Task switching

So apparently it is not possible to blog while in the final throes of a PhD. Crazy experience but now complete. But this got me to thinking about divided attention and a conversation I'm engaged in on LinkedIn. Basically some "researchers" who work for an advertising group have suggested that young people, because of their screen time, are cognitively speedier and better at task switching and integrating information from these sources than their elders were. The implication being that this is transferrable to other aspects of life. The researchers used one of my favourite methods (EEG) to determine this. At first I was a little nervous. Obviously I'm on the mature side and pretty clearly I have trouble with switching tasks all the time. But then I got to reading and thinking.....

Here's the story:
http://www.clickz.com/clickz/news/2231284/millennial-brain-responds-differently-to-digital-media?goback=.gde_1861379_member_195484606

First of all, no one can compare my performance at say, 21 years of age, to that of a 21 year old now. Our contexts are different and I had no screen time back then. Not to mention the fact that the EEG methods used now did not exist then. Also, some of these EEG methods remain unproven. Secondly, I suspect that all this "speediness" simply reflects a skill set and not an evolutionary change in people.  We just don't change that quickly from one generation to the next. Third, research has long ago shown us that reaction times increase with age and perhaps some cognitive processes slow down. So this idea that younger people are faster isn't really new. But most importantly, what is so great about being faster? I suppose it would make younger members of the tribe more able to defend territory, get mates and find food etc etc. But beyond that, there are other implications for today's society. For example I worry about a world in which the speed of your thumbs or the speed with which you can scan a screen determine economic success and confer power over others. And most especially, I worry about a world that places such a high premium on youth, whether based on looks or speed of cognitive processing. To solve the problems we face, we need older AND younger brains working together and we need to stop comparing them as though one were better than the other. So with apologies to those researchers, I think we should all think twice when we read reports like this.

Well, that's my gripe for the day I guess. I'm going to switch tasks now :), but more on these brain themes as they occur.

Dastardly Discussions

As usual, long breaks in the blog. However, I am realizing that this is ok given the amount of writing (and thinking about writing) that I have been doing every day. You see, part of the dissertation process is intensive interpretation of your findings, i.e., the dastardly discussions. I've written 4 of these discussions already and I'm on my 5th now. This is where you get to recap your findings, explain what they mean, align them with the work of others and suggest what contributions you have made to research and theory.......theory. Theory is the bane of my existence which is very interesting given the fact that I have such a speculative and curious mind. Somehow, the idea of having to explain how my work confirms or disputes a theory makes me want to go to the corner of my office and assume the fetal position. Give me numbers! Give me statistics! And especially ... give me graphs! These I can interpret and work with to develop new experiments. But theory.... ugh.
Ok... so before you point it out, obviously without theory there wouldn't be any really cool ideas and I wouldn't have any reason to do my experiments in the first place. But somehow along the way I have become very attached to my data and I am not inclined to explain its theoretical significance. I have an idea (hehehe... a theory?) that this is because I am approaching the end of my writing process and I am so tired of it that its ultimate meaning escapes me. Those of you who have done grad school will know what I am talking about. There comes a point where your work appears to have no realistic purpose whatsoever, seems endlessly trivial and and is on a downward trajectory toward a state of permanent drivel. And since drivel has no meaning, how can it be explained from a theoretical vantage point? Haha! So its all about elevating the drivel... I must believe in the meaning of my work before I can explain it adequately. Apparently this is the last writing hurdle.... will keep you posted:)

Meantime, have you seen this?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2012/07/06/tech-dns-changer-virus.html
Check your computers!

Statistics galore

I recall that early in my graduate career SPSS was the bane of my existence, mostly because my undergraduate experience did not include much practice. A slightly uncooperative instructor worsened this by suggesting that no practical manuals existed and thus sent me into a panicked tailspin. Of course, resources did (and do) exist especially in the form of Dr. Andy Field's "Discovering Statistics Using SPSS", my current bible. Since discovering the delightful Dr. Field my stress levels have dropped dramatically and I find that I'm pretty good at this stuff. So today has been all about finishing my major stats.... one chi-square test, one repeated measures mixed ANOVA, and planned contrasts. Only one to go.... a 2x2x2 repeated measures ANOVA. And the great thing? I know what these are, what they're for, what their assumptions are and what their weaknesses are.The chi-square is for comparing frequencies of things, the mixed ANOVA is for comparing averages of things in different categories, the planned contrasts are to show differences between individual categories and the 2x2x2 is to show how three variables relate to one another. Yippee! Next step.... effect sizes. Once these are done the Chapter Four results section can be polished. Hmmmm..... while this may be boring to most, it sure does help me to keep track of what I'm doing.:)
On the emotional front, today is a relatively good day. Work is being accomplished in the steady and plodding manner that is a requirement for succeeding at this. Finding that steady groove is one of the biggest challenges of this process. My friend S speaks of dancing one's way and to keep that analogy, the steady groove is like reaching the place in a dance where you have acquired the choreography and are preparing to tweak the details. Gives one a feeling of accomplishment, however fleeting.
More soon....

PhD processing

ok.... so I'm not very good at blogging.... or 'journalling' etc. but I suspect that now could be a good time to use it as a motivator. So I'm going to record the latter stages of my PhD process as a sort of therapeutic measure. And of course, as a way to limit procrastination (the idea being that I will be more likely to move forward with writing if I publicly share what I am doing). I have watched several friends/acquaintances going quietly (and sometimes not so quietly) mad while engaged in all of this. To counteract this potential madness I'm trying everything to 'dance' my way through it as my friend S would say. If you want a beautiful and accurate description of the writing process try reading the tiny but brilliant book "The Unstrung Harp" by Edward Gorey . This was given to me by me stepdaughter E yesterday - a timely and beautiful gift that prompted me to try blogging again.

http://www.amazon.ca/Unstrung-Harp-Edward-Gorey/dp/0151004358

Today the plan is to finish drafting the results section of Chapter 4..... more on my progress tomorrow.