Live data from Hacker News

Have attention spans been declining?

slimemoldtimemold.com

71–80 of 495 posts

Re: Have attention spans been declining?

#71

There is far more content than there used to be but no more hours in the day. Our filters must reject more. Yes, there are costs -- deep work & study both suffer -- but there are benefits too: informational content that can be compressed does get compressed. An introduction to a concrete skill that would at one time have been padded out to fit into an hour long movie or lecture might become a 30 minute youtube video…

Do you have an example of such a skill that has been compressed?

Re: Have attention spans been declining?

#73

Trying to read classic literature really makes this apparent. Hemingway's Sun Also Rises must have been a riveting adventure story when it was published in 1926, but how can it compete with 10,000 hours of adventure travel on youtube, netflix etc.? Same with Moby Dick in 1850s... these were glimpses into exotic lives rarely heard of back then, but today you can find those stories or similar in vivid moving pictures a…

I'd like to believe it is reversible. It's not a genetic problem so it is a problem of environment. If you tech detoxed for a whole year living in the woods or something then tried to read Moby Dick it would likely be very tolerable again. You could study some people who have gone to prison and have little opportunity for endless media consumption.

Moby Dick was never meant to be read how it is read now. It was originally a serial, so like a webcomic or a fanfic that's actively being worked on. Those are still very popular mediums of media.

Re: Have attention spans been declining?

#74

I like the theory that the reason attention span has declined is because the demand for quality has hugely increased. Since there are so many blogs, films, books and videos out there, we no longer want to waste time on things that don't entertain or provide value to us. If in the past you might've given in and read or watched through boring parts because there was less options available, now people demand less B.S. a…

Lord of the Rings. An absolutely genre-defining work, but if you read it, it's really friggin slow and not at all compatible with today's attention spans. It's not a demand for quality, it's a demand to be endlessly entertained without having to invest the time or have the patience to wait for a backstory to unfold. Which is fine, I'm opening my phone to doom scroll for a second too, I just don't think it's quality that's being sought-after, but instant-gratification dopamine-inducting entertainment. It's bad. Until I took the time to retrain my. brain, I couldn't read books because I didn't have the attention span for them.

Re: Have attention spans been declining?

#77
post #22

People hack themselves to find the quickest release of feel-good chemicals in their brain but most do it at the expense of not realizing that it numbs their entire existence. And now it’s more prevalent than it ever has been. Grabbing a phone is a nice way to stay in the shell that you have built around yourself and pretend like you have control over your life, but no one has control over their lives. The more you bu…

>> Grabbing a phone is a nice way to stay in the shell that you have built around yourself and pretend like you have control over your life, but no one has control over their lives.

Probably a major cause of the increased levels of anxiety younger generations have. Simple things like blocking out the world with headphones, or standing in line engrossed in your phone reduce the likelihood of somebody interacting with you in a way you don't control. Avoidance breeds anxiety.

Re: Have attention spans been declining?

#78
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oppenheimer is not an action flick. :) Movies with a compelling story keep your attention, but with action, your brain can only take so much stimulation. Unless it has a really compelling story, your mind will wander.

Sounds like it would be a better movie split into 2 or 3 sittings.

3 hours is probably getting towards the upper limit but it's hardly historically anomalous. Lawrence of Arabia was over 3 1/2 hours and other "epics" of that era were often in the 3+ hour range. (Though movie theaters often had intermissions which most would probably never do today.) Live theater (with an intermission) is often in that range as well although many newer plays seem to be more like straight through 90 minute length.

ADDED: I originally read sittings as parts but if you mean intermissions, I agree. That's what long movies used to do and it's pretty standard for live plays much over two hours.

Re: Have attention spans been declining?

#79

Soooo how to we get it back?

Recognize that your most focused mindstate is first thing in the morning. Do tasks that require the longest attention span right then. Don't turn your phone on until they're done.

Generally don't keep your phone in your pocket, put it in another room on silent. Disable lockscreen notifications for all apps but the essentials. Do the same to your computer. No screen time 2 hours before bed.

Do long cardio workouts outside.

Recognize that it's OK to be bored, you don't need to fill every gap by looking at your phone. It's OK just to let your mind wander around.

Re: Have attention spans been declining?

#80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for mentioning that book. I am trying to decide if it's worth reading. The negative reviews agree with the main premise of the book but say it's short and superficial. Is there information in there worth reading beyond the usual tips ie keeping your phone in another room, avoid news first thing in the morning, no screen time 2 hours before bed, long cardio workouts, etc?

You should look at Matthew Sweet's responses to that book, it's not pretty: https://twitter.com/DrMatthewSweet/status/147912591249084826... It's also worth noting that Johann Hari has an extensive history as a liar.

TIL. Thank you
Post reply on HN