On Cognitive Dispersion: The Shift from Deep Attention to Hyper Attention in The Digital Age 

The rise of digital technologies has deeply shaped how people, especially youths, attend to information and tasks. Katherine Hayles makes a profound argument that the extensive use of digital technologies catalyzes a generational shift in cognitive modes and capacities. She explains that deep attention refers to the sustained, rigorous focus on a single object, text, or task. It enables complex analysis and critical contemplation. Historically, deep reading of books and long-form texts epitomized deep attention. Yet in the digital age, young minds increasingly display hyper attention, characterized by quick shifts in focus, divided attention across multiple streams of information, a thirst for stimulation, and little tolerance for boredom.

Crucially, Hayles contends that the brain’s neuroplasticity means extensive interaction with digital technologies rewires neural circuits to privilege hyper attention. The parts of the brain dedicated to rapid task switching, divided attention, and dynamic stimulus-response are reinforced. However, the circuits that sustain deep focus attenuate from lack of stimulation. In other words, exposure molds the minds of digital natives for hyper attention, potentially at the expense of capacities for deep attention.

This rewiring has resonant implications, touching realms from education to existential philosophy. It echoes debates about the effects of radio, film, and television on cognition while drawing out new questions unique to digital life. The depth versus breadth tension takes on fresh nuance amid the high-speed streams of multimedia information online. If deep attention fosters the intellectual progress underpinning civilization, what is lost when digital natives lack the capacity or inclination for deep reading and sustained concentration? If hyper-attention suits the information age, what happens to wisdom traditions centered on focused internal reflection?

Hayles’s framework highlights concerns about impacts on education. Academia’s emphasis on close reading and critical analysis presupposes deep attention abilities. Yet professors bemoan the disengagement of students unable to focus for long on a scholarly text before diversion to digital distraction. The notion of digital technologies rewiring student brains for hyper-attention explains the mismatch. It parallels debates on television shortening children’s attention spans decades ago. However, the ubiquitous and immersive nature of digital engagement makes the depth and scale of rewiring more extreme.

Some argue teaching must adapt to students’ wired brains, incorporating more interactive media, creative projects, collaborative group work, and experiential learning. However, lowering expectations for sustained concentration also risks failing to cultivate deep attention. The question is whether academics can develop curricula to engage hyper-attention while expanding aptitude for deep inquiry. More research is needed on how learning experiences interact with neuroplasticity. Perhaps with intentional training, digital natives can gain more control over their cognitive modes.

Hayles’s analysis also illuminates philosophical debates about the effects of pervasive computing on conceptions of selfhood. Contemplative traditions long held that identity required deep self-reflection undistracted by external stimuli. Sages sought enlightenment through inward focus. The notion of non-stop digital immersion splintering recollection challenges this. Some speculate hyper attention scatters personal narrative, producing postmodern selves lacking internal coherence. If wisdom depends on possessing an integrated identity cultivated through diligent introspection, the acceleration of hyper-attention could preclude such existential progress.

However, the dichotomy may be false if hyper-attention and deep reflection can coexist. Although heavy multitasking correlates with weakened short-term memory, some research indicates training helps high-functioning multitaskers avoid negative impacts. Digital life may evolve new modalities of contemplation amid the data flow. Forms of meditative hacking, contemplative computing, and algorithmic self-quantification illustrate attempts to appropriate information technology for reflective purposes. Perhaps digital natives can harness the tools of their age to know themselves without losing internal continuity.

This relates to questions about the impact on creativity. Does deep attention naturally foster individual creativity whereas hyper attention diffuses creative potential across digital collective intelligence networks? Do new media environments redefine the creative process to emerge through decentralized, fast-paced collaborative interactions between diverse thinkers? The rapid spread of memes suggests viral, participatory creativity energized by hyper-attention. Again though, the relationship between modes of focus and creativity likely depends on how users’ appropriate available cognitive modes.

Research into the effects of digital technology on cognition remains in the early stages. Chen et al’s study substantiates that excessive use of digital technology can alter brain structure and function, leading to a range of cognitive impairments. Internet addiction was associated with reduced gray matter density in the brain’s frontal cortex, which is responsible for decision-making and impulse control (2023). Smartphone addiction has also been associated with reduced activity in the prefrontal cortex, which is responsible for decision-making and impulse control (Lin et al., 2015). Small et al. (2020) state that “Potential harmful effects of extensive screen time and technology use include heightened attention-deficit symptoms, impaired emotional and social intelligence, technology addiction, social isolation, impaired brain development, and disrupted sleep.” (p.179). As with debates about media, alarmism often exaggerates negative consequences while techno-optimists ignore risks of over-immersion during critical developmental windows. Long-term studies are needed to map how exposures change neural pathways, and whether subsequent interventions can actively reshape circuits, and impact complex thought. Such insights could inform digital literacy initiatives to cultivate strong foundational skills for reading, reflection, and attention control amid digital largesse. This may mitigate assumed dichotomies between hyper-attention and deep attention.

A growing body of research suggests that the constant stream of information from digital devices can impair our ability to retain and process information over time. A 2016 study by Cain et al. found an association between increased media multitasking, poorer working memory performance, and lower academic outcomes. In addition, college students who reported higher levels of Facebook usage performed worse on cognitive tasks like free recall activities, according to a 2013 study by Frein et al. Excess Facebook use has also been linked to decreased gray matter density in the anterior cingulate cortex, a brain region critical for memory and emotion regulation (Kanai et al., 2012).

Beyond impacts on memory, some research indicates that heavy technology use can affect the structure and function of other parts of the brain as well. One study found that frequent social media use was tied to decreased gray matter volume in the amygdala, which is involved in processing emotions (Montag et al., 2017). Another study revealed that video game players who gamed extensively showed reduced gray matter volume in the hippocampus, which plays a key role in spatial memory (Kühn and Gallinat, 2014). Most troublingly, the cognitive impairments associated with overuse of digital devices increasingly resemble those seen in dementia – and are now being observed even in younger adults not expected to suffer age-related neurodegeneration (Manwell et al., 2022).

Overall, Hayles puts forth a compelling framework for examining how today’s digital natives think differently than previous generations because ubiquitous computing technologies condition minds for fast-paced, fragmented information processing. The arguments highlight critical questions about the impacts these shifts may have on learning, creativity, identity, wisdom, and more. Additional research can further clarify the relationships between modes of attention and the effects of immersive digital experiences across varying contexts. This will equip teachers, parents, technology designers, and policymakers to make choices, navigate trade-offs, and harness opportunities of the high-tech age. Deep attention undoubtedly remains crucial for higher-level cognition, but with guidance hyper attention may complement rather than erode these capacities.

References 

Cain, M. S., Leonard, J. A., Gabrieli, J. D., and Finn, A. S. (2016). Media multitasking in adolescence. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 23, 1932–1941. doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1036-3

Chen, H., Dong, G., and Li, K. (2023). Overview on brain function enhancement of Internet addicts through exercise intervention: based on reward-execution-decision cycle. Front. Psychiatry 14, 1094583. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1094583 

Frein, S. T., Jones, S. L., and Gerow, J. E. (2013). When it comes to Facebook there may be more to bad memory than just multitasking. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29 2179–2182. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.04,031

Hayles, N. K. (2007). Hyper and deep attention: The generational divide in cognitive modes. Profession, 187-199. doi:10.1632/prof.2007.2007.1.187

Manwell, L. A., Tadros, M., Ciccarelli, T. M., and Eikelboom, R. (2022). Digital dementia in the internet generation: excessive screen time during brain development will increase the risk of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias in adulthood. J. Integr. Neurosci. 21, 28. doi: 10.31083/j.jin2101028 

Montag, C., Markowetz, A., Blaszkiewicz, K., Andone, I., Lachmann, B., Sariyska, R., et al. (2017). Facebook usage on smartphones and gray matter volume of the nucleus accumbens. Behav. Brain Res. 329, 221–228. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2017.04.035 

Kanai, R., Bahrami, B., Roylance, R., and Rees, G. (2012). Online social network size is reflected in human brain structure. Proc. Biol. Sci. 279, 1327–1334. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2011.1959 

Kühn, S., and Gallinat, J. (2014). Amount of lifetime video gaming is positively associated with entorhinal, hippocampal and occipital volume. Mol. Psychiatry 19, 842–847. doi: 10.1038/mp.2013.100

Small GW, Lee J., Kaufman A, Jalil J, Siddarth P, Gaddipati H, Moody TD, Bookheimer SY. Brain health consequences of digital technology use.Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2020 Jun;22(2):179-187. doi: 10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.2/gsmall.

One thought on “On Cognitive Dispersion: The Shift from Deep Attention to Hyper Attention in The Digital Age 

  1. Your optimism gives me a hopeful pause, Shuvro, in that the potential complementarity of shallow and deep attention can be incredibly difficult to orchestrate across a group of students (e.g., a section of first-year writing students); tempting to blend this phenomenon with SRTOL and to pose, as a thought experiment, something like Students’ Rights to Their Own Attention Structures. I wondered as I read about whether attention, because it is increasingly the purview of cognitive psychology and neuroscience, may once again bring cognitive studies into play for rhetoric and composition. Cognitive studies held onto low-key status in composition studies for the last two decades of the last century, but it tended to be grouped with behaviorism and elicited more than a few critiques for its understating the role of culture and identity in cognitive studies. Does resurface the question, where are cognitive studies and/or neurosciences now in relation to rhetoric and composition? And are they as interwoven or overlapping as you would like, in light of what you’ve developed here?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *