TECH FORUM | 57 TOOLS OF THE TRADE | 59 EXCEL | 60 TECH PRACTICES | 62

TECH FORUM

IS DIGITAL AMNESIA REAL? BY MICHAEL CASTELLUCCIO

The disagreement among psychologists and neuroscientists over the
seriousness of the problem is growing, but few doubt that our outsourcing of
memory and certain cognitive functions to our digital devices is becoming more
measurable. Whether that’s leading to a new digital category of amnesia is still
uncertain.

T
he outward signs are there
with the insistence on more
memory on our next smart-
phone and the absence of
traditional maps in glove compart-
ments becoming more universal, but
now the interior evidence from MRI
imagery and specific testing is raising
concerns. In a July 3, 2022, article in
The Guardian (bit.ly/3vZXgsv), Rebecca
Seal pointed out that we’re clearly
aware of the problem. She wrote, “Of
those surveyed by memory researcher
Catherine Loveday in 2021, 80% felt
that their memories were worse than
before the pandemic.” Seal connected
this to the “smartphonification” of
life, begun 20 years ago and now
accelerated due to increased internet
use during COVID-19. “Before smart-
Download Daniel Schacter’s study phones,” she explained, “our heads
“Media, technology, and the sins of would have held a cache of phone
memory” in Memory, Mind & Media, numbers and our memories would
Cambridge Core (bit.ly/3zTGehZ). contain a cognitive map, built up
over time, which would allow us
to navigate—for smartphone users,
that is no longer true.” This raises
the question: Are we now so reliant
on our devices that it will change how
our memories work?
In Seal’s article, neurobiology
professor Oliver Hardt of McGill
University described a potentially
destructive cycle: “Once you stop
using your memory it will get worse,
which makes you use your devices
even more.” He also warned that our
prolonged use of GPS instead of maps,
which actively engage our spatial rea-
soning, “likely will reduce grey matter
density in the hippocampus” where
spatial behaviors are processed. “Map
reading is hard…. But hard things are
good for you, because they engage
cognitive processes and brain struc-
tures that have other effects on your
general cognitive functioning.”
Another disturbing neurological
study cited by Seal found changes
in the brains of 10-year-olds. Using
paper and pencil tests and an MRI,
an ABCD (adolescent brain cogni-
tive development) study that tracked
10,000 American children showed a

September 2022 / STRATEGIC FINANCE / 57

TECH FORUM
relationship between tech use and cor-
tical thinning. “Young children who use
more tech had a thinner cortex, which is
supposed to happen at an older age,” said
Larry Rosen, who studies social media,
technology, and the brain. Thinning, Seal
explains, “is a normal part of growing up
and then ageing.”
And a further problem created by
smartphones is the state of constant dis-
traction coming from notifications, texts,
social media, and the anxiety of FOMO
(fear of missing out). Science writer
Catherine Price, in Seal’s article, called
this a state of “continual partial atten-
tion.” Not only does this obstruct pres-
ent awareness, but it also “impedes our
brain’s ability to transfer memories from
short- to long-term storage.”
THE CONTRARY VIEW
Chris Bird, professor of cognitive neuro-
science at the University of Sussex where
he runs research by the Episodic Memory
Group, explained in Seal’s article, “We
have always offloaded things into external
devices, like writing down notes, and that’s
enabled us to have more complex lives. I
don’t have a problem with using external
devices to augment our thought processes
or memory processes. We’re doing it more,
but that frees up time to concentrate, focus
on and remember other things.”
Bird isn’t alone cautioning against
overreaction. Daniel Schacter, a mem-
58 / STRATEGIC FINANCE / September 2022
ber of Harvard’s Mind Brain Behavior
Interfaculty Initiative, published “Media,
technology, and the sins of memory” in
July 2021. In it, he addressed the impact
of media and technology on what he
calls four memory sins: transience (for-
getting over time), absent-mindedness
(lapses in attention that produce for-
getting), misattribution (attributing a
memory to the wrong source), and sug-
gestibility (implanted memories), along “What we pay
with growing concerns about the nega-
tive impact of media and technology on attention to in the
memory. moment adds up
Schacter admitted, “Negative impacts
have been documented, but they are
to our life.”
mostly what I have called process- —Catherine Price,
specific effects, with limited evidence of
domain-specific [far-reaching] effects
author of How to
and no evidence for domain-general Break Up with Your
effects [damage to overall memory Phone
processes]. Moreover, some positive
impacts have also been documented….
Thus, we should approach broad claims
about the damaging effects of technol-
ogy and media on memory with cau-
tion.” The 15-page paper deserves
serious consideration.
These are just a few representative
speculations of where the controversy
is now. Expect the dialogue to get more
complicated going forward, especially
in those areas of AI development where
machine encroachment becomes even
more humanized. SF
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction
prohibited without permission.