Internet and everyday life: The perceived implications of internet use on memory and ability to concentrate

Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 88-93

  Näsi, Matti ^a   Koivusilta, Leena ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^b TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COMPUTER; FEMALE; FINLAND; HUMAN; INTERNET; MALE; MEMORY; MIDDLE AGED; PERCEPTION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE FACTORS; ATTENTION; COMPUTERS; FEMALE; FINLAND; HUMANS; INTERNET; MALE; MEMORY; MIDDLE AGED; PERCEPTION;

EID: 84874361114     PISSN: 21522715     EISSN: 21522723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2012.0058     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Kraut R, Patterson M, Lundmark V, et al. Internet paradox: a social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist 1998; 53:1017-1031.
2. Hargittai E. Second-level digital divide: differences in people's online skills. First Monday 2002; 7. www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue7-4/hargittai/ (accessed Jan. 18, 2012).
3. Hargittai E, Walejko G. The participation divide: content creation and sharing in the digital age. Information, Communication and Society 2008; 11:239-256.
4. van Dijk, JAGM. Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics 2006; 34:221-235.
5. Räsänen P. Information society for all? Structural characteristics of Internet use in 15 European Countries. European Societies 2006; 8:59-81.
6. Wellman B, Haythornthwaite C. (Eds.). (2002). The internet in everyday life. Oxford: Blackwell.
7. Bawden D, Robinson L. The dark side of information: overload, anxiety and other pathologies. Journal of Information Science 2009; 35:180-191.
8. Chen C-Y, Pedersen S, Murphy KL. The influence of perceived information overload on student participation and knowledge construction in computer-mediated communication. Instructional Science 2011. [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1007/s11251-011-9179-0.
9. Beaudoin CE. Explaining the relationship between Internet use and interpersonal trust: taking into account motivation and information overload. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 2008; 13:550-568.
10. Müller K. (2010) Aivot pitävät kutituksesta vaan eivät kur-ituksesta. Brain@Work-Yhteisvastuu aivoista-seminar presentation September 7th 2010. (accessed Oct. 12, 2011).
11. Klingberg T. Limitations in information processing in the human brain: neuroimaging of dual-task performance and working memory tasks. Progress in Brain Research 2000; 126:95-102.
12. Klingberg T. (2009). The overflowing brain: information overload and the limits of working memory. New York: Oxford University Press.
13. Kauppinen T, Hanhela R, Kandolin I, et al. (2010) Työja terveys Suomessa 2009. Helsinki, Finland: Työterveyslaitos.
14. Saadé R, Bouchaib B. The impact of cognitive absorption on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in on-line learning: an extension of the technology acceptance model. Information and Management 2005; 42:317-327.
15. Berger T, Hohl E, Caspar F. Internet-based treatment for social phobia: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Psychology 2009; 65:1021-1035.
16. Anderson P, Jacobs C, Rothbaum BO. Computer-supported cognitive behavioral treatment of anxiety disorders. Journal of Clinical Psychology 2004; 60:253-267.
17. Egan J. The role of the Internet in the lives of people with traumatic brain injury PhD thesis. School of social work and human services, The University of Queensland, 2010.
18. Karim AA, Hinterberger T, Richter J, et al. Neural internet: Web surfing with brain potentials for the completely paralyzed. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2006; 20:508-515.
19. Bergquist T, Gehl C, Mandrekar J. et al. The effect of internet-based cognitive rehabilitation in persons with memory impairments after severe traumatic brain injury. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 2009; 13: 550-568.
20. Sparrow B, Liu J, Wegner DM. Google effects on memory: cognitive consequences of having information at our fingertips. Science 2011; 333:776-778.
21. Small GW, Moody TD, Siddarth P, et al. Your brain on Google: patterns of cerebral activation during internet searching. American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 2009; 17:116-126.
22. Nicholas D, Rowlands I, Clark D, et al. Google Generation II: web behaviour experiments with the BBC. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives 2011; 63:28-45.
23. Statistics Finland. (2010) Statistical yearbook of Finland 2010. Helsinki, Finland: Tilastokeskus.
24. Räsänen P. The aftermath of the ICT revolution? Media and communication technology preferences in Finland in 1999 and 2004. New Media and Society 2008; 10:225-246.
25. Tsatsou P. Why Internet use? A quantitative examination of the role of everyday life and Internet policy and regulation. Technology in Society 2011; 33:73-83.
26. Gershuny J. Web use and net nerds: a neofunctionalist analysis of the impact of information technology at home. Social Forces 2003; 82:141-168.
27. Robinson JP, DiMaggio P, Hargittai E. New social survey perspectives on the digital divide. IT and Society 2003; 1:1-22.
28. Katz JE, Rice RE, Aspden P. The Internet, 1995-2000. American Behavioral Scientist 2001; 45:405-419.
29. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. (2000) Applied logistic regression. New York: Wiley.
30. Greene WH. (1993) Econometric analysis, fifth edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
31. Statistics Finland. (2011) Use of information and communications technology [e-publication]. Helsinki: Statistics Finland. www.stat.fi/til/ sutivi/2011/sutivi-2011-2011-11-02-tie-001-en.html (accessed Aug.14, 2012).
32. Brennan LL. The scientific management of information overload. Journal of Business and Management 2011; 17: 121-134.