3 ms·

What you've described is part of the experiment, which asks the question "can/will you focus for ten minutes on something that you did not choose and may not im

What you've described is part of the experiment, which asks the question "can/will you focus for ten minutes on something that you did not choose and may not immediately tickle your neurons?". For most the answer is 'no'. The lack of choice is by design.

sandspar 2y ago
This is a form of brainwashing. Cult leader: "Will you repeat the word 'Love' 10,000 times out loud?" Why? Leader: "Asking 'Why' means you've failed and shall be liquidated." It's a way of forcing people to commit to you while simultaneously demolishing their critical capacity.
- voltaireodactyl 2y ago
  Certainly true, but boredom is also the foundation of creativity so there is some middle ground worth seeking out.
- gumby 2y ago
  Perhaps also a good way to explore why so many kids are bored in school.
- cootsnuck 2y ago
  It's a voluntary experiment on a website. It's not that serious.
photonthug 2y ago
They based the exercise on one where choice was not eliminated: > Our exercise is based on an assignment that Jennifer Roberts, an art history professor at Harvard, gives to her students. She asks them to go to a museum, pick one work of art, and look at only that for three full hours. Since what they have described as the "shape of attention" is more measuring how willing I am to endure a headache for no good reason, I would say it's a poorly designed experiment. The goal for the journalists here is to show something about the "fried attention span" of the twitter generation I'm sure, whereas the goal for the original educator was to get people to deeply engage with art that already spoke to them somewhat. Attention can and should be directed, but in general not by others, so this just doesn't measure what it claims to. And for what it's worth, I say this as someone who is more interested in art than the average person. I've not only looked at a piece of art for 10+ minutes before, but the last time was less than a week ago. Edit to add: What really is the difference between something you don't like & didn't choose vs say an advertisement? Does leaving the room during ads imply anything good or bad about the attention span of the public?
- Flop7331 2y ago
  I survived the ten minutes, but then when I clicked to read more it prompted me to subscribe. There's probably a little bit of a "get people to chase the sunk cost of their attention" thing happening here too.
Enginerrrd 2y ago
In my case, it was broken and no art appeared. Only a black screen with the text overlayed and the "I quit" button. ...Makes me wonder about the validity of their data.
- Flop7331 2y ago
  Maybe that was the art.

sandspar 2y ago

This is a form of brainwashing. Cult leader: "Will you repeat the word 'Love' 10,000 times out loud?" Why? Leader: "Asking 'Why' means you've failed and shall be liquidated." It's a way of forcing people to commit to you while simultaneously demolishing their critical capacity.

voltaireodactyl 2y ago
Certainly true, but boredom is also the foundation of creativity so there is some middle ground worth seeking out.
gumby 2y ago
Perhaps also a good way to explore why so many kids are bored in school.
cootsnuck 2y ago
It's a voluntary experiment on a website. It's not that serious.

photonthug 2y ago

They based the exercise on one where choice was not eliminated: > Our exercise is based on an assignment that Jennifer Roberts, an art history professor at Harvard, gives to her students. She asks them to go to a museum, pick one work of art, and look at only that for three full hours. Since what they have described as the "shape of attention" is more measuring how willing I am to endure a headache for no good reason, I would say it's a poorly designed experiment. The goal for the journalists here is to show something about the "fried attention span" of the twitter generation I'm sure, whereas the goal for the original educator was to get people to deeply engage with art that already spoke to them somewhat. Attention can and should be directed, but in general not by others, so this just doesn't measure what it claims to. And for what it's worth, I say this as someone who is more interested in art than the average person. I've not only looked at a piece of art for 10+ minutes before, but the last time was less than a week ago. Edit to add: What really is the difference between something you don't like & didn't choose vs say an advertisement? Does leaving the room during ads imply anything good or bad about the attention span of the public?

Flop7331 2y ago
I survived the ten minutes, but then when I clicked to read more it prompted me to subscribe. There's probably a little bit of a "get people to chase the sunk cost of their attention" thing happening here too.

Enginerrrd 2y ago

In my case, it was broken and no art appeared. Only a black screen with the text overlayed and the "I quit" button. ...Makes me wonder about the validity of their data.

Flop7331 2y ago
Maybe that was the art.