SmartWatch and Cognitive Theory - Essay Example

The Smart Watch and Cognitive Theory Name: Course: Instructor: Institution: Date of Submission Introduction The scenario under investigation is the idea of Apple Company aiming to launch a smart watch by 2015. It is a wristwatch with capability of performing a number of tasks such as running applications, communicating and monitoring the wearers' health and fitness. Some organizations raise a concern of the possibility that drivers will be compelled to operate the watch while driving, an act that can result to accidents. The essay examines whether the watch can disruptive to driver's concentration by referring to the primary concepts of cognitive approaches of attention. It is possible to note that that the watch is similar to other modern smart electronic devices such as iPads, iPods, cell phones and laptops. It has the same capacity of temptation to operate while driving similar to the gadgets. Social scientists assert that humans have specific limits of concentration that influence their ability to perform many tasks at a time (Posner & Petersen, 1989). Attention towards an activity is directly proportional to the ability to select and respond to the most important information in the environment (Sambamurthy, Bharadwaj, & Grover, 2003). The drivers that use the watch encounter a divided attention between driving the vehicle and operating the watch under some compromising circumstance. An illustration is when they are compelled receive calls and reply the messages that they cannot afford to ignore. The cognitive theories of attention include the filter bottleneck theory, central resource capacity and multiple resource theory (Swartz, De la Rey & Duncan, 2004). The theories explain the capabilities of people to do more than one task at a particular time. The Filter theory Haykin (2008) claims that people perceive the environmental stimuli, select the best way to respond to the stimuli, choose the most significant stimuli to respond to and finally respond to it .The theory has two dimensions in relation to the scientists' views; Single functioning view of filter theory The theory states the people find it hard to perform multiple tasks at a time because their information processing system can only perform a single task at a time in a serial manner. The approach argues that the system is capable of filtering out the information that does not require further processing (Haykin, 2008). The type of information processing is called the bottleneck. The study asserts that attention through sensory orientation is essential when learning or performing. The audio, visual and proprioceptive cues increase the learning ability and making the information more useful during filtration for an individual to improve their concentration (Mensvoort et al., 2008). Significant environmental cues stand out and become important leading to proper processing of information. The situation implies that the mind of drivers using the watch becomes wholly diverted when they operate the phone. The mind can either engage in the starting, using and the stopping the watch or igniting, driving and stopping the vehicle and not jointly performing the activities. The exclusivity in processing information can make the drivers lose their driving control as Haykin (2008) claims. The other sub-topic under this theory is the multiple functioning theory. Multiple functioning view of filter theory Michael and Steven (1989) as quoted by Posner and Petersen (1989) argue that the information processing in the mind is parallel rather than serial. Lack of concentration arises from the overuse while multi-tasking the limited information processing resources. People can, therefore, perform different tasks at the same time as long as the capacity of the resource system is not exceeded. Some researchers, under this view, argue that the information processing system is a single unit that contains all information processing resources. On the other hand, the multiple functioning views argue that the information processing resources emerge from different sources. Despite the support of multitasking by the views, it is reasonable to claim without contradiction that the research supports the idea that drivers using the watch can still cause accidents. The choice to attend to the watch can exhaust all the information processing capacity, leaving out insufficient or no resource for use for the mentality of driving. The reduced attention can be a possible cause of accidents (Haykin, 2008). The central resource capacity theory The primary resource capacity demonstrates that if multiple tasks do not exhaust the information processing resource pool, then it is possible for one to undertake a simultaneous task performance successfully. Attention is a cognitive effort, and the information processing capacity limits of individuals vary with environmental dynamics, the form of function under execution and the existing conditions of the individual such as and the level of expertise. The success of doing multiple tasks at a particular time depends on the amount of attention depending on arousal level, the way of resource allocation (Ombu & Jolicœur, 2003). According to the approach, multitasking ability follows three rules; ensuring completion of at least one task, having an enduring character that considers meaningfulness tasks and momentary intention that enhances allocation of resources according to the instructions. The theory argues that environmental changes can affect the multiple information processing abilities of people. The watch can create dynamics in arousal of individuals similar to mobile phones. The calls and messages that are hard to ignore from workmates, family members, can cause excitement, anger, shame and other emotions. The arousal can lower the capacity of the resource pool and make multitasking difficult. Trying to answer while driving can be a source of accidents. On the other hand, when drivers respond to calls and messages from the watch, they go against the idea of completion of one task (Ombu & Jolicœur, 2003). Multiple attention theory The multiple concentration theory argues that people have different mechanisms of attention. The people exhaust their limited resources on the various functions depending on the information processing component. The resources process sensory input such as proprioceptive and visual components, people's responses such as verbal or motor, and memory codes such as visual or spatial. Competition for resources occurs depending on the amount of the tasks. Multitasking capacity of an individual is thus dependent on the volume of the tasks under execution (Willcut, Doyle, Nigg & Pennington, 2005). The capacity of processing resources is on the dimensions of vision, memory and timing proportion (Mensvoort, Hermes, & Montfort, 2008). Motor and the verbal success in performing multiple tasks depend on demands from on two or more shared resources. Two similar functions drawing similar attention on one resource pool can lead to negative performance but when the resources are different, there is less adverse. The theory has a mixed approach to the probability of danger while using the watch. If the information processing resources of driving are different from the one of operating the watch, then it is possible that accidents have a low probability of occurring. However, if the two tasks draw attention to the same resources, then there are increased chances of accidents by drivers wearing the watch (Willcut et al, 2005) Recommendations The human mind is structured in a manner that its ability to perform multiple tasks at a time tends to be limited depending on the number of jobs, their level of relationship and environmental arousal. The new watches can appear fancy to most people and attract high demand. The act of doing more than one task at a time can disrupt drivers and make them not to exploit all the driving skills as required. The driving case is more pronounced the visual or audio features of the watch disturb the drivers. The watch must be linked to mobile phones as the most popular audio-visual disruptors of drivers. The similar measures that control cell phone use on the road must apply to the smart watch. The smart watch can be the next driving disruptor after the cell phone whose insufficient control can lead to an increase in road accidents. The government must advise Apple to design the watch such that it operates under different modes. A suggestion is to switch between watch functions and applications exclusively and interchangeably. Drivers caught running the applications while driving must be face charges similar to those of cell phone users. Given that they are wristwatches, they are likely to lead to active disturbances. The distractions are similar to the mobile phones because drivers have to stop to hold the steering wheel to receive a call or answer a message that they consider important. Driving with one hand and while keeping an eye on the watch instead of the road can result to lethal accidents. The information processing system is forced to control driving, looking at the watch and thinking of the best response to make pertaining to responses to the watch and the next move for the vehicle. There is thus a necessity of controlling the use of the smart watches by drivers to avoid possible cases of those accidents. Technological advancement is a root to economic development. However, clamour for lives by the same technology needs reduction by all means possible. Regulating the use of the watch while driving can minimize the possibility of occurrence of the expected accidents is possible and needs the highest support possible from all stakeholders. All drivers must have their watches switched to the standard clock modes while driving to avoid application disruptions. The control is not meant to discriminate vehicle owners and drivers from using the smart watches. It only aims at preventing the possible watch distractions by establishing strict laws against drivers that claim innocent lives as a result of carelessness. The rules must incorporate penalty points on driving licenses of the drivers (Twisk & Stacey, 2007). Apple needs to make sensors for active smart watches for detection. Cameras and sensors of active watches can be manufactured alongside the watch to detect watches that are active while the owner is driving. It is essential to make an agreement with Apple Company to design the watches in a manner that they take time to switch off. The feature can prevent the motor vehicle drivers from keeping applications on and switching them off immediately they see a monitoring a traffic police officer. There must be undercover motorcycles to watch out for people that violate the law by not switching the watches off while driving (Barker, 2011). The detector devices and cameras can be attached to the helmets of the patrol vehicles to pick out drivers with active smart watches. References Barker, T. (2011). Police ethics: Crises as a result of law enforcement. Charles C Thomas Publisher. Haykin, S. S. (2008). Adaptive filter theory. Mensvoort, K. V., Hermes, D. J., & Montfort, M. V. (2008). Using of optically simulated haptic feedback. Journal s, 66(6), 438-451. Ombu, M., & Jolicœur, P. (2003). The central-capacity sharing model of multitasking performance. Psychology: Perception and Performance, 29(1), 3. Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. (1989). The attention system of the human brain (No. TR-89- 1). WASHINGTON. Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., & Grover, V. (2003). Shaping people's agility through digital decisions: Reconceptualising the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS quarterly, 237-263. Swartz, L., De la Rey, C., & Duncan, N. (2004). Psychology: Oxford University Press. Twisk, D. A., & Stacey, C. (2007). Trends in driver risks and countermeasures in Europe. Journal of Safety Research, 38(2), 134-156. Willcutt, E. G., Doyle, A. Nigg, J.., Faraone, S. V., & Pennington, B. F. (2005) The executive function theory of hyperactivity: a meta-analytic review. Biological psychiatry, 57(11), 1336-1346. Read More

The situation implies that the mind of drivers using the watch becomes wholly diverted when they operate the phone. The mind can either engage in the starting, using and the stopping the watch or igniting, driving and stopping the vehicle and not jointly performing the activities. The exclusivity in processing information can make the drivers lose their driving control as Haykin (2008) claims. The other sub-topic under this theory is the multiple functioning theory. Multiple functioning view of filter theory Michael and Steven (1989) as quoted by Posner and Petersen (1989) argue that the information processing in the mind is parallel rather than serial.

Lack of concentration arises from the overuse while multi-tasking the limited information processing resources. People can, therefore, perform different tasks at the same time as long as the capacity of the resource system is not exceeded. Some researchers, under this view, argue that the information processing system is a single unit that contains all information processing resources. On the other hand, the multiple functioning views argue that the information processing resources emerge from different sources.

Despite the support of multitasking by the views, it is reasonable to claim without contradiction that the research supports the idea that drivers using the watch can still cause accidents. The choice to attend to the watch can exhaust all the information processing capacity, leaving out insufficient or no resource for use for the mentality of driving. The reduced attention can be a possible cause of accidents (Haykin, 2008). The central resource capacity theory The primary resource capacity demonstrates that if multiple tasks do not exhaust the information processing resource pool, then it is possible for one to undertake a simultaneous task performance successfully.

Attention is a cognitive effort, and the information processing capacity limits of individuals vary with environmental dynamics, the form of function under execution and the existing conditions of the individual such as and the level of expertise. The success of doing multiple tasks at a particular time depends on the amount of attention depending on arousal level, the way of resource allocation (Ombu & Jolicœur, 2003). According to the approach, multitasking ability follows three rules; ensuring completion of at least one task, having an enduring character that considers meaningfulness tasks and momentary intention that enhances allocation of resources according to the instructions.

The theory argues that environmental changes can affect the multiple information processing abilities of people. The watch can create dynamics in arousal of individuals similar to mobile phones. The calls and messages that are hard to ignore from workmates, family members, can cause excitement, anger, shame and other emotions. The arousal can lower the capacity of the resource pool and make multitasking difficult. Trying to answer while driving can be a source of accidents. On the other hand, when drivers respond to calls and messages from the watch, they go against the idea of completion of one task (Ombu & Jolicœur, 2003).

Multiple attention theory The multiple concentration theory argues that people have different mechanisms of attention. The people exhaust their limited resources on the various functions depending on the information processing component. The resources process sensory input such as proprioceptive and visual components, people's responses such as verbal or motor, and memory codes such as visual or spatial. Competition for resources occurs depending on the amount of the tasks. Multitasking capacity of an individual is thus dependent on the volume of the tasks under execution (Willcut, Doyle, Nigg & Pennington, 2005).

The capacity of processing resources is on the dimensions of vision, memory and timing proportion (Mensvoort, Hermes, & Montfort, 2008). Motor and the verbal success in performing multiple tasks depend on demands from on two or more shared resources.

Read More