Cell Phones and Communication: Effects, Research & Society

Introduction

Cell phones and other cellular communication equipment are omnipresent in today's digital age. Roughly 1.5 billion cellular phones are in use across the globe, and on average, 75 billion SMS messages are sent globally each month (Merry, Domlija & Mackenzie, 2005). While the use of cellular communication has greatly contributed to the field of communication, cellular interference has hampered functioning in various contexts, including driving, parenting, task completion, and enrollment in academic courses. Strayer and colleagues (2006) proved that cognitive impairments linked to cell phone usage while driving may be equivalent to those linked to drunk driving.

Impacts of distractions from cell phones have been observed in both laboratory and naturalistic settings. Here, the word "distraction" implies unintentional inattention to the task at hand, which is characteristic of unexpected events (e.g., a call on one's cell phone). By contrast, the term "task-switching" in the literature is typically used to indicate intentional attention shifts. It is also established that communication devices pose a cognitive disturbance across all developmental ages, from adolescence to old age. Studies have further indicated that such disturbances affect multiple cognitive elements, including logical reasoning, mental arithmetic, and working memory.

While a majority of studies have concentrated on the impact of cellular disturbances on information storage, encoding, and retrieval (working memory), numerical calculation (mental arithmetic), and pattern identification across presented narratives (reasoning), comparatively little is known regarding the emotional impact on fabricated memories for events that never occurred. False memory denotes remembering an event differently than the way it actually transpired, or recalling an event that never took place (Merry et al., 2005).

Significance and Preview

With the increased application of information and communication technology (ICT) over the last ten years, social critics have voiced concerns about individuals' apparent failure to disconnect. Beyond unscientific commentary, however (Powers, 2010), minimal organized research has been undertaken regarding the concerns ICT users have in connection with their devices, including adverse effects of cell phones on personal health and social interaction. This paper addresses that gap by employing cross-cultural scientific data from multiple existing research reports.

While cell phones' origins go as far back as the 1950s, the technology matured during the last decade of the twentieth century with the advent of the European Global System for Mobile communication (GSM) network, the emergence of numerous transmission networks in America, the Japanese launch of mobile phone operating company NTT DoCoMo, and parallel growth across the remaining Asian countries, the Middle Eastern nations, and the African continent (Ling & Donner, 2009). By 2009, nearly 4.7 billion cell phone subscriptions were recorded worldwide, in a global population of approximately 6.8 billion people.

History abounds with examples of new technologies or products that were initially embraced with enthusiasm but subsequently proven to have unforeseen adverse effects. Mobile phone technology offers a similar bipolar example. Cell phones afford users immense freedom to interact with others on their own terms, with regard to both time and place. Nevertheless, the reverse side of this Faustian deal is that individuals find themselves always at others' beck and call, struggling against the apparent social expectation of constant availability (Baron, 2008; Kahneman, Fredrickson, Schreiber & Redelmeier, 1993).

Wide variation in functionality and price can be observed across cell phone models today. Apart from voice and texting capabilities, the majority of cell phones offer features such as address books, a camera, a calendar, multiple ring tones, an alarm clock, and a radio or MP3 player. 3G smartphones additionally offer video capabilities and access to the World Wide Web. Mobile technology has pervaded all age groups, cultural communities, and economic strata (Ling & Donner, 2009; Powers, 2010). Since their introduction, however, cell phones have enjoyed particularly high adoption among young adults and adolescents.

Review of Research

Smith, Abadie, Isaak, and Senette (2011) investigated the impact of electronic communication distractions — including texting and cell phone demands — on false and true recognition, and in particular on semantically linked terms presented or not presented on a screen. Respondents were given twenty-four Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) word lists; the presence or absence of text-message and cell phone distractions was manipulated during the study. In this paradigm, respondents examine lists of semantically linked words (for instance, mother, diaper, and crib), associated with an absent critical lure (for instance, baby). There was no statistically significant variation in measures of false recognition across distraction conditions. However, signal detection analyses revealed that respondents better discriminated real targets from control items when no text-message or cell phone distractions were present. There was no significant variation in response bias across distraction conditions. These findings are discussed in relation to fuzzy-trace models and activation monitoring (Smith et al., 2011; Kahneman et al., 1993).

Lopez-Rosenfeld and colleagues (2015) sought to quantitatively assess the cost of cell phone interruptions during face-to-face meetings, via an experiment conducted in dyads among a large audience at a TEDx gathering. A speaker related a story, while the listener was instructed to intentionally ignore what the speaker was saying during a portion of the narrative — by, for example, attending to their phone — without the speaker's knowledge. The researchers demonstrated that the overall amount of attention paid is a key factor driving subjective perceptions of both the story and the speaker. These effects were largely independent of how attention was distributed across time. With the exception of the story's perceived emotional content, every social dimension of the interaction was affected by the duration of attentive listening. The study's data offer a cautionary note: disturbances significantly affect how people perceive what is said and how they evaluate the person speaking (Lopez-Rosenfeld et al., 2015).

Gonzales (2014) hypothesized that meaningful social exchanges are positively linked to increases in self-esteem, and that this phenomenon had remained largely unexplored in the digital media context despite the growing popularity of text-based interactions such as email, SMS, and social media. Communication quality, significance, and frequency were assessed across non-mediated and mediated channels using experience-sampling methods applied to a representative sample of 3,649 exchanges. Results showed that a majority of communication occurred in person (62%). Text-based communication (approximately 22%) and voice communication via mobile phone (14%) were less common. Meaningful text-based exchanges and in-person interactions were both linked to self-esteem changes. Consistent with the hypothesis of web-enhanced self-disclosure, the psychological benefits of text-based interaction appear to arise from improved self-disclosure. Further research is needed to fully understand the mechanisms underlying the positive association between self-esteem and meaningful text-based communication; nonetheless, findings point to the key contribution of digital exchanges to psychological well-being.

Misra, Genevie, Yuan, and Cheng (2014) explored the relationship between face-to-face communication quality and the presence of mobile devices. Through naturalistic field research, they found that conversations occurring when cellular devices were absent were rated as significantly superior to those taking place when mobile devices were visible. Individuals conversing without mobile devices nearby reported greater empathic concern, while conversations conducted in the presence of cellular devices were associated with lower empathy levels.

Przybylski and Weinstein (2012) arrived at similar conclusions, demonstrating that the mere presence of mobile devices in social settings disrupted human relationships. Across two studies, the authors found evidence that mobile devices negatively influence closeness, connection, and conversation quality — effects that were particularly pronounced during personally meaningful discussions. Although the majority of research documents adverse effects of mobile technology on interpersonal communication, one study found that cell phone use in public may make people more inclined to speak with strangers (Przybylski & Weinstein, 2012).

Campbell and Kwak (2011) analyzed whether and how mobile phone use affected engagement in conversation with strangers in public spaces. Considering different modes of cell phone use, the study found that phone use in public did, in certain cases, trigger conversations with unfamiliar individuals — particularly among users who regularly relied on mobile phones to gather and share news.

Van Valey and Brignall (2005) studied technology's effect on what they termed "cyber-youth" — children who grew up using the Internet as a central component of daily life and communication. They found that the widespread application of the Internet in entertainment, education, and social interaction has resulted in a significant decline in direct interpersonal exchanges among young people. The authors suggest that the reduction in face-to-face interaction time may ultimately have a substantial influence on young people's social skills development and self-presentation abilities (p. 337).

In her book Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other, Sherry Turkle (2012) examined technology's effects on family relationships. After interviewing over 150 adults and 300 young people, Turkle found that children frequently complain that their parents are absorbed by technology. Many children reported feeling that their parents paid more attention to their cell phones than to them, often postponing face-to-face conversation until they had finished responding to email messages.

Microsoft Research scientist Nancy Baym takes a different view from much of the scholarly community. Rather than seeing technology as harmful to face-to-face interaction, Baym argues that studies show digital communication enhances relationships; research evidence consistently indicates that people who communicate more with others via digital devices are also more likely to engage with them in person (Adler, 2013).

Drago's 2015 study, "The Effect of Technology on Face-to-Face Communication," evaluated earlier research, conducted field observations, and administered a web-based survey to assess the degree to which people engaged with their mobile devices versus one another during in-person meetings. The findings indicate that technology adversely affects both the quantity and quality of face-to-face conversation. Despite widespread societal awareness that technology has reduced direct interaction, over 62% of people observed on one university campus continued using their cellular devices while in the company of others.

Conclusions and Areas of Agreement

One principle of communication is that it begins with a "handshake" — a formal signal that two parties are ready to interact. Drawing on this principle, inattentiveness at the start of a conversation is likely to produce a more negative impression of the listener than inattentiveness toward the conversation's end. Inattentiveness early on violates the communication protocol, whereas inattentiveness at the end may lead the speaker to conclude that the story itself was uninteresting, rather than that the listener was discourteous. This idea can be illustrated through the metaphor of dancing. If someone is invited to dance but declines, the person who extended the invitation may conclude that the refusal was impolite. If the invitation is accepted but the recipient ends the dance early, the inviter may more naturally conclude that the dance itself was insufficiently engaging, rather than blaming the partner (Drago, 2015; Przybylski & Weinstein, 2012).

One might also reason that — as has been observed in other cognitive domains — perception is dominated by retrospective views shaped by the final portion of an experience. Van Valey and Brignall (2005), for example, found that individuals retrospectively prefer a treatment in which a lower level of discomfort follows a fixed amount of pain over one in which no discomfort follows at all. In other words, respondents do not simply accumulate the total amount of distress; rather, they form impressions based on portions of the experience, with the final episode being particularly influential. If this principle dominated the data in Lopez-Rosenfeld et al.'s (2015) study, one would expect respondents' perceptions to be shaped by the temporal distribution of attention — that is, the experience would be rated more negatively when the speaker was neglected toward the end of the story. However, the data indicate that the timing of inattentiveness contributes only minimally to variance in subjective perception of the story and the conversational partner (Turkle, 2012; Drago, 2015).

A quantitative assessment following a four-minute face-to-face meeting reveals that the overall quantity of attention is the primary driver of subjective impressions regarding both the message and the person conveying it. This effect applies to both listener and speaker, and is largely independent of how attention is distributed across time. Disruptions commonly occur in everyday conversations with children and among peers. Research must therefore caution that even brief windows of inattention can meaningfully affect both the storyteller and the message recipient (Turkle, 2012; Campbell & Kwak, 2011).

Mobile communication has transformed how individuals orient to time and space, deeply affecting how people coordinate with one another. Technology used for coordination between individuals enables schedule flexibility to a great extent when making arrangements. Ling and Donner (2009) note that as cell phones become widespread, they both complement and compete with traditional, time-based social coordination. Rather than relying on fixed schedules, cellular technology enables direct contact that is, in many cases, more flexible and interactive than temporal coordination. Przybylski and Weinstein (2012) classify this application of cell phones using the term "micro-coordination," suggesting it encompasses multiple dimensions: basic logistics (for instance, redirecting an already-begun trip), schedule softening (for instance, calling to say one is running late), and progressive activity refinement (for instance, finalizing the details of flexible plans). These instrumental applications of mobile phones alter coordination patterns across several social domains, including work, peer groups, and families.

Mobile communication has also altered family coordination patterns, particularly in households where both parents are employed or otherwise busy. Cell phones enable families to identify, communicate, and handle unscheduled domestic tasks, and lend parents support in monitoring and coordinating family activities. One participant in a 2004 study by Ling and Donner offered illustrative examples of messages exchanged between family members: "Can you drop one of the kids to her music class?"; "Can you pick her up?"; "Can you get milk from the store?" Misra and colleagues (2014) refer to this particular application as "remote mothering," noting that while it offers the benefit of flexible household management, it may carry the negative consequence of reinforcing gender inequalities by binding women more closely to domestic responsibilities.

It is important to bear in mind that not all effects of cell phones are positive. Research shows an association between cell phone use and adolescent delinquency, with heavy cell phone users overrepresented among those engaging in deviant behavior such as theft, fighting, and substance use (Ling & Donner, 2009). In these cases, the relationship is not simply linear; rather, it is those who use mobile communication — particularly voice calls rather than text messaging — most heavily who are most likely to engage in deviant behavior. Additionally, research reveals a broader correlation between cell phone use and sexual activity that is more consistently linear: as cellular communication use increases, a generally corresponding increase in sexual activity is observed. The precise mechanism underlying this relationship is not yet well understood, though one possibility is that the enhanced ability to arrange meetings facilitates greater opportunity for sexual activity. Considering this alongside broader patterns of media effects, heavy cell phone use appears to facilitate sexual behavior among overly eager adolescents (Powers, 2010; Kuznekoff & Titsworth, 2013).

References

Adler, I. (2013, January 17). How our digital devices are affecting our personal relationships. WBUR. Retrieved from http://www.wbur.org/2013/01/17/digital-lives-i

Baron, N. S. (2008). Always on: Language in an online and mobile world. New York: Oxford University Press.

Brignall, T. W., & Van Valey, T. (2005). The impact of Internet communications on social interaction. Sociological Spectrum, 335–348.

Campbell, S. W., & Kwak, N. (2011). Mobile communication and civil society: Linking patterns and places of use to engagement with others in public. Human Communication Research, 37, 207–222.

Drago, E. (2015). The effect of technology on face-to-face communication. The Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications, 6(1).

Gonzales, A. L. (2014). Text-based communication influences self-esteem more than face-to-face or cellphone communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 197–203. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.026

Gupta, S. K. (2011). Intention-to-treat concept: A review. Perspectives in Clinical Research, 2, 109–112.

Kahneman, D., Fredrickson, B. L., Schreiber, C. A., & Redelmeier, D. A. (1993). When more pain is preferred to less: Adding a better end. Psychological Science, 4(6), 401–405. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00589.x

Kuznekoff, J. H., & Titsworth, S. (2013). The impact of mobile phone usage on student learning. Communication Education, 62(3), 233–252. doi:10.1080/03634523.2013.767917

Ling, R., & Donner, J. (2009). Mobile communication. London: Polity Press.

Lopez-Rosenfeld, M., Calero, C. I., Fernandez Slezak, D., Garbulsky, G., Bergman, M., & Trevisan, M. (2015). Neglect in human communication: Quantifying the cost of cell phone interruptions in face-to-face dialogs. PLoS ONE, 10(6): e0125772. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0125772

Merry, P., Domlija, D., & Mackenzie, N. (2005). Global mobile forecasts to 2010 (5th ed.). London: Information Telecoms and Media.

Misra, S., Cheng, L., Genevie, J., & Yuan, M. (2014). The iPhone effect: The quality of in-person social interactions in the presence of mobile devices. Environment & Behavior, 1–24.

Powers, W. (2010). Hamlet's BlackBerry. New York: HarperCollins.

Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2012). Can you connect with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences face-to-face conversation quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1–10.

Resnik, D. B., & Stewart, C. N. (2012). Misconduct vs. honest error and scientific disagreement. Accountability in Research, 19(1), 56–63. doi:10.1080/08989621.2012.650948

Smith, T. S., Isaak, M. I., Senette, C. G., & Abadie, B. G. (2011). Effects of cell phone and text-message distractions on true and false recognition. Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social Networking, 14(6), 351–358. doi:10.1089/cyber.2010.0129

Strayer, D., Drews, F. A., & Crouch, D. J. (2006). A comparison of the cell phone driver and the drunk driver. Human Factors, 48, 381–391.

Turkle, S. (2012). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. New York, NY: Basic Books.