half minutes.
Wow.
So those interruptions are not just, I'll check something for one second.
It never is a second.
It's never a second.
Remember, we're talking about looking at the level of a project.
You're working a project interrupted from that, moving to another project and to another
project, starting to work on another project and then going back.
So many of us complain about getting distracted by others, by bosses, by friends, by co-workers,
but you found that we have become so conditioned to expect frequent distractions that if the
outside world doesn't interrupt us, we just interrupt ourselves.
This was one of the most surprising things that we found in our research.
Going back to when we were shadowing people and observing them for no apparent reason,
someone would suddenly stop in the middle of, say, working on a word document and then
they would check email or they would pick up their phone.
And there was no external stimulus that was triggering them to make that switch.
There was something inside themselves.
And I've thought about this quite a bit and I realize for myself how often I self-interrupt.
And I might have an urge to do something.
And we've asked people, why do you self-interrupt?
Well, because people have memories of something they forgot to do or they're cute to some
information in the current task to do something else.
So there's lots of reasons or because they're bored and then they're attention wanders.
But I'm almost hearing Gloria is that we have something of an internal clock in our heads.
And after we've worked on something for a little while, we're so used to getting interrupted,
so used to switching between tasks.
That little clock goes off and the alarm goes off and we say, okay, I've been working
at this thing for five minutes.
Surely I must have to do something else right now.
Since there's nothing else that's actually interrupting us, we go ahead and do it ourselves.
So what we found in our data was we looked at the number of interruptions that come from
some external trigger, like a notification or a phone call.
And then we also looked at the number of interruptions that come from within a person, right?
People self-interrupt.
And we find that when the number of external interruptions goes down in the next hour,
the number of self-interruptions goes up.
So it's almost as if people want to maintain this level of interruptions.
And if you're not being interrupted by something external to yourself, then you self-interrupt.
Can you remember a time when you interrupted yourself, Gloria?
Oh, I interrupt myself all the time.
It's very common.
So I was reading an article about AI and for some reason, the thought popped into my head.
How safe is it to eat non-organic strawberries?
It's just a completely random thought.
And I simply had to look it up.
Of course.
So I self-interrupted when on the internet and looked up to see whether it was safe or
not.
So you read up on strawberries and pesticides.
And I'm guessing there were probably other rabbit holes that you went down from there.
Oh, for sure.
Because then, of course, I started thinking about other fruits and vegetables.
Gloria says that a central driver of our increasing levels of distractedness is that the human
brain, which has a finite capacity for attention, is finding itself in a losing battle with
the avalanche of information and options on the internet and social media.
I mean, we live in an age where we have access to more information and more people than
ever before in history.
But ultimately, the mind is a bottleneck.
The human mind can't process all that information.
So when we have so many friends on, say, Facebook or other social media, it's just not possible
to have any kind of meaningful relationship with so many people.
And there's something called the Dunbar number.
Robin Dunbar is a British psychologist.
And he found that people realistically can have about five meaningful relationships.
And they can have about 150 other relationships with, which may not be very close or meaningful,
but at least, you can say that this is a friend.
But you know, on social media, because it scales up so high, it's just not possible to conceive
of having meaningful relationships with so many people.
Let's talk a moment about multitasking.
We all know it can be difficult to do two things at once.
But you also say that they can be hidden costs to switching between activities.
You describe these costs using the metaphor of a whiteboard.
Describe this metaphor for me, Gloria.
So every time we switch our attention, going from one test to another, you can think of
it as having a whiteboard in your mind, an internal whiteboard.
And so just like with a real whiteboard, when you write information on that whiteboard,
and then you erase it, sometimes you can't erase it completely.
And sometimes there's a residue.
And the same thing happens with our minds.
So let's say I'm reading the news and I read about some horrific story.
That creates a residue.
So even though I'm switching and I'm in a completely different task, the residue from
that news article stays with me.
And it creates interference from my current task at hand.
So it's very difficult when we do this attention switching.
It's hard to make a clean break, right?
There's generally going to be some kind of interference from previous tasks.
So Gloria, you've studied the effects of these distractions on our propensity to make errors
and specifically you've looked at the domain of healthcare.
What do you find?
So first of all, let me say that there have been decades of studies in the laboratory that
show that when people multitask, they make more errors.
There was a study done of physicians.
The researchers shadowed physicians in their real work environments and they noted down
every time physicians were interrupted and were multitasking.
And as you can imagine, physicians are interrupted quite frequently by other people, by devices,
by beapers.
And it turns out that the more times that physicians multitasked and were interrupted, the more
errors they made in prescriptions.
And some of these errors were quite serious in terms of writing down wrong medications
and wrong dosages.
So when people's attention is diverted from what they're doing, it's very easy to make
errors.
We live in a world saturated with distractions.
Imagining that we can cut ourselves off from these distractions can be appealing, but is
often not realistic.
We need to be able to respond to emergencies, work collaboratively with colleagues, and allow
ourselves to learn from the inexhaustible knowledge that is available on the internet.
When we come back, how to find focus in a world filled with distractions?
You're listening to Hidden Brain.
I'm Shankar Vedanta.
This is Hidden Brain, I'm Shankar Vedanta.
Gloria Mark studies the psychology of attention.
She's the author of Attention Span, a groundbreaking way to restore balance, happiness, and productivity.
She says the first step to fighting distraction is to notice it.
I realize that when we use our devices, so many of the things we do are unconscious.
So I see my phone next to me and I have this automatic reaction to grab it and swipe it
open.
I might have an automatic reaction to click on a notification or to self-interrupt and
turn to social media.
I learned to ask myself, why do I have this urge to go to social media?
Why do I have this urge to check my email right now?
And so what this meta awareness does is that it's raising unconscious activities to a
more conscious level.
And when we can become more conscious of them, we can be more intentional and we can create
plans.
For example, if I have an urge to go to social media and I become aware that I'm about
to switch, I can say,
OK, Gloria, I'm going to work 20 more minutes and then I can reward myself with a break.
I understand that you use this technique as you were writing your book.
Yes, I'm a news junkie and there was a trial of very well-known personality and I knew
that the results of the trial were going to be broadcast at any moment.
And I did see a notification on my screen that announced that the trial results were going
to be announced and rather than click on it, which I knew would distract me for quite
a long time.
I probe myself and said, do I really need to look at that right now?
And the answer is no.
So I continued working and then I was able to look at the results when I took a break.
In other words, once you're actually sort of trying to, you're making the choice deliberately,
in some ways the choice becomes easier to forego because you can say, do I actually want
to make the choice?
So much of this is happening because it's happening unthinkingly.
That's right.
Yes.
So you become more in control of your actions.
A second way that you have recommended to push back against distractions is to practice
something that you call forethought by imagining the state you'll be in in the very near future.
Can you tell me how you use forethought to avoid getting distracted?
So forethought is about imagining our future selves and how we want our future selves to
be.
And I think it makes the most sense to think of our future selves at the end of a work
day.
And so I ask myself, what do I want to do at the end of the day?
How do I want to feel?
So I want to see myself relaxing, maybe watching my favorite show, being with family or friends.
How do I want to feel?
I want to feel rewarded and fulfilled.
And the more concrete of a visualization you can form about your future self at the end
of the day, the more powerful it is to keep you in check and keep you on task.
In other words, our goals are one way to hold off distractions.
The clearer our goals are in our heads, the easier it becomes to say, I don't want to
go down this side alley because it's going to keep me from getting to my goal.
Exactly.
And it's about making your goals very concrete, creating a visualization of these goals.
And don't forget, it's not just about thinking of finishing the task, but it's also about
thinking how you will feel emotional.
You'll feel relaxed.
You'll feel relieved.
I understand that you're a fan of the online game PanGram.
Tell me about this game, Gloria, and how it speaks to the issue of distraction and
destructibility.
PanGram is a very easy and engaging game making anagrams and you reach different levels.
And it's a way to help relax my mind.
Now, of course, I can get stuck in this game.
And I don't want to be playing this for, you know, long periods of time.
But it's okay to play it for a few minutes, especially if I just had, you know, a very
difficult meeting or, you know, I just need to clear my head from having done a lot of
work.
It's okay to spend a few minutes doing something easy, mindless, wrote, to help relax yourself.
But the key thing is that you have to make sure that it really is a short period of time.
So you may want to set a timer or you may want to create what I call a hook, which is you
do this wrote activity five minutes before you have a meeting.
And you know, you've got to be at that meeting and that's going to pull you out.
Some people talk about doing knitting as a wrote activity.
One person told me he has this ball that he throws on a screen in his office and that's
his wrote activity.
The great writer Maya Angelo talked about her big mind and her little mind and her big
mind was used for her deep thought for doing her writing.
And then every so often she'd break away and she'd use her little mind, which is when
she would do crossword puzzles or other kinds of simple activities.
And she did that to relax and clear her head.
I love that story because what it says is that in fact, we have these different needs in
our minds and it's not a problem that we have a need for distraction or a need for wrote
activity.
The problem arises when those activities carry us away and then we add down rabbit holes
and we forget the needs of, you know, what Maya Angelo would call our big mind.
Yes, there is nothing wrong with doing some simple mindless game like pangram as long
as you put a limit on it.
And as long as you know, you know, there's a purpose to it.
The purpose is to help you relax, clear your head so that you can go back and do other
things that are really important to do.
What's the technique that you recommend is that people check their email only twice a
day.
Do you do this yourself?
Not as often as I should, but it is something that when I do it, it's very valuable.
I'm a fan of batching email.
You know, you check your email first thing in the warning and then you check it mid-day,
maybe after lunch and then at the end of the day.
So twice a day is good as well.
One thing that I discovered is that email age is very fast.
So you might get the most urgent email that sent you first thing in the morning.
And if you don't deal with it until the end of the day, you might discover, oh, the problem
has already been solved.
Or, you know, the person writes back and said, ah, I got the information that I need.
At the same time, Gloria, when you don't respond to a question that, let's say, a coworker
is asking you, at least some of the time what happens is that someone else might end up
responding to it.
So I certainly get the appeal of not wanting to be distracted.
But surely in collaborative work environments, our desire to not be distracted can mean
where implicitly asking others to pick up the slack.
That's very true.
Here's the thing, the burden is placed on the email recipient, right?
The sender is the one who benefits, but it's always the recipient who has to do the extra
work.
And I completely agree with you that we all need to be good citizens and do our part,
especially if we're doing collaborative work.
How much of what you're recommending is sort of about individuals and how much of it
is about the structures and organizations in which individuals are embedded.
Because when you came back from Germany to the United States, you came back to a very
different kind of job.
And someone could say, look, you had a job in Germany that allowed you to focus on one
or two projects.
You just have a different job right now.
And yes, of course, you might wish that the new job had the same level of distractedness,
which is very little distractedness as your earlier job, but this is just a different
job.
That's right.
That is a different job.
I do think that organizations bear some responsibility for helping people focus.
So some organizations institute quite a time during the day, usually two or three hours
during the day where no electronic communications are sent and people are off the hook from having
to answer electronic communications.
And what this does is it helps reset expectations because email has its own set of norms as does
slack, as does texting, that when you get these messages, you have to respond fast.
And so the burden cannot just be on the individual to pull out, but there really has to be a collective
solution that I believe organizations need to be responsible for.
One of the ideas that you have proposed, Gloria, is that we all have fluctuations in our
capacity for attention during the day.
Talk about the idea of these attention rhythms and how we can take advantage of them.
When most people think of attention, they think of there being two states, you're focused
or unfocused.
And as I've been studying attention, it occurred to me that there's another variable in the
mix that's really important.
And that is how much mental effort is involved when you're paying attention.
So there's things we do that can be very challenging, like trying to read a difficult article.
And there's things we do that are very easy, like playing solitaire or playing a pan-gram
game.
So we did a research study where we asked people questions throughout the day.
And people had to simply respond how engaged were you and the thing you were just doing
and how challenged were you and the thing you were just doing.
And so people responded, we had time stamps and we contract their responses over the
course of the day.
Turns out that when we look at the focused state of attention being challenged and engaged,
we see a peak rhythm which is around mid-morning for most people and again about mid-afternoon
for most people.
There are individual differences, of course, but we do see that there are these peaks and
valleys, so to speak, of attention throughout the day.
How do we take advantage of that?
So if we have a number of tasks during the day and we know that we have these rhythms
of attention, how should we marry the levels of our attention with the tasks that we have
to accomplish?
Think about what your peak focus times are.
And think about planning to do those tasks that require the hardest work, the most thought,
the most creative thinking during those times when your attention is at its peak.
And for the times when our attention isn't a valley, that's when I do what I call subordinate
work.
Work that doesn't involve a lot of thought, but simple work that needs to get done.
There is one final idea on how we can fight distractions and it is counterintuitive.
Gloria says we can increase our capacity for focus if we consciously take breaks from
the things we are focusing on.
There is a Japanese expression that is called Yohaku nobi, which means the beauty of empty
space.
And there is a very well-known Japanese garden in Kyoto, which has the most beautiful
rocks that are very carefully positioned.
And what is as important as the rocks themselves is the space around the rocks, because that
space creates a kind of dynamism that makes these rocks more beautiful.
And we can use that as a metaphor to think about our work day.
So of course, we want to perform the best that we possibly can.
But we also have to design empty space into our day to enable our work to shine, because
otherwise we just get exhausted.
And what can you do during this empty space?
Take a walk.
Go out in nature.
That's the best break of all.
You can meditate.
You can contemplate.
There's many different ways to help your mind refresh.
I understand that you used to be a painter before you were an academic.
And when you're a painter, of course, you have to pay attention not just to what you're
putting down on the canvas, but the parts of the canvas that you are not painting.
That's how I came to think about this idea of empty space or in painting.
It's called negative space, where you have to really pay attention to the space around
the figure and give that importance to.
So it's a holistic understanding of the painting.
And that's how we have to think about our work day in a holistic sense.
It's not just the time we do our work, but it's also the time that we devote to replenishing
ourselves.
Gloria Mark is a psychologist at the University of California, Irvine.
She's the author of Attention Span, a groundbreaking way to restore balance, happiness, and productivity.
Gloria, thank you for joining me today on Hidden Brain.
Oh, thank you so much for having me.
If you have additional questions about distraction and focus that you would like to ask Gloria
Mark, and if you're willing to share those questions with the Hidden Brain audience,
please record a voice memo on your phone and email it to us at ideas at hiddenbrain.org.
Use the subject line distraction.
Your email address again is ideas at hiddenbrain.org.
Hidden Brain is produced by Hidden Brain Media.
Our audio production team includes Bridget McCarthy, Annie Murphy-Paul, Kristen Wong, Laura
Quarelle, Ryan Katz, Autumn Barnes, Andrew Chadwick, and Nick Woodbury.
Tara Boyle is our executive producer.
I'm Hidden Brain's executive editor.
I'm Shankar Vedantam.
See you soon.
