BS: Email Hurts IQ

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 08:40 PM

As Professor Parkinson, I believe, said, talking about applicant for job interviews...

"when all applicants are equally excellent, effectively none are, so hire the boss's nephew"

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: Cluin
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 04:23 PM

Like the guy I saw in the office after his day off:

Hang on, let me check this...

"You have 146 unanswered voice mail messages"

*DELETE*

If it's important, they'll call back. Let's get a coffee....

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 03:00 PM

DaveO -

I too noticed the researcher's report that:

Nine out of 10 people thought colleagues who answered messages during face-to-face meetings were rude, while three out of 10 believed it was not only acceptable, but a sign of diligence and efficiency.

While at first glance this appears to suggest that there are 12 people in this group of 10, some overlapping of the opinion groups apparently occured. At least 2, and perhaps all three of those who thought it "not only acceptable, but a sign of diligence and efficiency" must also have been part of the group that thought it was rude.

Note that the test subjects were Brits...


(although they're probably not the only ones who might think that being rude is an estimable behavio(u)r.)

John

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 01:14 PM

Kendall? Helllloooo down there!

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: PoppaGator
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 12:52 PM

Reading and posting to Mudcat threads certainly affects productivity at work. Thank God my job only requires me to use about 30% of my awesome mental capacity!

If you don't detect my presense here for a few days, it probably means that I'm facing a deadline and have to finish up a project over which I had been procrastinating for months.

My at-work email, on the other hand, actually prompts me to do things that I am supposed to be doing and for which I am getting paid. Nothing wrong with that, is there?

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: Amos
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 11:30 AM

LOL, John. That's like the camper who put on running shoes when threatened by a bear. His mate told him "You can't outrun that bear!". He replied, "No, but all I have to do is out run you!"


A

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 11:29 AM

+ 5 SD ... measured at age 40

:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 11:08 AM

JohninKansas cited the following:

Nine out of 10 people thought colleagues who answered messages during face-to-face meetings were rude, while three out of 10 believed it was not only acceptable, but a sign of diligence and efficiency.

Huh? Seems to me that if only one out of 10 didn't think it was rude, then three out of 10 couldn't believe it was acceptable and even laudable.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 10:51 AM

Since IQ theoretically is a "quotient" obtained by dividing one's own problem solving abilities by the "average abilities of the general population" the rapid decline of thinking capacity in the general population must be driving my IQ to astronomical levels, even if my own abilities never change.

As long as I can get dumb less quickly than the rest of you, I'll still have a high IQ? I'm pretty sure that effect outstrips the one cited, so I guess its safe to check my email once a week.

John.

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 10:39 AM

Frankly IQ isn't really genuine intelligence.

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 10:30 AM

I think the whole idea is silly....I can deal with it easily and.....oh, hold on a minute...........









ok, as I was saying, Harold, I can juggle these things with relative ease with just a little effort as I.....ummm...hold on, I need to deal with this message from my brother....




so, anyway...oh, damn it...it's time for my program....I'll finish this later...maybe after I do my blog on ...what was it? Oh, yeah, attention span.

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: Amos
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 10:05 AM

I would submit that more genuine communication actually raises IQ. (I don't mean meaningless noises or SPAM).

It is the interruption factor that CAN be deleterious, but it depends entirely on the attitude and management of the individual.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: Firecat
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 09:41 AM

Seeing as I have an IQ of 159 I would say it doesn't affect you at all!

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 08:44 AM

I'd be curious about what method was used when he "monitored the IQ of workers throughout the day." I don't think I've ever heard of an "instant IQ" test that was anything but a parlor game/joke.

Maybe he emailed them a test periodically? If they answered quickly they were "less smart?"

A fairly well-known consultant, J. M. Juran, from many years ago produced a monster "Quality Management" handbook in which he propounded something to the effect (paraphrased from memory):

"It doesn't matter if the employees who do the work believe that your methods will work. You must determine what manager is primarily responsible for paying your consulting fee, and impress him."

(Of course, the new edition probably says "him or her" but this was 25 years ago.)

This sounds like a "consultant report" to me.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: kendall
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 08:27 AM

Sure, you can do a number of tasks in a half assed way, but to do something right, you have to concentrate.
Oh, oh, I hear the cellar door opening.

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: jacqui.c
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 08:23 AM

Which is probably why it affected the men more. Multi tasking, it would seem, does come more naturally to women.

Jacqui - running for cover..............

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: Amos
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 08:00 AM

The coverage is slightly misleading; the e-mail is not the problem, it is the distraction caused by deciding to or having to answer it immediately. That;s a personal choice to be interrupted. Receiving PMs can be even more leisurely since there are a couple of layers in between (unless you have a auto-notification turned on).

Being interrupted all the time can be stupefying, and trying to put your attention onn multiple things at once, but there is nothing new about that!

A

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 04:48 AM

Beat you Dave, I scored in at 138 - a rise of one point since last I did it....

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: John O'L
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 02:11 AM

So it took a study of 1,100 people to confirm that interuptions cause distraction, and that excessive interuptions cause tiredness.

I wonder if there's any data concerning how the subjects felt after filling out the questionnaire.

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 02:03 AM

No they dont, mine is still an average of 135 according to the emailed results of an electronic test I just did ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 01:56 AM

Shifty comment, Ebbie. Very ShIfTy.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 01:54 AM

Yes, PMS can have a deleterious effect. Or wasn't that the question?

Subject: BS: Email Hurts IQ
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 01:48 AM

I'm surprised I haven't seen this new research reported, as it was released some time ago. A friend forwarded a link, but I think he hacked me in on his password, and asked that the link not be forwarded. It should be accessible by searching at CNN if anyone needs confirmation:

E-mails 'hurt IQ more than pot'
Friday, April 22, 2005 Posted: 8:08 AM EDT (1208 GMT)

LONDON, England -- Workers distracted by phone calls, e-mails and text messages suffer a greater loss of IQ than a person smoking marijuana, a British study shows.

The constant interruptions reduce productivity and leave people feeling tired and lethargic, according to a survey carried out by TNS Research and commissioned by Hewlett Packard.

The survey of 1,100 Britons showed:

•        Almost two out three people check their electronic messages out of office hours and when on holiday

•        Half of all workers respond to an e-mail within 60 minutes of receiving one

•        One in five will break off from a business or social engagement to respond to a message.

•        Nine out of 10 people thought colleagues who answered messages during face-to-face meetings were rude, while three out of 10 believed it was not only acceptable, but a sign of diligence and efficiency.

But the mental impact of trying to balance a steady inflow of messages with getting on with normal work took its toll, the UK's Press Association reported.

In 80 clinical trials, Dr. Glenn Wilson, a psychiatrist at King's College London University, monitored the IQ of workers throughout the day.

He found the IQ of those who tried to juggle messages and work fell by 10 points -- the equivalent to missing a whole night's sleep and more than double the 4-point fall seen after smoking marijuana.

"This is a very real and widespread phenomenon," Wilson said. "We have found that this obsession with looking at messages, if unchecked, will damage a worker's performance by reducing their mental sharpness.

"Companies should encourage a more balanced and appropriate way of working."

Wilson said the IQ drop was even more significant in the men who took part in the tests.

"The research suggests that we are in danger of being caught up in a 24-hour 'always on' society," said David Smith of Hewlett Packard.

"This is more worrying when you consider the potential impairment on performance and concentration for workers, and the consequent impact on businesses."



I wonder if PMs have the same effect.

John