Essay Final Draft
“I cant live without
my phone” - A study into the effects of advancing smartphone technology and
it’s direct impact on today’s society.
“There
has been more technological improvement in the last 50 years than in the
previous 5,000” (Bowman, 2010) and it is a struggle to remember what
life was like in society before mobile phones, tablets, laptops and before the
Internet became readily available for the everyday person. “The devices we use
change the way we live much faster than any contest among genes” (Wu, 2014),
therefore how has this
huge impact affected us on a direct level and what are the implications of
being exposed to such a vast array of new technology now at our fingertips?
Many of us refuse to confront the impact that these advances may be having on
our lives and choose to ignore the underlying/hidden relationships we are
beginning to grow with the products of this technology such as smartphones. “I
can’t live without my phone” is something we aren’t short of hearing in society
and poses the question: how much are we becoming reliant on smartphone technology
today and are we really at a point where we are unable to get by without it?
Long ago
were the days of laborious hand-written letters, dial home telephones and silver
coins in phone boxes to help us keep in touch with our loved ones. However, it
wasn’t until smartphones moved from solely business uses and hit the consumer
market in the early turn of the century, that this digital device began to
change the way we live our lives in society. Smartphones are a tool for all things communication, promising to
provide us with “infinite possibilities” (Yoon, 2015),
helping us to “do more”(Microsoft, 2015), as well as promising to fulfil our personal needs such as helping
us to wake up in the morning (alarms); helping us to get from a-to-b (maps/GPS);
they store our notes (notes/word applications); memories (photos/video) and all
important contact details (address book); remind us of important to-do’s and
events in our up and coming schedule (reminders/calendars); help us to tell and
keep track of the time; predict the weather and stay healthy; as well as
helping us to learn with the promise of good connectivity to the internet and
all it holds for email; blogging; social networking; online shopping and business.
You name it, smartphones and their application “app” technology have it and with
this technology having such a direct impact on our daily lives, its not
surprising that in recent years this digital takeover has come under scrutiny
with psychologists and health professionals alike whilst also being the subject
for many global studies and surveys.
The annual Deloitte Mobile
Consumer Survey released in May 2014 explains how in the UK alone “more than two in three UK
adults – about 35 million people – now have a smartphone” (Marsden,
2014). Digital technology is everywhere, and having constant access to our
smartphones on the go as a platform to source this technology has meant are
rate of productivity is increasing and our ability to multi-task is improving.
This however may not be a positive thing as our focus and ability to complete tasks
well, is overshadowed by our dwindling focus and requirement to do more than one
thing at once as we become
“addicted to the screen” (Watson, 2010:6).
Neuroscientist Susan Greenfield’s research has found that
there are “negative effects of attempting to process different streams of
information simultaneously, and results now indicate that multi-tasking leads
to increased time needed to achieve the same level of learning, as well as an
increase in mistakes while processing information” (Greenfield, 2014:230).
In her book Mind Change, Greenfield explains “When they
(high multi-taskers) are in situations where there are multiple sources of
information…they’re not able to filter out what’s not relevant to their current
goal. The failure to filter means they’re slowed down by that irrelevant
information” (Greenfield, 2014:228).
This lack in ability to filter through the bombardment
and large quantities of information we are exposed too in order to successfully
reach the required answer and solution is become more apparent throughout
society and as Greenfield explains “It’s no real surprise that concentration is
the key and that multi-tasking can be counterproductive” (Greenfield,
2014:229).
As we
become faster at completing tasks thanks to digital technology through being
continuously connected, the want, demand and expectation for these tasks to be
completed more rapidly also increases. We ourselves have become impatient,
checking our smartphones for messages and emails and waiting in the hope of an
almost instant response, and if we are responding like this – others are also. “We are already so connected through
digital networks that a culture of rapid response has developed. We are
currently so continually available that we have left ourselves no time to think
properly about what we are doing” (Watson, 2010:2).
With all
that smartphone technology can do for us and with the extent to which we use these
devices for our everyday needs, our learning is becoming increasingly impacted
as a result. Whilst our rate of productivity is shown to be increasing, it is
the quality of our problem solving and the amount in which we are extending our
knowledge that is suffering. Personality expert Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic argues how “life has become more complex but we hardly
ever notice it because technology has made complexity simpler than ever” (Chamorro-Premuzic,
2013). He goes on to explain that “technology will continue to evolve and the gap between what can be
solved with and without it will only increase” and as a consequence “people who
are able to keep up with technology will outsmart those who don't (even more
than they do now)” (Chamorro-Premuzic, 2013). Whilst these traits and suggested outlook on technology usage may
be true, it shouldn’t be so widely accepted and in contrast to Chamorro-Premuzic, futurologist Richard
Watson takes this idea one step further and paints a different and more
realistic picture of what is happening as a result of our digital technology
usage. “We are in danger of developing…a
society that has plenty of answers but very few good questions. A society
composed of individuals who are unable to think by themselves in the real world”
(Watson, 2010:3).
The shortage
of meaningful thinking and individual problem solving could mean “digital devices are turning us into a
society of scatterbrains. If any piece of information can be recalled at the
click of a mouse, why bother to learn anything? We are becoming Google-eyed,
scrolling through our days without thinking deeply about what we are really doing
or where we are really going” (Watson, 2010:3). Whilst Chamorro-Premuzic
explains how he feels “humans
today are like most smartphones and tablets - their ability to solve problems
depends not on the knowledge they can store but on their capacity to connect to
a place where they can retrieve the answer to find a solution…the only
knowledge we need to have is the knowledge of where to find stuff” (Chamorro-Premuzic,
2013), it is obvious that an individual’s
intelligence shouldn’t be defined by their tech-savvy ability to search for the
answer on Google and should definitely not be equal to that of someone who has
studied hard to find the answer themselves by other true means. After all, as
Pablo Picasso once said “Computers are useless. They can only give
you answers” (Watson, 2010:11).
It is not surprising that constant digital connectivity is having an effect on our health, both physically and mentally. The UK Deloitte Consumer Survey explains how “we don’t seem able to leave our smartphones alone. About one in six UK adults who own a smartphone (equivalent to about six million people) look at their phone more than 50 times a day” (Marsden, 2014). This inability to “never truly sit still or completely switch off” (Watson, 2010:4) means that many of us are becoming sleep deprived as a result, as “a massive 83% of all smartphone users check their phone within the first hour of waking up (not taking into consideration turning the off alarms)” (Marsden, 2014), and it being the last thing they switch off at night. Despite smartphones providing a platform of applications specifically designed to improve our health, and help us to become motivated to exercise and eat well, our “daily existence revolving around the smartphone…is radically changing…our everyday lifestyles” (Greenfield, 2014:1), as society becomes so engrossed in communication, tasks and living life via the screen, less of us are venturing outside and being physically active.
Constant
connectivity may also be driving us, and our relationships with one another, further
apart than we realise, as digital technology and communication via social
networking sites fail to build the foundations for solid relationships in
comparison to face-to-face physical communication. Mark Zuckerberg, the founder
of Facebook explains how “there
is a huge need and a huge opportunity to get everyone in the world connected,
to give everyone a voice and to help transform society for the future”
(Greenfield, 2014:101), however a darker, more realistic view on the use
of social networking sites is that
“we are connected globally, but our…relationships
are becoming wafer thin and ephemeral” (Watson, 2010:3). The only way we
seem to be able to build an authentic picture of who someone is, is no longer dictated
by our own impressions and physical perceptions of someone, but by what information
this person wishes to share and make public about themselves and what they
would have us believe. This shift in control has left society open to
manipulation by some, as “the
internet creates a unique world which adds an extra ‘disengagement’ from
immoral actions” (Greenfield, 2014:153), with more members of society becoming
victims of mistaken-identity, miss representation, bullying, fraud, privacy,
hacking, identity theft, and of course online grooming, stalking and predatory
paedophilia.
Our
identities and social behaviours are changing in accordance with online social
trends and how we want to be perceived. The constant use of social media sites
like Facebook and Twitter has stopped becoming a way for us to communicate,
express ourselves and speak our minds freely, and has instead turned into a way
for us to post disjointed, random and irrelevant statuses in order to get the
most response/reward, thus creating an incorrect and not entirely true
perception of ourselves, our views and insight into our personal lives. Increased
anxiety, depression and social isolation are all factors resulting from the
bombarding technological presence in society, with “the twenty-four-hour availability of social
networking, plus an unedited and unrealistic snapshot of what everyone else is
up to” proving “to be a heady cocktail for some individuals” (Greenfield,
2014:151). As psychologist George Fieldman explains, “social anxiety may... be heightened
by mobile phones. This is because people can avoid full social contact, by
means of texting and e-mail. Avoidance is fundamental to the maintenance of
anxiety. People experiencing anxiety may also be less empathic, so enhancing
selfish attitudes" (Fieldman, 2012).
A possible explanation
as to why our need for staying connected is so strong and why we turn so readily
to our accessible smartphones and social media to satisfy this urge is
something that could be more natural and internally mind based than we realise.
Neuroscientist
Susan Greenfield describes how “It’s
not difficult to see an overlap between feeling excited and feeling happy. Many
activities in life that are arousing, such as fast-paced sports, are also
rewarding.” Greenfield goes on to explain that “if various brain states
relating to arousal and reward are consistently linked to raised levels of
dopamine, and if social networking sites are rewarding and exciting, it is very
likely that social networking might serve as another trigger for the release of
dopamine in the brain” (Greenfield, 2014:111). This is the foundation for new
studies into smartphone addiction and dependency and why we feel the
need to check our mobile phones so often – even when there is no indication of
receiving anything in need of checking. Dopamine itself is a neurotransmitter produced
naturally in our brains when completing an action for a subsequent reward and
is also triggered when taking drugs such as heroin, cocaine and nicotine, increasing
their addictive properties (Greenfield,
2014). Seeking and receiving reward for our actions helps to strengthen
our feeling of acceptance and this is nothing new in society, however using our
smartphones in conjunction with social media in seek of this recognition, is
changing our identity as we become obsessed with our online presence and how
others perceive us.
An
illustration by Danish conceptual artist Mads Peitersen (fig. 1) manages to
capture just how advanced smartphone technology has become and our relationship
to this technology as it dramatically evolves. This illustration was created as
a series of personal works in 2010 aptly named “The Anatomy of Gadgets”, with
the central theme of technological advancements running throughout and how
these once inanimate objects are
“slowly
becoming more and more human” (Ho, 2011), taking on life-like qualities so as to serve our needs more
efficiently. This work is clearly in response to current interests within
society today, with an obvious visual representation of the Apple IPhone and
how this smartphone in particular has worked hand in hand with the promotion
and easy access to social networking sites such as Facebook and Instagram,
making the illustration more relatable to its audience via these cultural
references. Although the image is overall indifferent in terms of illustrating the
positive and/or negative effects of smartphone usage to its audience, Peitersen
does communicate some interesting ideas in this piece. The use of colour within
this conceptual painting by Peitersen helps to depict the contrast between the realistic
cold, hard, dead and lifelike digital device we are familiar with on the
outside, as apposed to the colourful and vibrant palette used to describe the
organic living anatomy within. The human anatomy of the smartphone here symbolises
how this technology is becoming so advanced that it is as if it is becoming an
extension of our selves, needing to think, breath and function similar to how
we do in order to survive. Unlike needing food, water and oxygen in these
cases, smartphone technology requires the use of its applications by a third
party instead, as depicted by each organ being subsequently linked to that of a
respective application icon; buttons connected the inner nerve endings and
moving parts connected to muscle and bone.
These human
like qualities within this image also give the impression that the relationship
society has with this digital device is changing as a result, in that as this
technology is becoming more intuitive and answering
to our every need, we are becoming more sentimental towards it and beginning to
treat this technology as if it were a living thing, mentioning how a phone has
“died” once out of battery and often how this possession is something we “can’t
live without”.Throughout
this image and those in the rest of the series, Peitersen has not once included
a brain in his anatomy of gadgets.The absence
of this key organ enforces the overall notion that technology, despite being
helpful, productive and efficient, is still mindless and inanimate no matter
how far advanced at this stage and that society may be becoming mindless in its
overuse.
‘Digital
Jailhouse’ (fig. 2) is an illustration by Felipe Luchi created as part of a
series of works for a Go Outside Magazine print campaign entitled “Prisoners of
Technology” in 2012. This campaign, available in both print and online, was to
simply and visually promote life outside in the open air in drastic contrast to
the withdrawn and introverted society being built as we become imprisoned by our “beloved gadgets”
(Erakovich, 2013). This illustration,
unlike Peitersen’s work (fig. 1), clearly communicates the negative impacts of
technology on our society, depicting
a “digital landscape in bleaker terms than
we’re all used to seeing” (Spencer, 2013). The value of colour has been used well by Luchi in this illustration to
support its message, the smartphone jailhouse drawn true to life in its dull and
unimpressive grey manner, as well as the baron, empty, desert-like space in
which it sits. Similar to imprisonment, this illustration
visually symbolises and supports the notion of alienation and isolation as a result
of digital technology. Luchi uses the cultural reference of the Apple IPhone,
similar to Peitersen (fig. 1), which is instantly recognisable for the
audience, strengthening the message of the illustration.
A lonely figure in the bottom
of the image is shown escaping from the smartphone jailhouse and strongly suggests
how very few of us have come to the realisation of the negative impacts of
smartphone technology on our everyday lives, thus not many of us being able to
escape its grasp. In line with this idea is the notion of our own choices and
mistakes resulting in these issues within society. Whilst placed in jailhouses,
time outside is a small form of enjoyment and recreation for prisoners and is a
main feature within the illustrated smartphone jailhouse in this image. This
recreational area symbolises how technology may provide society with activities
to occupy time and attention, however our own actions and choices in overusing
it are subsequently forming our own imprisonment while becoming trapped in the
screen, preventing society from interacting physically and mentally with the
outside “real” world.
In contrast
to Peitersen (fig. 1) and Luchi (fig. 2), the 2014 cartoon illustration
entitled ‘Like’ by Spanish artist Luis Quiles has a more controversial and
striking method of demonstrating the issues surrounding social networking in
our digital age.
Quiles’
work, often revolving around
technology “sexism, exploitation, violence, and homophobia” (Earth Porm, 2015), is current and has popular online
presence due to its impacting nature, suggesting many of its audience agree
with the “ugly side” (Earth
Porm, 2015) of social issues illustrated. Quiles
has commented on his recent works depicting technology, mentioning how “we should seriously ask
ourselves if we are controlling technology or if technology is controlling us” (Earth
Porm, 2015).
This image in
particular has a clear and direct message that centres on the theme of social networking
and the social identity changes experienced as a result. Quiles uses bright
bold colours and cultural referencing such as the Instagram logo to resonate
with the audience and illustrates the ‘like’ notifications in a suggestive and shocking
way due to the positioning of the mobile phone and female oral sex actions, mocking
society and its need to seek action and reward through social networking
methods. This illustrated quick pleasure fix, easy satisfaction notion supports
the findings of Susan Greenfield mentioned earlier and shows how societies
search for presence and acceptance online is in itself a form of
self-gratification, feeding an egotistical addiction.
This image
communicates how this online search for acceptance is, in a lot of cases,
explicit and invasive in order to shock and receive the most reward in the form
of ‘likes’ and ‘comments’.
In viewing
this illustration, the audience are confronted with the question: Do we go to
these lengths, divulging such personal
and raw information publically in real life situations in order to receive
pleasure and satisfaction, and if not, why is it acceptable to build an online
identity based on such unrealistic bombardment, rewards and ideals?
In conclusion, it is clear to see from this psychological
research and studies that not only are our day-to-day lives changing as a
result of advancements in mobile and digital technology and all that comes with
it, but that our minds are as well. “For the first time ever, life in front of
a…screen is threatening to out-compete real life” (Greenfield, 2014:17) with
the negative impacts of continuous digital access and connectivity by way of our
smartphone use far outweighing the positives. The imposing and addictive nature
of technology and our growing need to be constantly connected (yet truly
disconnected) is quietly stripping us of our privacy, our sanity, our
independence and our basic cognitive and communicative skills. Our brains, as they
always have done, are adapting to their new (now digital) environment and are in
danger of becoming computer-like themselves, “a system responding efficiently
and processing information very well, but devoid of deeper thought”
(Greenfield, 2014:12). Whilst
this cyber world advancing before us may look shiny, new and full of endless
possibilities, there is an increasing chance that this need to be digital may
be our downfall and a step in the wrong direction for human intelligence, as we
begin to become the mindless machines that serve us. Not to say that we need to remove technological
advancements from our lives all together, but we should however consider
seeking other non-digital forms of social communication, interaction and
fulfilling personal needs and tasks. Efforts should be made to try and limit
this digital hold on society and not forget the more important, beneficial and
natural ways of living without a screen, becoming more mindful as a result.
Bibliography
Book Sources:
Greenfield, S. (2014) ‘Mind Change’, London, U.K., Ebury Publishing. p 1, 12, 17, 101, 151, 153,
228, 229 & 230.
Watson, R. (2010) ‘Future Minds’, Boston, U.S.A.,
Nicholas Brealey Publishing. p 2, 3, 4, 6 & 11.
Internet Sources:
Bowman,
J. (2010) ‘The Lightning-Fast Pace of
Technological Advancement’ [Internet] U.K., Daily Reckoning. Available
from:
<http://dailyreckoning.com/the-lightning-fast-pace-of-technological-advancement/>
[Accessed 20th November 2014].
Chamorro-Premuzic, T.
(2013) ‘Is Technology Making Us Stupid (and Smarter)?’
[Internet] U.S.A., Psychology Today. Available from: <https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mr-personality/201305/is-technology-making-us-stupid-and-smarter>
[Accessed 23rd April 2015].Earth Porm. (2015) ‘Spanish Artist Reveals The Ugly Side Of Society In Controversial Illustrations’ [Internet] U.S.A., Earth Porm. Available from: <http://www.earthporm.com/spanish-artist-reveals-ugly-side-society-controversial-illustrations/> [Accessed 2nd May 2015].
Erakovich, A. (2013) ‘Heroes and issues’ [Internet] U.S.A., Pinterest. Available from: <https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/100979216617535241/> [Accessed 2nd May 2015].
Fieldman, G. (2012) ‘Mobile Phones May Make People Selfish’ [Internet] U.K., The British Psychological Society. Available from: <http://www.bps.org.uk/news/mobile-phones-may-make-people-selfish> [Accessed 2nd May 2015].
Ho, A. (2011) ‘Gadget Anatomy’ [Internet] C.A., Trend Hunter. Available from: <http://www.trendhunter.com/trends/mads-peitersen> [Accessed 23rd April 2015].
Marsden, E. (2014) ‘Deloitte Mobile Consumer 2014: The UK cut. Revolution and evolution’ [Internet] U.K., Deloitte. Available from: <http://www.deloitte.co.uk/mobileuk/assets/pdf/Deloitte_Mobile_Consumer_2014.pdf> [Accessed 25th April 2015].
Microsoft. (2015) ‘Microsoft Mobile Devices’ [Internet] U.S.A., Nokia Lumia. Available from: <http://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/mobile/phones/lumia/?gclid=CNqdx7vn6cQCFcsBwwodAEwAOA> [Accessed 23rd April 2015].
Spencer, N. (2013) ‘Digital Jailhouse Illustrations by Felipe Luchi’ [Internet] U.S.A., Visual News. Available from: < http://www.visualnews.com/2013/02/06/digital-jailhouse-illustrations-by-felipe-luchi/> [Accessed 2nd May 2015].
Wu, T. (2014) ‘As Technology Gets
Better, Will Society Get Worse?’ [Internet] U.S.A., The New Yorker. Available
from:
<http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/as-technology-gets-better-will-society-get-worse>
[Accessed 20th November 2014].
Yoon, B. K. (2015) ‘Highlights: CES 2015 Keynote
Address by B K Yoon’ [Internet] U.S.A., Samsung Tomorrow. Available from: <http://global.samsungtomorrow.com/highlights-ces-2015-keynote-address-by-bk-yoon/>
[Accessed 23rd April 2015].
Visual Examples:
 |
| Figure 1 |
.jpg) |
| Figure 2 |
Available
from: <https://www.behance.net/gallery/3790149/Go-Outside-Magazine-Jailhouses>.
 |
| Figure 3 |
Word count (minus referencing and Bibliography): 3,480