The following are some points I think are important to think about after reading Author Nicholas Carr: The Web Shatters Focus, Rewires Brains .
For homework, please respond to the text preceeding one of these numbers in brackets. Be as detailed as possible.
[1] "Brain activity of the experienced surfers was far more extensive than that of the newbies, particularly in areas of the prefrontal cortex associated with problem-solving and decisionmaking."
[2] "The new scans revealed that their brain activity had changed dramatically; it now resembled that of the veteran surfers. 'Five hours on the Internet and the naive subjects had already rewired their
brains,'"
[3] "'The current explosion of digital technology not only is changing the way we live and communicate,' Small concluded, “but is rapidly and profoundly altering our brains.'"
[4] "Many educators were convinced that introducing hyperlinks into text displayed on monitors would be a boon to learning. Hypertext would strengthen critical thinking, the argument went, by enabling students to switch easily between different viewpoints. Freed from the lockstep reading demanded by printed pages, readers would make all sorts of new intellectual connections between diverse works. The hyperlink would be a technology of liberation."
What is hypertext??
[5] "By the end of the decade, the enthusiasm was turning to skepticism. Research was painting a fuller, very different picture of the cognitive effects of hypertext. Navigating linked documents, it turned out, entails a lot of mental calisthenics—evaluating hyperlinks, deciding whether to click, adjusting to different formats—that are extraneous to the process of reading. Because it disrupts concentration, such activity weakens comprehension. A 1989 study showed that readers tended just to click around aimlessly when reading something that included hypertext links to other selected pieces of information. A 1990 experiment revealed that some 'could not remember what they had and had not read.'"
[6] "A 2007 scholarly review of hypertext experiments concluded that jumping between digital documents impedes understanding. And if links are bad for concentration and comprehension, it shouldn’t be surprising that more recent research suggests that links surrounded by images, videos, and advertisements could be even worse."
[7] "The Net’s ability to monitor events and send out messages and notifications automatically is, of course, one of its great strengths as a communication technology. We rely on that capability to personalize the workings of the system, to program the vast database to respond to our particular needs, interests, and desires. We want to be interrupted, because each interruption—email, tweet, instant message, RSS headline—brings us a valuable piece of information. To turn off these alerts is to risk feeling out of touch or even socially isolated. The stream of new information also plays to our natural tendency to overemphasize the immediate. We crave the new even when we know it’s trivial."
[8] "It’s likely that Web browsing also strengthens brain functions related to fast-paced problem-solving, particularly when it requires spotting patterns in a welter of data. A British study of the way women search for medical information online indicated that an experienced Internet user can, at least in some cases, assess the trustworthiness and probable value of a Web page in a matter of seconds. The more we practice surfing and scanning, the more adept our brain becomes at those tasks. (Other academics, like Clay Shirky, maintain that the Web provides us with a valuable outlet for a growing “cognitive surplus”; see Cognitive Surplus: The Great Spare-Time Revolution."
[9] "We know that the human brain is highly plastic; neurons and synapses change as circumstances change. When we adapt to a new cultural phenomenon, including the use of a new medium, we end up with a different brain, says Michael Merzenich, a pioneer of the field of neuroplasticity. That means our online habits continue to reverberate in the workings of our brain cells even when we’re not at a computer. We’re exercising the neural circuits devoted to skimming and multitasking while ignoring those used for reading and thinking deeply."
[10] "There’s nothing wrong with absorbing information quickly and in bits and pieces. We’ve always skimmed newspapers more than we’ve read them, and we routinely run our eyes over books and magazines to get the gist of a piece of writing and decide whether it warrants more thorough reading. The ability to scan and browse is as important as the ability to read deeply and think attentively. The problem is that skimming is becoming our dominant mode of thought. Once a means to an end, a way to identify information for further study, it’s becoming an end in itself—our preferred method of both learning and analysis. Dazzled by the Net’s treasures, we are blind to the damage we may be doing to our intellectual lives and even our culture."
I agree with point number three because the Internet has changed our lives greatly but comes with downfalls. Social networking sites such as Facebook make it very easy for us to communicate with others. However, it also keeps us attached our computers away from the outside world. Instead of taking a walk outside and grabbing some ice cream together to discuss what they need to they resort to just sitting behind their computers.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYou do feel a bit disconnected if your either not on a social network that everyone is on or any other communication programs, such as, AIM.
ReplyDeleteI agree with point number ten. It talks about how skimming through text isn't bad which i agree with because in certain cases what would be the point of reading thoroughly through useless information? The only problem is that we only stick to just skimming which is bad on its own. Skimming plus intent reading is what needs to be done.
ReplyDeleteI agree with point number three because it states how the technology is changing peoples way of viewing things. Many different websites contain false information and a person won't be able to differentiate between what is false and what is true. As technology gets better, more people tend to rely on it more because its supposably more efficient then before. The more exposed people are to web 2.0, the more their brain will be effected and most likely proven...not for the better.
ReplyDelete"It shouldn't be surprising that more recent recent research suggests that links surrounded by images, videos, and advertisements could be even worse," might actually be the most surprising statement made in Point 6. This implies that it was a shock that the original belief, that hyperlinks might just improve one's learning/reading, was proven false. I am unable to understand how anyone could have imagined that incorporating hypertext in one's reading content would ever improve one's learning/reading. The fact that the complete opposite has been happening for years confirms what common sense should have done a long time ago; while reading, there should be little distraction as possible. Most people are unable to read if there is a loud television in the same room, or if music is playing...so exactly how would people be able to read-without being distracted-if there are blue, underlined texts everywhere, accompanied by illustrations, photos, videos, and advertisements. Even if a person does not consciously intend on paying attention to any of these distracting details, they are, in fact, unconsciously doing just that! All it takes is one second for one's mind to consider whether or not to click the link, or stare at the photo one second longer, and distraction sets in, and concentration evaporates in thin air! It might seem as if it's just one quick second, but there isn't just one distraction throughout most websites... On the contrary, there are actually many. Seconds and seconds worth of distractions, that eventually build up. However, shouldn't the world have known how all this would play out? Once again, isn't it simply common sense? Apparently not. Then again, who is to say that when the web began "taking over" society, it did not suddenly become similar to a Wall Street bubble investment- something that starts off wonderfully and creates buzz left and right, hence also creating a sense of false hope, but then suddenly, in time, just...pops? It should have not been a surprise to anyone that the inserting of photos, videos, advertisements or anything else for that matter would not only fight against one's concentration while reading, but therefore, would also disallow the person to fully comprehend, or even remember, what he or she had just read. The only surprise here is that people did not know these results in advance.
ReplyDeleteThe idea in bracket [1] that brain activity is much higher in that of a veteran internet user, then that of an amateur one is incredible. Simple things like surfing and browsing the internet increases activity therefore helping solve problems and making decisions quicker and easier. This study is good for the people who are against a lot of internet usage in kids and young adults! It proves that just because you are stuck behind a computer screen does not mean your not doing anything productive. Every moment you spend surfing and browsing is increasing your ability to do necessary tasks.
ReplyDeleteI find that point number 10 is very accurate. i myself take to skimming through texts, to identify anything interesting. I think people in this generation tend to get bored easily, so they resort to skimming, in order to absorb interesting information.
ReplyDeleteI some what agree with number 10 "There’s nothing wrong with absorbing information quickly and in bits and pieces". I believe yes, its perfectly fine everyone does it but the reason they do it is because nothing poses or strikes interesting. Once the reader skims through something interesting that they like based on their own personality that's when they stop skimming and start analyzing and read more in depth with the headline the interest them.
ReplyDeleteMr killJoy was me i changed it
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI Agree with Statement [3] Digital technology such as the internet or high tech cellphones throughout the years have gain so much popularity and have advanced in such form that a individuals life can revolve around it,we now communicate through instant messengers and social networks and so on. I also do agree that it has change the way we live because now you can have jobs that can be directly done at the comfort of your home on your computer without ever having to step out, also you can even take college classes online. Digital technology has altered and re-wired our brains in such ways that at some point we become more dependent on technology than in other humans around us.
ReplyDeleteStatement 6 is very accurate. While reading a news article, or any article, the reader will get distracted by hyperlinks, pictures, videos, and advertisements. Hyperlinks always leave you wondering where it will take you, which might stray you away from the article you are reading. Pictures and videos are similar. While reading, you might see an eye-catching video or picture which will deviate you from your article and if you continue reading, that picture or video will be in the back of your head, which is a major distraction to active reading. Advertisements are just as provocative. Whether or not you are interested in the item being advertised it still will keep your mind off of the reading for a short time, making it hard to regain focus. That is why I agree with statement 6, there are way too many distractions when trying to read articles on the internet.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with point number four because hyperlinks are in no way a boon to learning as many educators thought it would be, instead hyperlinks are very distractive and tend to lure one away from their readings which are in most cases very important. They do not strengthen critical thinking because hyperlinks are more often than not in no way associated with the topic or the reading. Yes it allows one to switch between different viewpoints, however curiosity leads to one thing and another which in the end leads to distraction as well as students deducing which source is a trusted one and which is not. In the end, Hyperlinks are not productive instead they are distractive and most often very annoying.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the conclusion from the 2007 scholarly review of hypertext experiments, shown in number six, because while online we tend to jump from document to document while we are reading text. At times when things are posted for us to read there are links in between the text usually highlighted in a different color than the rest of the text and that distracts us. We tend to click onto that link and it brings up to a different page and its hard to go back to what you were reading and to comprehend what you were reading about. Also, while we read there are sometimes ads at the side with moving images, quizzes and other things that make it tempting to click on them just to see what they are about, even if its complete nonsense. These things are huge distractions.
ReplyDeleteI agree with point 10 which says that there's nothing wrong with absorbing information quickly and in pieces and that we've always skimmed through things to see if it catches our eye. But just like that, we're doing more skimming and less actual reading. Not trying to understand what was written for us to read and think it through. At the end it says that "we are blind to the damage we may be doing to our intellectual lives and even our culture" which is completely true. Soon, nothing will really catch our eye to read because we won't even want to read just skim through everything.
ReplyDeleteI agree with point 9 where it states that people are applying their internet adapted brain into the outside world. People are shallowly reading more and more and not taking in the information as deeply as they should. People say they understand what they read but do they really and to what extent. And all the while juggling many things at a time because they are used to multi-tasking on the internet. The changes they have been presented from the online culture has significantly altered them and how they live and do things.
ReplyDelete-[7] "The Net’s ability to monitor events and send out messages and notifications automatically is, of course, one of its great strengths as a communication technology. We rely on that capability to personalize the workings of the system, to program the vast database to respond to our particular needs, interests, and desires. We want to be interrupted, because each interruption—email, tweet, instant message, RSS headline—brings us a valuable piece of information. To turn off these alerts is to risk feeling out of touch or even socially isolated. The stream of new information also plays to our natural tendency to overemphasize the immediate. We crave the new even when we know it’s trivial."
ReplyDeleteI believe that this statement particularly aims toward the younger crowd and buisness oriented associates. The younger crowd feels the need to stay on top of trending topics since it's practically one of the only connections a group has in common. For example, when there is major celebrity or sociological news, one feels the need to update the rest of the world via Facebook or Twitter just so they do not feel out of the loop or inferior to those who already know the news. Without the technological advancement of automatic updating, one would not "fit in" with the social normality. This is the reason why our attention span when having a conversation with someone else is not only fixated on the conversation itself but on the updates one has on their mobile device. Communication has always been essential to humans, but now with the inventions that make it easily attainable, word of mouth and hand-written letters have been replaced with 140 characters.
3] "'The current explosion of digital technology not only is changing the way we live and communicate,' Small concluded, “but is rapidly and profoundly altering our brains.'"
ReplyDeleteThis statement is true in a literal sense. As they say in the article, our brains are plastic and change with every new experience. Being exposed to such vast forms of technology are bound to make some permanent changes to our brains. In turn, this will change our behavior. Going back to the communication, if our brains adapt to communicating through text at such a high rate, communicating in person will likely become a struggle. As said in the article, "When we go online, we enter an environment that promotes cursory reading, hurried and distracted thinking, and superficial learning" If our behaviors adapt to this learning, our abilities to communicate in person will diminish.
I disagree with number 10 because if someone is looking for specific information they won't skim through it. A serious book reader won't skim through the book they'll read it deeply. The only time we skim through information is when its not important to us.
ReplyDelete[4} [4]
ReplyDeleteThere is nothing remotely liberating about a computer doing our thinking for us. Why be bothered taking the time to make all these intellectual connections when you know the computer can do it for you? If anything having every viewpoint easily accessible to us would only impede our ability to form our own viewpoint, therefore weakening critical thinking.