DISQUS

Looking at Twitter and friendfeed with the thought: "I have to keep up," contributes to a sense of "vigilance," and the stress that comes along with that. Keeping the windows open ALL THE TIME, on the desktop, while attempting to be "productive" with coding or writing or other tasks, is sort of like going snowboarding and talking on a cell phone/picking up text messages. The risk while snowboarding is that you'll hit a tree. The risk while working on productivity related tasks is that -- you'll hit a tree (metaphorically). I have come to *love* Twitter. I choose when to check in, scan, read, follow links, and I choose when to focus on something else. When thinking the thought, "I have to keep up," I question it and contradict it -- keep up with what? I don't have to keep up... as a way of unraveling the stress around that thought.

The only leap made in my HuffPo piece is this: frequently, people inhale and then hold their breath when they do their email and that, breath holding is highly correlated with certain physiological consequences -- thus, breathing is a good idea and it's good to notice whether you are, in fact, holding your breath, or breathing. Further, posture, when working at a computer is often compromised -- arms forward, head forward, and that can contribute to more restricted breathing. Paying attention to posture is also a good thing. As I researched this -- I observed and spoke with (about their own observations of themselves) close to 200 people, in a variety of settings. I interviewed physicians, cardiologists, neuroscientists, medical researchers, body workers, and chiropractors and read a number of papers on breath holding and physiological consequences. Before posting the piece, I had it fact-checked by medical researchers and physicians. The intention of the piece was to shine on a light on breathing -- in any context, especially around technology. Any conclusions suggesting "email is bad," miss the point. Technology is NEUTRAL. What we do with it and how we do it, is everything.

Stowe,
I read your paragraph above regarding my continuous partial attention thesis. Once again, you appear to misunderstand my work. Check http://www.continuouspartialattention.com</p>

Continuous partial attention is not something that I judge to be "good" or "bad." EVERY attention strategy has a place and matches to an activity, a desire. CONTINUOUS continuous partial attention, that is -- operating in a constant state of vigilance, high alert, always on, is stressful to the body. It creates an adrenalized fight or flight state, cortisol floods the body. The bottom line: continuous partial attention some of the time can be a great thing. Continuous, continuous partial attention -- or continuous partial attention ALL the time, is a contributing factor to insomnia, obesity, and stress-related diseases.
Cheers,
Linda

Great post! We are at, what I believe, will be a tipping point, with regard to how we evolve the way we pay attention. That is, while today, we pay, what I call, continuous partial attention, increasingly, we are longing for more signal and less noise, fewer and more meaningful relationships, and to get to the bottom of things (vs. to stay on top of things). It's interesting to watch those under 20 use technology. They KNOW where the off switch is. They prefer to SMS vs. deal with intrusive phone calls or burdensome email messages. They will begin to show the rest of us new ways to use the technologies and we'll discover new ways on our own as we move from "always-on" toward more balanced lives.