Potential Negative Effects of Heavy Engagement with Online Technology on Critical Thinking
Introduction
Do you ever look at the weekly screen report of your smartphone? Or do you ever think about the average time you spend reading posts, commenting, or posting on social media applications like Instagram, X (former Twitter), etc.? It is likely that your responses to these questions may not strongly lean towards a ‘yes’. However, analyzing screen reports showing the volume of online activities should prompt us to reflect on our level of engagement with online technology (i.e., engagement with affordances like reading anytime, anywhere).
Having thoroughly engaged with online technology, we should be curious as to what possible cognitive implications arise from such engagement, e.g., from reading e-texts, checking social media content, scrolling through comments, and so on and so forth. This paper will particularly discuss the negative effects and implications of heavy engagement with e-reading, apps, and social media for the internet user’s[1] critical thinking; also, measures that can be taken to combat the destructive effects of such engagement will be considered.
To have a better understanding of implications of the related engagement for the user’ critical thinking, this paper will first explain briefly what (online) technology offers to the user, and then, it will provide some definitions of critical thinking in the literature.
[1] Instead of using terms like the internet, smartphone, or computer user, the writer used the term the user, as it seems to have an all-encompassing meaning, and also it makes it easier to be consistent throughout the paper.
Affordances of Online Technology
In the current epoch, technology, coupled with the internet, grants users instant access to vast information and enables three main forms of interactions: (a) text, exemplified by the text-to-speech feature, (b) applications like Microsoft Word, demonstrated by receiving immediate feedback on word spellings, and (c) other users, illustrated through multiplayer online games or commenting on one’s posts (Chapelle and Jamieson, 2008). By virtue of these affordances respectively, the user can engage in reading and learning process in an unstructured learning context (e.g., on the bus) where there is not a clear-cut boundary between text, time, and place (Duxbury et la., 2014); also, the user has a perpetual opportunity to receive feedback and to communicate their thoughts with other users, for example, in different online platforms like Edmodo. In consequence, it can be claimed that the three interaction types prove strong factors that have amplified the ubiquity of heavy engagement with online activities and mass information; however, it may not be easy to assert that such engagement proportionately engages the user’s critical thinking. To elucidate the concept of critical thinking, some of its definitions suggested in the literature will be discussed below.
Critical Thinking
Critical thinking entered literature by what Dewey (1910) wrote—how we think— at the beginning of the 20th century. Since then, various definitions of critical thinking were given in bodies of research. According to Fisher and Scriven (1997) a critical thinker interprets and assesses observations, interactions, facts, and details. Similarly, Scriven and Paul (1992) described it as a disciplined cognitive process of conceptualizing, analyzing, implementing, synthesizing, and evaluating information produced by what is observed, experienced, reflected on, reasoned, or communicated with; this process leads us to form our beliefs and take actions accordingly. Sternberg (1987) defined critical thinking as “the mental processes, strategies, and representations people use to solve problems, make decisions, and learn new concepts” (p. 3). Ennis (1987) put forward that critical thinking embraces reflective thinking which itself ensues from reflective practices. Paul and Elder (2007) asserted that “the goal of critical thinking is to establish an additional level of thinking, a powerful of inner voice of reason through an explicit focus on self-directed, disciplined questioning” (p. 36). They believe that a thinker with a questioning mind (i.e., critical mind) scrutinizes ideas and makes connections between them to cultivate deep learning (Paul and Elder, 2007). That said, do you think someone who is heavily engaged with online reading and interacting with social media apps for hours on end has many opportunities to think critically in an online environment?
Effects of Heavy Engagement with Online Technology
This paper suggests two effects that heavy engagement with online technology might bring about. The first one is rooted in the essence of online searching. To illustrate, if a user needs an answer to a question, they can easily search for information about it online, for example via the Google search engine. Their search result(s) will either guide them to the right answer(s) or give them remarkably close clues to find the right answer(s). In the information search process, the user will be bombarded with unlimited information. This ease of access to mass information while searching a right answer for the question can potentially hinder the user’s critical thinking or analysis and turn them into a mere consumer of information, as the user would not feel the need to delve into the question, or to deconstruct the question, first before receiving an answer. Eventually, the inhibited critical thinking would make the user show a diluted tendency to analyze the question, question critically, draw connections among far-flung ideas, and argue or justify a viewpoint – i.e., critical thinking skills (Kong, 2014).
Therefore, the essence of online searching that supplies the user with a vast amount of information—information overload—seems to obviate the need for developing and practicing critical thinking skills. In a similar vein, Foreman (as cited in Carr, 2008) used the term ‘pancake people’ to describe what information search habits in the Google era can turn us into. Foreman maintained that we change into “pancake people — spread wide and thin as we connect with that vast network of information accessed by the mere touch of a button” (p. 94).
The second effect would be on the ability to concentrate sustainably when doing cognitively demanding tasks (e.g., writing a literature review). Indeed, continual interaction with the online world can harm the user’s concentration because online technology has the concomitant effect of keeping the user in a long-lasting state of distraction and interruption. More specifically, constant access to mass information at a stroke and to communication tools that allow you to connect with family, friends, and colleagues at any time (any time they are available) leave the user having meager time for concentrating their mind on one specific task. Lack of sustained concentration conflicts with the essence of critical and deep thinking which seems to occur effectively when the thinker can stay attentive to information flows and screen out (online) distractions. In this sense, Greenfield (as cited in Wolpert, 2009) believed that online technology promotes multi-tasking which is necessary for doing certain tasks like driving; however, it impedes the user’s critical thinking and profound understanding of information.
Extensive internet engagement often leads to multitasking, wherein users simultaneously read articles while checking emails, Facebook pages, Tweets, or shopping on Amazon. These various activities demand part of the user’s attention, consequently reducing their overall concentration level. Greenfield (as cited in Wolpert, 2009) found that sustained concentration is necessary when the task at hand is cognitively complex. In her analysis, she affirmed that college students who watched CNN Headline News with only the anchor on screen and without any televised distractions like the ‘news ticker’ moving at a lower part of the screen could recall key information better than those who watched the news with all the televised distractions like the news ticker and weather forecast on the screen. Hence, it is not uncommon to acknowledge that while online technology constantly exposes users to unlimited streams of information, it also possesses the inherent ability to diminish opportunities for practicing attentiveness and critical thinking.
The heavy reliance on online technology has significantly impacted users’ reading habits. With perpetual access to vast amounts of information, users now tend to crave breadth rather than depth in their reading. Instant access to information has fueled a desire for the latest updates in the shortest time possible (Carr, 2010). Consequently, users often prefer reading short texts or employ strategies like skimming to grasp the main points of longer texts, satisfying their need for quick but surface-level information. This inclination has given rise to compulsive behavior, with users constantly checking smartphone notifications, emails, and social media apps, even when there is no specific need. Such behavior emerges as a means to quench the thirst for staying up to date with the latest information. The constant checking of the smartphone and computer (or any digital device with similar functions) appears to have inundated the user with distractions and interruptions in a way that maintaining an elevated level of concentration, a requisite for reading long texts, seems to be laborious (Carr, 2010).
The change in reading habits is to the extent that the user today does not find it an optimum use of time to read long texts from different books (electronic or print versions) to gain information; rather, they tend to engage in reading, or more precisely, skimming and scanning e-texts because the Web technology allows them to cherry-pick the relevant texts and scan them for specific information of interest in a shorter period (Tapscott, 2008). In fact, the convenience, and benefits of online reading—prompt access to text, powerful in-text searching tools, easification of text comprehension (e.g., via using the built-in dictionary of reader apps—in case the text is written in the user’s second language), interaction with text via text-to-speech tools—have compensated for low concentration along with impatience while reading long texts, and negligence of critical thinking (Karp, 2008). Friedman (2008), a blogger in the field of computer-assisted medicine, believed his thinking habits are being changed by the internet, and consequently, he has lost his ability to actively engage in reading long, online, or printed texts.
As explained by Carr (2010), online technology is taking critical thinking (or deep thinking) from us by eroding our ability to transfer information from working memory to long term memory (i.e., memory consolidation) where we draw connections and contrasts between new streams of information and already established thoughts and knowledge. In fact, it is these connections and contrasts that steer us to engage in critical thinking. If the working memory, which has a limited capacity, is constantly inundated with information (e.g., Google search results, emails), we cannot store added information in it. Therefore, if we do not remove older pieces of information (e.g., a Facebook comment that we read two minutes ago) from our working memory, only a small amount of information remains in the working memory for long; long enough to be transferred to long term memory.
What is important to note is that we need to stay focused and attentive to current information for a while so that memory consolidation occurs, because it is the attentiveness that sets in motion the transfer of information to long term memory and that enables us to draw the connections and contrasts (Carr, 2010). However, the question is despite all the distractions and interruptions that we experience online, what measures can be taken to amplify our concentration on information to the extent that it (our concentration) enables us to draw the connections and contrasts, or in other words, to think critically?
Proposed Measures and Educators' Response
There are some effective measures that can help us maintain attentiveness during prolonged reading sessions while minimizing distractions and interruptions. One such method is utilizing a dedicated reading device, such as a Kindle. In contrast to smartphones or computers, a dedicated e-book reader allows you to concentrate solely on the reading material at hand, avoiding constant distractions like checking emails, social media, or streaming videos. This focused approach enhances your reading experience and minimizes the urge to engage in unrelated activities. Using such devices would potentially help you to not overload your working memory with information and would leave you sufficient time to transfer the information to your long-term memory; therefore, you would better focus your mind on doing cognitively complex activities. Another way that can be helpful in keeping us attentive to a cognitive activity is to disconnect our smart devices from the internet or turn off the device notifications for certain periods of time when accomplishing a cognitive activity. In this case, we would be able to maintain a higher level of concentration than when the device is connected to the internet.
As an educator, I would like to emphasize that in the online environment, information consumption speed is just one aspect to consider. Equally important is the veracity of the incoming information and how it relates to your own experiences. It’s essential to assess whether the new information aligns with, enhances, or challenges your existing knowledge. To navigate this effectively, developing critical thinking skills such as reasoning, analysis, and assessment is vital. By honing these skills, users can determine the accuracy, relevance, sufficiency, and potential biases of the information they encounter.
A valuable method to foster critical thinking is by encouraging users to engage in reading for pleasure, especially on subjects unrelated to their discipline or field of work. This practice broadens their perspective and prompts them to think critically about diverse topics and ideas. Research demonstrates that our imagination, reflection, and critical thinking can be developed by pleasure reading (Greenfield, cited in Wolpert, 2009). Another way for stimulating critical thinking is to have students grapple with higher-order thinking questions (Conklin, 2011), which are the questions that do not necessarily have one correct answer, e.g., why do some believe that print books outsell e-books? Or how have your life goals changed from five years ago? Lower order questions—questions that often have one correct answer—are useful for establishing foundation knowledge; however, the student should be exposed to higher order questions because they open opportunities for using the knowledge in real-life situations.
Conclusion
This paper discussed the detrimental effects and consequences of heavy engagement with online technology on the user’s critical thinking. Additionally, it explored potential measures that can help minimize these negative effects. The user in the online environment is at the risk of losing critical thinking due to the ease of access to mass information and the lesser need to read extensively. Also, diversions and interruptions like checking emails or Tweets reduce the user’s concentration span, and therefore, they leave limited room for the user to think critically. As a possible precautionary measure, it might be useful for the user to look carefully at the weekly screen reports of their smartphones so that they can have an estimate of the extent to which they become distracted while doing a complex mental activity.
References
Carr, N. (August 15, 2008). Is Google making us stupid? The Atlantic.
Carr, N. (2010). The shallows how the internet is changing the way we think, read and remember. New York: Atlantic Books.
Chapelle, C., & Jamieson, J. (2008). Tips for teaching with CALL: Practical approaches to computer-assisted language learning. Pearson Education.
Conklin, W. (2011). Higher-order thinking skills to develop 21st century learners. Shell Education.
Dewey, J. (1910). How We Think. D. C. Health & Company.
Duxbury, L., Higgins, C., Smart, R., & Stevenson, M. (2014). Mobile technology and boundary permeability. British Journal of Management, 25(3), 570–588. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12027
Ennis, R. H. (1987). A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities.
Fisher, A., & Scriven, M. (1997). Critical thinking Its definition and assessment. Centre for research in Critical Thinking.
Friedman, B. (February 6, 2008). How Google is changing our information-seeking behavior. Lab Soft News. https://labsoftnews.typepad.com/lab_soft_news/2008/02/how-google-is-c.html
Greengard, S. (2009). Are we losing our ability to think critically?. Communications of the ACM, 52(7), 18–19.
Karp, S. (February 9, 2008). The evolution from linear thought to networked thought. Publishing 2.0. https://publishing2.com/2008/02/09/the-evolution-from-linear-thought-to-networked-thought/
Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers and Education, 78, 160–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.009
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2007). Critical thinking: The art of socratic questioning. Journal of Developmental Education, 31(1), 36–37. https://doi.org/10.1037/027900
Scriven, M., & Paul, R. (1992). Defining critical thinking. Retrieved February 23, 2013. Www. Critical-Thinking. Org/University/Univclass/Defining. Html.
Sternberg, R. J. (1987). Teaching critical thinking: Eight easy ways to fail before you begin. The Phi Delta Kappan, 68(6), 456–459.
Tapscott, D. (November 10, 2008). How digital technology has changed the brain. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2008-11-10/how-digital-technology-has-changed-the-brainbusinessweek-business-news-stock-market-and-financial-advice
Wolpert, S. (January 27, 2009). Is technology producing a decline in critical thinking and analysis?. UCLA Newsroom. https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/is-technology-producing-a-decline-79127