Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Cellphones Communications Science

Why Overheard Cell Phone Chats Are Annoying 344

__roo writes "American researchers think they have found the answer to the question of why overhearing cell phone chats are annoying. According to scientists at Cornell University, when only half of the conversation is overheard, it drains more attention and concentration than when overhearing two people talking. According to one researcher, 'We have less control to move away our attention from half a conversation (or halfalogue) than when listening to a dialogue. Since halfalogues really are more distracting and you can't tune them out, this could explain why people are irritated.' Their study will be published in the journal Psychological Science."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Why Overheard Cell Phone Chats Are Annoying

Comments Filter:
  • Sigh (Score:5, Informative)

    by tool462 ( 677306 ) on Thursday May 20, 2010 @06:35PM (#32286534)

    I'm pretty sure I remember coming across a news piece that said exactly this a good 10-20 years ago. The only thing I got out of this article is the word "halfalogue". Specifically, I added it to the List of Words I Must Never Utter. It sounds too much like Heffalump to ever be spoken in polite conversation. It joins other worthy contenders such as irregardless, paradigm, and "the cloud".

  • by JoshuaZ ( 1134087 ) on Thursday May 20, 2010 @06:45PM (#32286664) Homepage

    Paradigm is a valid word. It is just painfully misused and overused. The word first came into wide use after Kuhn wrote "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions." In that book he argues that different branches of science go through successive paradigms which encompass their general framework for understanding their matter of study. The vast majority of science then occurs within these consensus attitudes. People now use paradigm in such a general way as to be close to meaningless. For example, people talk about technological paradigms which makes no sense in a Kuhnian framework. Similarly, people talk about paradigms in the humanities while Kuhn spent quite a bit of effort explaining and showing how the humanities don't form paradigms and undergo paradigm shifts in the same way at all, in that consensus never occurs for any overarching explanatory structure. Don't blame the word paradigm. Blame the people who use it as a buzzword.

    Also, while I'm at it, I strongly recommend that any interested Slashdotter read Kuhn's book. He's an excellent writer who makes a strong case. I think he's incorrect but it is a very enjoyable read and one get's to learn a lot of neat historical facts that are often overlooked or not discussed in standard pop explanations of the history of science. He also wrote "The Copernican Revolution" which is also very readable and provides a very different view of the switch from geocentrism to heliocentrism then that which is often presented.

  • Re:Backwards (Score:5, Informative)

    by cpirius ( 1002255 ) on Thursday May 20, 2010 @07:01PM (#32286860)
    It does not say that overhearing half a conversation takes more concentration then having a conversation yourself, it says that overhearing half a conversation takes more concentration than overhearing both sides of a conversation.
  • Re:Hemilogue (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 20, 2010 @07:23PM (#32287076)
    That would be half a dialogue. But I agree that hemilogue is the best choice: it is an acceptable elision, more pronounceable than hemidialogue. Halfalogue is the misbegotten bastard of a Germanic prefix with a Greek root, and should never be written or uttered again. The only "scientist" quoted in TFA, a psych graduate student who coauthored the paper, evidently neglected her classical education.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 20, 2010 @08:30PM (#32287714)

    I don't think it means what you think it means...
    I believe that you are confusing science with fortunetelling.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science [wikipedia.org]

    Science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is a systematic enterprise of gathering knowledge about the world and organizing and condensing that knowledge into testable laws and theories.[1] As knowledge has increased, some methods have proved more reliable than others, and today the scientific method is the standard for science. It includes the use of careful observation, experiment, measurement, mathematics, and replication -- to be considered a science, a body of knowledge must stand up to repeated testing by independent observers. The use of the scientific method to make new discoveries is called scientific research, and the people who carry out this research are called scientists.[2][3] This article focuses on science in the more restricted sense, what is sometimes called experimental science. Applied science, or engineering, is the practical application of scientific knowledge.

    A scientific hypothesis is an educated guess about the nature of the universe, a scientific theory is a hypothesis which has been confirmed by repeated observation and measurement. Scientific theories are usually given mathematical form, and are always subject to refutation if future experiments contradict them.

    In the modern world, scientific research is a major activity in all developed nations, and scientists are expected to publish their discoveries in refereed journals, scientific periodicals where referees check the facts in an article before it is published. Even after publication, new scientific ideas are not generally accepted until the work has been replicated.

    Scientific literacy is the ability of the general population to understand the basic concepts related to science.

    Also...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology [wikipedia.org]

    Psychology is an academic and applied discipline that involves the scientific study of human or animal mental functions and behaviors. In this field, a professional practitioner or researcher is called a psychologist. Psychologists are classified as social or behavioral scientists. Psychologists attempt to understand the role of mental functions in individual and social behavior, while also exploring underlying physiological and neurological processes.

    Psychologists study such topics as perception, cognition, attention, emotion, motivation, brain functioning, personality, behavior, and interpersonal relationships. Some, especially depth psychologists, also consider the unconscious mind.a Experimental psychologists try to determine causal and correlational relationships between psychosocial variables. In addition, or in opposition, to employing empirical and deductive methods, clinical psychologists sometimes rely upon symbolic interpretation and other inductive techniques.

    Psychological knowledge is applied to various spheres of human activity, including the family, education, employment, and the treatment of mental health problems, as well as wider historical dimensions such as the attainment of greatness in fields such as politics, music, art, and literature.[1] Psychology includes many diverse sub-fields, such as developmental psychology, sport psychology, health psychology, industrial and organizational psychology, media psychology, legal psychology, and forensic psychology. Psychology incorporates research from the social sciences, natural sciences, and humanities.

    The word psychology literally means, "study of the soul".[2] It derives from Ancient Greek: "" (psych, meaning "breath", "spirit", or "soul"); and "-" (-logia, translated as "study of").[2] The term was probably coined in the mid-16th century, and in the following century it also came to mean, "study of the mind". In 1895, the term was used for the first recorded time in reference to behavior.[2]

  • Re:Common sense.. (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 20, 2010 @09:12PM (#32288010)

    For those who do not know the reference, it's a Louis Black joke [youtube.com].

    Well done, CorporateSuit! I modded so I have to post AC.

  • Re:Hemilogue (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 20, 2010 @09:51PM (#32288284)

    My god you're right.
    Mod parent insightful.

  • by hedwards ( 940851 ) on Thursday May 20, 2010 @10:10PM (#32288408)
    No, actually it is true. A cellphone, in contrast to the traditional type, does not pipe your own voice back at you through the receiver. The consequence is that people don't know how loud it is that they're being heard on the other end. Hence the yelling. Additionally most cellphones are designed to pick up very quiet speech at a close range.

    Add that all up and you get people that are shouting on the phone and unaware that they're talking too loud. In fact in many cases you don't even have to be able to hear yourself talking for it to be coming in loud and clear on the other end of the call.
  • Re:Sigh (Score:3, Informative)

    by emm-tee ( 23371 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @02:48AM (#32289920)

    I'm pretty sure I remember coming across a news piece that said exactly this a good 10-20 years ago..

    Yep, it's old news. Here's an article from 2004, about some research done in the UK: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20040412.html [useit.com]

    Here's the summary of the paper at ACM.org: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=993187 [acm.org]

    You can find also find the PDF.

  • Re:Common sense.. (Score:3, Informative)

    by rgviza ( 1303161 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @08:29AM (#32291640)

    Studies have been done before, I believe that's what AC is alluding to. This is VERY old news. Here's an article about a university of York study from 2004 that came to the same conclusion:
    http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20040412.html [useit.com]

    There are even older stories. I'm just at work and have boss aggro.

For God's sake, stop researching for a while and begin to think!

Working...