31/07/2026
Stuck doom scrolling? Your brain is managing an environment filled with competing demands.
Research shows that attention begins filtering relevant and irrelevant information within the first 100–200 milliseconds, influencing what reaches working memory. Yet digital interruptions and repeated task-switching continually challenge this limited system.
In one study of 263 students, participants maintained focus for an average of only 5.61 minutes. Other workplace research found that returning to an interrupted task took approximately 23 minutes on average.
Understanding how attention works is the first step towards using technology more consciously.
Discover the CYBER resources: cyber-erasmusproject.eu
References
Gazzaley, A. (2011). Influence of early attentional modulation on working memory. Neuropsychologia, 49(6), 1410–1424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.12.022
Gazzaley, A., & Nobre, A. C. (2012). Top-down modulation: Bridging selective attention and working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(2), 129–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.11.014
Gazzaley, A., & Rosen, L. D. (2016). The distracted mind: Ancient brains in a high-tech world. MIT Press.
González, V. M., & Mark, G. (2004). “Constant, constant, multi-tasking craziness”: Managing multiple working spheres. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 113–120. https://doi.org/10.1145/985692.985707
Mark, G., González, V. M., & Harris, J. (2005). No task left behind? Examining the nature of fragmented work. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 321–330. https://doi.org/10.1145/1054972.10C55017
Mark, G., Gudith, D., & Klocke, U. (2008). The cost of interrupted work: More speed and stress. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 107–110. https://doi.org/10.1145/1357054.1357072
Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. A. (2013). Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced task-switching while studying. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 948–958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.001