Gloria Mark, “Attention Span”

This week’s evidence comes from Professor Gloria Mark, author of the wonderful book, “Attention Span,” who shared this remarkable data in one of my favorite podcasts, “Hidden Brain” hosted by Shankar Vedantan. Professor Mark is a neuroscientist at the University of California, Irvine, and has studied the decline of attention span around the globe in the past two decades. She measured the time that was devoted to a single screen. While I do my best to live a life of focus, her data suggests that I’m kidding myself. 

Here’s the raw data on attention duration. 

2004 – 2.5 minutes 

2012 – 75 seconds 

2020 – 47 seconds 

Other researchers have replicated these observations, and 47 seconds is the mean of several studies. 

These workers checked e-mail on average 77 times a day.   

 A Georgetown computer science professor has documented the cost of switching tasks, with an estimated 21 minutes required to focus entirely on the original task.  The most common complaint of teachers and administrators is “I just don’t have the time,” a plainly untrue statement as we all have the same amount of time.  However, the constant interruptions, meetings, and tech-generated messages to teachers and administrators deny them the ability to focus.  

Finally, the New York Times recently reported that after decades of declining pedestrian deaths, the date of pedestrian deaths has, since 2009, grown dramatically. While I acknowledge that correlation is not causation, 2009 was the year that the ubiquitous use of cell phones and incidents of distracted driving and walking escalated.  

Mark’s personal wakeup call was when she was double booked for two Zoom calls simultaneously.  Rather than admit the mistake, she had one Zoom meeting on her computer and the other on her phone and had each device on a separate earbud, attempting to switch back and forth between meetings.  It was a disaster; as we all know, multi-tasking is a myth. 

Related Posts

  • Research Wednesday | March 4, 2026

    Do Audiobooks Count as Reading?
    Contributing author: Dr. Douglas Reeves

    While surveys indicate that more than 40% of U.S. adults think that listening to a book should not be regarded as genuine reading, Brian Bannon, Chief Librarian of the New York Public Library, disagrees in a November 23, 2025, article.  He notes that while print circulation in the library has remained flat over the past five years, audiobook demand is up 65%.

    Read More
  • Research Wednesday | February 25, 2026

    Hope for Cynics
    Contributing author: Dr. Douglas Reeves

    In this inspiring book (Hope for Cynics: The Surprising Science of Human Goodness, 2025) by Stanford’s Jamil Zaki, there is a treasure trove of research that will help all of us who support educators and school leaders who are dealing with despair in the dark winter months and pervasive threats to our schools, students, and professional careers. Professor Zaki marshals research and keen observation to make these essential arguments.

    Read More
  • Research Wednesday | February 18, 2026

    A Balanced and Skeptical View of AI in Schools
    Contributing author: Dr. Douglas Reeves

    In this thoughtful and evidence-rich article (February 12, 2026), the authors cite several randomized control trials (RCT) that provide mixed evidence on the use of AI in schools. My recent book, Education and the Ethics of AI, offers practical ways to avoid cheating – the principal concern of teachers – and use AI in an ethical and constructive way.  This new article notes that when students become dependent on AI, their performance actually decreases, especially when they practice with AI but are later tested without AI assistance. Moreover, while AI can assist with simple tasks, such as learning multiplication tables, it does not enhance students’ reasoning or creative thinking.

    Read More