As we consider potential social and cultural explanations for the brusque, short-tempered, and overly sensitive behavior that we observe in use of e-mail, it's worth considering possible deeper causes too.
What if computer media activates radically different parts of the brain from those parts engaged by more traditional media? In Mozart's Brain and the Fighter Pilot, neurology professor and neuropsychiatrist Richard Restak, M.D. points out research suggesting that "expressing one's opinion on a computer screen engages a different part of the brain than when writing or typing the same sentiment on a piece of paper." He theorizes that certain critical faculties arising from the left prefrontal lobe might grow weaker when we use a word processor than they become when we write with pen and paper. He says a computer's bright backlit screen, and its mosaics of images changing at high speeds, measurably excite the visual and emotional portions of the brain, while printed media engage different bits of your mind. This, Restak says, can explain the lapses in discretion and excesses of emotion that often emerge in workplace e-mails.
I get all jazzed up imagining the upcoming bounty of high-resolution, deep-color reflective computer displays. I admit the main reason for my excitement is that once we have screens that look like paper, I can sit out in the sunshine and get my work done; such displays can be just as visible in sunlight as books. No more peering at these monstrous glowing CRTs please; we evolved to spend all day looking at reflected sunlight, not at the glare of cold screens.
But if Restak's right, such advances in displays might have farther-reaching effects; they might dramatically change people's behavior online.
(Disclaimer: some critics say Restak's pronouncements veer too far from experimental foundations. He believes that our new technologies profoundly rewire our brains, deeply changing the way we think and operate in the world. I love thinking about this stuff, but to be clear: the wilder claims are "what if's" and not proven facts. If anyone reading this has a neurology or cognitive science background, please dive in and let me know what you think of Restak's theories in the comments below.)
More fun of this flavor here.
Posted by sean at Duben 05, 2004 11:39 PM | TrackBack (0)