New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Tiny Distractions Can Double Mistakes

Just a three-second distraction, such as glancing at your phone, can divert your attention and double the number of mistakes you make

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Don't look down! Checking your phone may take just a few seconds, but that's enough to ruin your train of thought, according to new research showing that a three-second distraction can double the number of mistakes people make.

Given how commonly such distractions occur in modern life, the findings, published Jan. 7 in the Journal of Experimental Psychology, could have broad implications for how people work.

Multitasking myth


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Past studies have shown that switching between many different tasks makes people worse at all of them. But those studies typically looked at longer distractions, said study co-author Erik Altmann, a psychologist at Michigan State University.

"We wanted to examine the kind of situation where someone is deep in thought and the phone rings," Altmann said. "After the phone call, you have to sit there and try to figure out where you left off in the task."

To test these situations, Altmann asked 300 undergraduates to complete a computerized task that involved a series of steps.

Students were shown a group of characters in different colors and formatting, and then asked to do several steps in order, such as picking out all the vowels, then all the red-colored letters, then all the even numbers, and so on.

Some of the time, the students could complete the task uninterrupted, but occasionally the computer screen would randomly display two letters and ask the students to type in those letters. Once the participants had done so, they went back to their tasks.

"It was meant to capture something like what you're doing when you're doing your taxes, because it's important to do the steps in the right sequence."

Though the distractions took only three seconds and weren't difficult tasks, students lost their places or made mistakes twice as often after those distractions as they did without interruptions.

Attention grabber

The distractions were so brief that they couldn't have caused people to actually forget the tasks they were doing, losing them from short-term memory. Rather, Altmann hypothesizes that the demands of switching attention, no matter how briefly, take mental energy that would otherwise have gone toward the task.

That has implications for productivity in the workplace, where short distractions such as email alerts and phone calls are ubiquitous, he said. These brief distractions may also affect how "present" people are in social situations, he said.

"When people are stealing glances at their cellphones, they're not quite with you in the same way as when they're looking you in the eye," he said.

Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

LiveScience is one of the biggest and most trusted popular science websites operating today, reporting on the latest discoveries, groundbreaking research and fascinating breakthroughs that impact you and the wider world.

More by LiveScience

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe