Originally published: . Volume 8, No. 4. Source pages: 11.
Dr. Scott Smith, originally from Shreveport, earned his doctorate from Texas A&M. He has lived in Lafayette for about 20 years with his wife, a Nurse Administrator, and two children, one who is in high school and the other is a freshman at Louisiana Tech. Smith’s background is in Educational Psychology and he is currently Assistant Professor at University of Louisiana Lafayette where he teaches several courses, including a graduate level course in professional ethics. He has authored, Cell Phone Distraction, Human Factors, and Litigation, published by Lawyers and Judges Publishing Company, a company focusing on litigation-based publications, in 2016.
Dr. Smith also directs the Forensic Cognition Laboratory at the University. “I primarily concentrate on how cognition applies to the courts,” said Smith, “such as eyewitness testimony, judicial decision-making, memory, and other aspects. I also focus on reasons why students with disabilities fail or are successful with education. Lastly, I am completing research with a graduate student on head injury protocols for athletes, with a particular emphasis on high school athletes.
He has about five students in his lab currently, including Lauren Short, who is particularly knowledgeable about this topic, he said. “I am attempting to create another generation of researchers with skills and knowledge about this topic.”
How did Dr. Smith become interested in cell phone distraction? “About six years ago, I was teaching a class, and a student, in which I knew was failing the class, was always on their cell phone during class. I asked the student to put up their phone and the student, bluntly and rudely, asked, ‘Do you really know if cell phone use limits my ability to pay attention to your lecture?’ I stated humbly, ‘No.’ After that, I completed a study, later published in CyberPsychology, on the effects of verbal cell phone use and texting on both true and false memory for learning.”
Smith and his team looked at two types of memory. “First, there is true memory, or your memory for events that really happened,” he said. “Second, I looked at false memory, or memory for events that did not happen, such as additions, deletions, and confabulations. What did I find? Cell phone distraction affects true and false memory very differently. Persons on their phone or texting have poorer true memory in comparison to persons without distraction. In contrast, false memory is greater in distracted persons than persons that are not distracted. Essentially, if distracted, you tend to recall fewer true details, and recall more details that are false.
How has his book, Cell Phone Distraction, Human Factors, and Litigation, been received? “I feel it has been received very well,” Smith said. “It has been vetted in law libraries across the Nation, including Yale, Baylor, Texas A & M and others. Additionally, it has been placed in libraries in Asia. Furthermore, it has good sales. It reached #2 in the Personal Injury, Law category on Amazon.”
Related to cell phone distraction, what does he think people least understand about the effects of cell phone use? “First, people do not realize how cell phone use affects their socialization, particularly in comparison to the past,” he said. “People often today forego face-to-face communication to send a post on Facebook or offer multiple texts. This affects the ability for people to practice negotiation and the ability to establish rapport.”
“Second, people do not realize how cell phone use affects learning, particularly learning processes. The days of traditional hard and soft cover books is quickly ending,” he said. “Libraries are getting away from holding books, to places for people to access computers. For young children, and even today’s college students, study materials are accessed through their cell phone, and tests similar through the same format. Information can be accessed quicker from the Internet. There is a concern that information may not be processed deeper, considering past learning styles.”
“Third, alongside the last discussion, cell phones in my prediction affect our ability to suspend award or accept that time is needed to process information. Cell phones enable us to demand immediate feedback through texts or calls or emails. Learning itself demands consolidation. And, personal communication requires processing time. Cell phones dissuade these natural processes.
Fourth, while cell phones are beneficial, they obviously are distracting. They affect walking, with many accidents having an origin with both walking and using a cell phone. Also, obviously, they particularly affect our ability to drive. David Strayer, a researcher out of the University of Utah, equates cell phone use to drunk driving. In my opinion, this represents an accurate depiction.”
What are some of the misperceptions people have about cell phone distraction
and driving? “First, people think that they are excellent dual taskers. Humans have limits regarding their ability to process information. People may “get by” dual tasking, or using their cell phones and driving, but their ability to perform both is indeed equivalent to a drunk driver assuming that he is able to drink and drive.”
“Second, people think hands-free phones solve the problem, or that ear buds or speakerphones equate to distraction free driving. This is false. Driving requires touch or haptic, visual, and cognitive demands. Speakerphones may reduce haptic demands, but there still is the attentional demand. The attentional demand through cell phone use reduces the ability to make critical thinking decisions. It increases reaction time. It also prompts a series of dangerous behaviors, such as following too close, frequent breaking and inconsistent speed.”
Should we try and eliminate cell phones? “No. That is not reasonable,” he said. “They enable us to communicate, access information, and keep in touch with the world. However, any tool must be used wisely.”
Dr. Smith notes that the research is mixed when it comes to legislation. “Some studies show that states with strict restrictions result in fewer cell phone related accidents and other students have failed to show any differences pre- and post-legislation.”
What has been effective? “Research has shown that educational interventions have been effective, particularly if focused towards children and young adults less than 25. Public awareness, followed by educational interventions have showed some success.
“The cell phone will not fade away. However, as a tool, people must critically evaluate when it is okay and not okay to use this tool.”
The National Safety Council sees the most dramatic increase in auto deaths in 53 years.
This article is part of a historical newspaper archive. Read the original issue for its original layout, photographs and graphics.