It's Not Just You: Hearing Half a Phone Call Is Annoying
Because the brain anticipates dialogue in a conversation, overheard cell phone calls really are more annoying than an overheard dialogue. Karen Hopkin reports
SUBSCRIBE TO Science Quickly
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.
[Silence.]
Well, did you see the thing about why people on cell phones are so annoying?
[Silence.]
I know, right? Because you only hear...
[Silence.]
Oohp, I gotta go. Sorry. I know that was irritating. Because a recent study in the journal Psychological Science [Lauren Emberson, Michael Goldstein et al] shows that overhearing only one half of a cell phone conversation is much more distracting than listening to two people chat.
When we follow a full conversation, we tend to fill in the blanks…anticipating what each of the speakers might say. But when we’re limited to just one side of a two-sided dialogue—or “halfalogue”—our brains have to work harder to guess what’s coming next. That unpredictability grabs our attention, which makes these partial exchanges hard to tune out.
Psychologists had volunteers perform tasks that required concentration. And while the subjects worked, they were treated to either a dialogue or halfalogue the scientists had previously recorded. The results: hearing just the “tete” in a cell phone tete-a-tete leads to poor performance in other tasks.
And that suggests that [phone rings]
Can you excuse me? Hello? Yah, I’m just recording it now.
—Karen Hopkin
[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]
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
